• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'[W:196]

Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Kobie said:
Way to cut off the second part of my quote where I said I didn't advocate releasing them. Dishonesty, thy name is Mr. Blaylock.
Click to expand...

The fact remains, that by your own admission, you are opposed to the appropriate treatment of the most dangerous and unsalvageable of criminals. No surprise that you are on the side of these criminals, and not on the side of honest citizens. This goes right along with opposing the Second Amendment.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Kobie said:
The engineer's qualifications don't seem to be entering into TD's argument at all.

Again, I'm not saying this is good tech or that it should be mandatory or anything like that, just that the actions of certain gun enthusiasts in this particular instance are reprehensible. (Standard disclaimer lest I get accused of wanting to "ban guns" by certain zealots around here)
Click to expand...
The woman should not have had those calls placed, on that we definitely agree.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Bob Blaylock said:
The fact remains, that by your own admission, you are opposed to the appropriate treatment of the most dangerous and unsalvageable of criminals. No surprise that you are on the side of these criminals, and not on the side of honest citizens. This goes right along with opposing the Second Amendment.
Click to expand...

No. You purposely and dishonestly cut off the second part of my quote. You lied. I thought a man who claimed to be as godly as yourself wouldn't bear false witness against his neighbor.

The idea that, because I favor incarceration over execution, that I am "on the side of criminals" is patently absurd.

Provide one shred of evidence that I "oppose the Second Amendment." Actual evidence, not snipped, out-of-context stuff like you just tried to pass off as evidence.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Kobie said:
So in other words, any and all advancements in gun technology that don't involve making them more killy should be immediately destroyed without prejudice, because otherwise the shadowy cabal of "gun banners" will rain fire and brimstone on the gun-owning community.
Click to expand...

what oozing idiocy. the "technology" in question doesn't make the gun safer.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

AlabamaPaul said:
Whatever, get a life. I believe you know what I mean...
Click to expand...
Now you know what it's like to talk with those people .
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

LaMidRighter said:
The woman should not have had those calls placed, on that we definitely agree.
Click to expand...
assuming it actually happened
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

The only standards they have are the double ones .
Moot said:
You're so worried about the government taking away your guns, but your practically first in line to have the government ban the new safety gun. Interesting, don't you think?
Click to expand...
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

TurtleDude said:
what oozing idiocy. the "technology" in question doesn't make the gun safer.
Click to expand...

I never said it did. I was simply commenting on what you said.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

TurtleDude said:
I see her claiming that but given this piece was from an anti gun publication, color me skeptical
Click to expand...

Is it really that hard to believe? There are assholes in the gun enthusiast ranks, just like in every other large group.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

TurtleDude said:
assuming it actually happened
Click to expand...
With the shoddy reporting of things these days, and the amount of people caught making stuff up anything is possible. If it is true, those guys should have been ashamed of themselves and maybe instead of berating her should have explained the implications of this crap gun, and the potential issues she faces by backlash from the firearms purchasing base........respectfully.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Kobie said:
Is it really that hard to believe? There are assholes in the gun enthusiast ranks, just like in every other large group.
Click to expand...

And there are anti gun assholes who will claim to be pro gun to POE the pro rights movement
heck, anti gun assholes are more likely to blast someone who wants to market a gun then I am
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Kobie said:
Is it really that hard to believe? There are assholes in the gun enthusiast ranks, just like in every other large group.
Click to expand...
Yes, there are also people with agendas who create a story and many got caught. Instantly coming to mind is the Tawana Brawley incident with Al Sharpton, some skepticism is healthy I suppose.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Typical conservative reaction. They don't like it so it shouldn't be allowed to exist, never mind what anyone else thinks. Fear-driven, ignorance-driven, knee-jerk mob-rule over-reaction.
Jesus. How can you say you're in favour of gun rights and then try to limit these kinds of guns? You're either in favour of individual rights or you're in favour of government interference. This is why I've been liberal all my life. It's easy for me- I believe everyone has rights. Conservatives believe rights are dealt out to those deserving them.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

TurtleDude said:
I worry about someone who considers the truth to be "bullying and intimidation"
Click to expand...
Well, here's a definition of cyber bullying.....

