Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 8/6/2001 1:26:29 PM EDT
[url]http://cgi.sacbee.com/news/calreport/calrep_story.cgi?story=N2001-08-06-1130-0.html[/url]
Link Posted: 8/6/2001 2:36:27 PM EDT
ya know, i don't even know why half of these cases get past the first judge that sees 'em. they're all based on the "fact" that the manufacturer marketed the guns specifically to criminals and/or should have known that their gun, as opposed to some other manufacturer, would have been used in a crime. i have yet to see an advertisement for a gun that appealed directly and solely to the criminals.
Link Posted: 8/6/2001 3:06:03 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/6/2001 3:15:27 PM EDT
And then even people here believe the anti line that it means you can't fingerprint the gun. How many of you wipe mildly corrosive fingerprints off your fine machinery?
Link Posted: 8/6/2001 3:22:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 8/6/2001 4:04:21 PM EDT
holy sheet, CA actually did something I can respect. Good for them. Holding any manufacturer liable for the actions of individual purchasers of their product is stupid. Personal responsibility, this country needs to re-learn that concept. Maybe this will be a step in that re-learning
Link Posted: 8/6/2001 5:11:07 PM EDT
Friendly fire halted. I just want to point out those irritating characterizations. I suggest everyone read that article. I love the line where they wouldn't have a problem-like they wouldn't have sued if it were a different mfgr. Yea right. Mighty big of them. They'll just leave that part to other guys (who lose anyway). And those "rapid fire" dangerous guns. If I had to pick the gun of a guy coming after me, the tec9 would be number 2 or 3 behind only lorcin and/or sigma. Can anyone name a 9 with a shorter barrel, worse accuracy and a reputation for jamming (although they are reputed to function well with factory mags) than the tec9?
Top Top