Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 7/21/2003 11:40:22 AM EDT
NAACP lost their case vs the pistol makers Glock, SW and I believe either Taurus or Ruger.

I fail to see NAACP's complaint as anything but the paraphrased following:

Gun makers have little better to do with their time than to distribute guns among minorities expressly with the intent of watching minorities kill eachother. As we all know, being a minority means you're genetically coded to comit crimes and be a savage (ehh.. NO, I do NOT think this way - AT ALL, but I can't see another way to put NAACP's stance).

Maybe we were all created equal - maybe not. I'd say not as I don't have a prayer of standing toe to toe with Shaq, and Mini-Me probably shouldn't arm wrestle Ah-Nuld. But I have always thought everyone should be held equally accountable, and that punishment for violent crime should be swift, and severe.

For example - take two proposed ideas - the Death Penalty for aggrevated rape and the proposed bans / restrictions on arms from NAACP. Rapists are hideous things, IMHO but what's more likely to be on their mind the day they commit their crime? The needle going in their arm after a short, terse stay on death row, or how hard it was to get the gun they're about to use?

Hmm. You know, I've never seen a GLOCK truck / van outside passing out handguns (or anything else for that matter). It honestly wouldn't surprise me if some racist biggot who was really loaded ($$) did this. If Glock IS going to pass out guns to the masses, I'm actually OK with a first-come first-serve basis to adult persons legally eligible to own firearms. This may offend some here, and I apologize but I have no qualms with kids and convicts (no matter how long ago it was) not being able to buy arms.

Anyhow - happy gunning. I know this isn't a Glock board but this applies to us AR-toters as well. Remember the Bushmaster case?
Link Posted: 7/21/2003 12:40:42 PM EDT
You also dont read too well. This is the AR section. General Discussion is over there <----. IBTL
Link Posted: 7/21/2003 1:22:24 PM EDT
CavVet, This matters to all gun owners and AR owners. I am glad they lost, and I own AR's. So this is fine here for me to read, in this part of the forums. You don't want people stepping on your gun rights, but you want to dictate where Javven puts his info. Not trying to offend you, but your response seemed a tad abrupt.
Link Posted: 7/21/2003 1:27:24 PM EDT
Well, I'm sorry but it does provide precedent for justices to find in favor of AR owners and producers in similar cases. Precedent is often the only thing that separates a decision in your favor with a percieved policically correct verdict. Take it or leave it the AR-15 is one of the most publically provocative firearms in existance, second only to the AK. It's a far cry from the 'power' of my 7mm BUT public perception does not deviate far from public support for legislation. This issue is EXTREMELY important to ALL AR-15 owners and since it'd not made an appearance on your very handy frontpage I figured I'd make a post where people could see it. Precedent on this level may be the death knell for currently pending and future legislation against AR-1X owners, operators and manufacturers. It may also help spur on the pending bill on the Hill which would help -prevent- such frivalous litigation from ever entering the courts. When makers pay for litigation, the cost of your AR goes up. Legislation diametrically opposed to the pending bill in Congress (allowing unlimited liability in crashes / accidents) all but SHUT DOWN light aviation in this country. Different subject sure but if you can't see that the effects of such legislation are similar, I'm sorry I wasted your drive space.
Link Posted: 7/21/2003 1:41:10 PM EDT
The Judge made a few comments regarding manufacturers needing to do better. No evidnece that they were doing anything illegal, etc etc. All indications were that he was set to clang the mafrs but apparently the writing is on all the walls and any other decision on his part would have been reversed on appeal. But the media is hyping his extracameral commentary. This case is especially relevant here because a loss here would have put Bushmaster clearly in the sights on the DC Sniper civil cases. Now Bushy is further off the hook.
Link Posted: 7/21/2003 3:00:46 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Spooge5150: CavVet, This matters to all gun owners and AR owners. I am glad they lost, and I own AR's. So this is fine here for me to read, in this part of the forums. You don't want people stepping on your gun rights, but you want to dictate where Javven puts his info. Not trying to offend you, but your response seemed a tad abrupt.
View Quote
No offense taken whatsoever. arfcom is kinda segregated as to what info goes where, and the ar mod does constantly enforce it. I personally dont care if he posts it in EE, someone else will, and they wont be as nice as me.[;)]
Link Posted: 7/21/2003 3:50:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 7/21/2003 3:51:01 PM EDT by Troy]
Top Top