"... Examples of what constitutes cyber bullying include communications that seek to intimidate, control, manipulate, put down, falsely discredit, or humiliate the recipient. The actions are deliberate, repeated, and hostile behavior intended to harm another. ...<snip>.....It may also include public actions such as repeated threats, sexual remarks, pejorative labels (i.e., hate speech) or defamatory false accusations), ganging up on a victim by making the person the subject of ridicule in online forums, hacking into or vandalizing sites about a person, and posting false statements as fact aimed a discrediting or humiliating a targeted person...."


You'd be hard pressed to prove that isn't exactly what LaMidRighter was doing as he repeatedly tried to discredit and insult my intelligence for simply disagreeing with him....on a thread about intimidation and bullying by gun enthusiasts, no less.


Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post

The gun is not safe, you don't understand this issue, and it's been proven.
Click to expand...

Quote Originally Posted by LaMidRighter View Post

If by "insult" you mean beat your arguments, proved your lack of knowledge of the subject, and asserted my own. Guilty.
Click to expand...


The only thing he's proven is that he is in fact a bona fide cyber bully.
 
Last edited:
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

TurtleDude said:
was there any real proof of harassment?
Click to expand...

Geez. What are you, a lawyer or something?
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

TurtleDude said:
And there are anti gun assholes who will claim to be pro gun to POE the pro rights movement
heck, anti gun assholes are more likely to blast someone who wants to market a gun then I am
Click to expand...

Oh boy, here we go.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

LaMidRighter said:
How did he get the charge? Drinking during the hunt, failure to follow hunting law, or was it a negligent shot? I'm curious because I've seen a few hunting accidents without any charges filed, things can happen when you go on a hunt and fortunately laws do allow for accidents for the most part.
Click to expand...
It happened very easily and without warning, he wasn't even trying to fire.

They were small-game hunting. He and his friend were in some rough wood, climbing over fallen logs and debris, his finger slipped and fired the shotgun, which due to his maneuvering in the rough wood was pointed at his friend only a few feet away. His friend took the full force of the shot to the chest, the concussion stopping his heart instantly.

The state charged him with 1st-degree Homicide arguing negligence and they didn't have hunting permits, but his lawyer struck a plea deal to reduce it to 2nd-degree Manslaughter (damn good lawyer imo). He served 18 months with 4 years suspended pending compliance with parole. Next year his parole will be up, and the court has already agreed to reinstate his voting and gun rights then.

I have no problem with violent felons having guns, as long as they're not violent people.
 
Last edited:
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Jerry said:
It happened very easily and without warning, he wasn't even trying to fire.

They were small-game hunting. He and his friend were in some rough wood, climbing over fallen logs and debris, his finger slipped and fired the shotgun, which due to his maneuvering in the rough wood was pointed at his friend only a few feet away. His friend took the full force of the shot to the chest, the concussion stopping his heart instantly.

The state charged him with 1st-degree Homicide but his lawyer struck a plea deal to reduce it to 2nd-degree Manslaughter. He served 18 months with 4 years suspended pending compliance with parole. Next year his parole will be up, and the court has already agreed to reinstate his voting and gun rights then.
Click to expand...

Geez. That sucks.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Jerry said:
It happened very easily and without warning, he wasn't even trying to fire.

They were small-game hunting. He and his friend were in some rough wood, climbing over fallen logs and debris, his finger slipped and fired the shotgun, which due to his maneuvering in the rough wood was pointed at his friend only a few feet away. His friend took the full force of the shot to the chest, the concussion stopping his heart instantly.

The state charged him with 1st-degree Homicide but his lawyer struck a plea deal to reduce it to 2nd-degree Manslaughter. He served 18 months with 4 years suspended pending compliance with parole. Next year his parole will be up, and the court has already agreed to reinstate his voting and gun rights then.
Click to expand...
Damn, sorry that happened to your friend. I don't even think he would have been charged under La. law, usually here you would have to have a contributing factor like intoxication, or violating hunting law, etc.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Moderator's Warning:
The personal jabs and baiting needs to stop NOW. Half the thread is filled with it and I seriously considered flushing this thread. However I'm not going to do that. That would be too easy. Suffice it to say that the next personal jab or bait that I see is going to earn that person infraction points and a thread ban. Along with everyone else that does it. Stay on topic and address the POSTS and NOT the postERS.

And FYI, challenging someone to a debate on the Constitution or parts of it is NOT a threat nor is it bullying. This whole forum is about debating people and challenging people to debates.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Cryptic said:
.....Rather, the new "Moms" group has attacked the NRA for obstructing back grounds checks via private seller loopholes, their fixation with AR-15 clones, their expansion of "Stand Your Ground" laws to new states, and support of "carry a weapon to a bar" type laws.....
Click to expand...
That's not a loophole.
Loophole
: a means of escape; especially : an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded
Click to expand...

The original intent of Gun Control Act and FOPA did not include a desire to run a background check on every single gun sale ever. The rule only applied to FFL holders.

If you're now saying the original intent of the GCT and FOPA was to document every gun sale, then that's a conspiracy theory you're welcome to open a thread on in the Conspiracy Theory forum of DebatePolitics.com.

*****
If you don't have a Commercial Drivers License, you do not have to get a physical every year and receive a [URL="https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rules-regulations/topics/medical/aboutDOTexam.htm"]DoT medical card[/url] to drive your car to work. It's not that you're getting away with some loophole, its that the rule doesn't apply to you because you don't have that license.

Performing background checks is a requirement of having an [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Firearms_License"]Federal Firearms License[/url] , so naturally if you don't have an FFL, those rules do not apply to you, just like you don't have to get a DoT medical card if you don't have a CDL.

Likewise you don't need to perform a background check or go through a licensed auto dealer to sell your car.
 
Last edited:
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

TurtleDude said:
you sort of brand yourself permanently disqualified from being taken seriously when you talk about the private sale loophole.
Click to expand...

You are splitting hairs via terminology. A the end of the day, I bet these sales are exempt a back ground check:

-Sales conduced by somebody who does not have an FFL- and
this person sells less than about twenty weapons per year.

You can use whatever terminology you wish o describe this- it does not alter the core fact.
Bob Blaylock said:
You cannot “…keep affirming the Second Amendment…” by proposing and advocating ways to violate it.
Click to expand...

The NRA has been tossing that out for years- "If you fail to support each and every one of our demands, then you are "anti gun". People have accepted that line for years, but those days are coming to a close.

Virginia - not Connecticut, just put an "anti gun" senator, governor and a what- attorney general in office. One of them received an "F" rating and openly said he could care less what the NRA gave him. Things are changing.
 
Last edited:
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

Aunt Spiker said:
It's disappointing that only two people in this thread seem to be bothered by the woman's harassment.

If gun enthusiasts value 'rights' then they should oppose those who are harassing her and realize/recognize how creepy and dangerous THAT behavior is. What will responses be if she ends up being shot or harassed further as a result? Why? Because she thinks a product is beneficial and good and so she sells it?
Click to expand...

This.

I will defer to the gun experts in this thread and assume that the item Ms. Padilla is attempting to market is an ill-conceived design. In fact, I think we had a thread around here recently mocking it. But even if that is the case, there are wrong ways to say the right thing. Two wrongs do not make a right, something that seems to have been lost on those who chose not to respect her privacy. So instead of this being a teachable moment of learning not to market a feel-good item that just won't work, now the anti-gun people are going to use these harassers as "gun nut" scapegoats, despite the likelihood that most critiques of the design were probably calm and level-headed.
 
Re: Gun enthusiasts threaten woman for marketing 'safer gun'

AlabamaPaul said:
What if the owner is in a life threatening situation, and family members were in a position to intervene?
Click to expand...

If you have the watch, you get a 30-second time out to put the thing on and arm the weapon. ;) Because the potential attacker will be so mesmerized by all the cool gadgetry that he won't even think about shooting at first.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom