Siagalova 0 Posted September 9, 2004 Report Share Posted September 9, 2004 What the hell? check this out! bushmaster, and the distributor (seattle I think), pays $550,000 to eight people!?!?! what the hell! what did they do wrong? I don't understand, and the brady group is at the bottom of it all. dark days ahaed................... http://www.katc.com/Global/story.asp?S=2279489 Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Siagalova 0 Posted September 9, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 9, 2004 here's another one: I guess because the distributor LOST the gun they have to pay, but why Bushmaster? http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....02247320&EDATE= check out the brady contact on the bottom. I dare one of you guys to call them - start a debate? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G O B 3,516 Posted September 9, 2004 Report Share Posted September 9, 2004 The dealer "lost"the gun( but not the extra profit), that bastard should be on death row but bushmaster? These are dark times for justice my friends. G O B Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KySoldier 2 Posted September 9, 2004 Report Share Posted September 9, 2004 I blame the media feeding the false image of the crazed sniper with the "high powered sniper rifle." What kind of BS is that...high powered, the 223 is weaker than most hunting rifles and the AR is probably less accurate too. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
shotgun_lobotomy 0 Posted September 9, 2004 Report Share Posted September 9, 2004 yeah mines a "lil" more powerful Quote Link to post Share on other sites
emclean 0 Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 but it is not as deadly, it is bolt action, no detachabul mag. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bvamp 604 Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 so much for banning assault weapons because we will make the fully automatic and go nuts with them and shoot people with drum magazines, huh? pathetic. just pathetic. bushmaster prolly had to pay out because there was some minor detail that was overlooked, or tricked onto them by the ATF and thier insane set of laws that you have to run through a cypher to understand. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KySoldier 2 Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 EMCLEAN: That's true, his bolt action wouldn't be a good weapon for combat, but for a sniper, I think its better. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
chris410 0 Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 Well I think the irresponsibility of the gun shops in those links is unacceptable, but I still think that the fault is on the person(s) who pull the trigger. Unfortunately, I fear this case will now set precedence and that these types of law suits will ultimately turn out to be the way in which the liberals manage to get rid of guns. With import restrictions and U.S. gun manufacturers getting sued every time some nut job decides to use a gun in a crime, quite probably to the point of bankruptcy, the gun business will surely be an unprofitable one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Siagalova 0 Posted September 10, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 That's excatly what I was thinking chris! all it would take would be some kind of liability tacked onto the manufacturer - and they will go along for financial reasons, to what ever crazy thing the gun grabbers come up with!!! We might be lucky that the libs aren't too smart, 'cause they could really run with this. I think the word sniper means any well placed shot from some one under cover or hidden - to them (meaning the media and general public). Most people are VERY uneducated to the whole gun scean, even my father with vietnam draft training, knows very little about firearms (he didn't see combat but went through AIRFORCE boot). In my liberal city, most people are scared of guns, in the innner city the only exposure they have to them is when local news tells them that someone got shot. (By the way, I notice that the only time My town's news starts telling people about muders and violent crimes is when national news is slow. 1.5 million, people 200 murders - I'm guessing - a year. A murder happens every day, probably. The word ASSAULT RIFLE or HAND GUN wil get repeated like a hundred times in a 30 second spot - you know what I mean!) Most people in the inner city vote and steer most of the laws. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
emclean 0 Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 EMCLEAN: That's true, his bolt action wouldn't be a good weapon for combat, but for a sniper, I think its better. It was meant as sarcasm, I would rather face an enemy with an AR than the pictured gun. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G O B 3,516 Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 Bushmaster says they settled cut their losses and to give $$ to victims and NOT brady lawyers. The gunshop"lost"over 200 waepons. ALL SOLD UNDER THE TABLE FOR BIG$$$$ tHE IGNORANT,GREEDY BASTARDS are paying 2million$- they should be on death row with mohamed. MY opinoin-we don't need assholes like these feeding the gungrabbers ammunition to paint all of us as dangerous whackos and criminals. G O B Quote Link to post Share on other sites
KySoldier 2 Posted September 10, 2004 Report Share Posted September 10, 2004 Yeah, it only takes one bad apple....just look at the AK assisted bank robbery in California, what a mess that made for CA gun owners! Still, ignorant people blame the GUN, like those AKs just went off and killed those cops on their own! What do the liberal (gun hating) idiots think is going to happen if they take all the guns away, even if it were possible, people could make Sten guns...pipe and a bed spring... La Resistance! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bvamp 604 Posted September 12, 2004 Report Share Posted September 12, 2004 its too bad that the guns the cops shot those two guys in CA with were seized that day from public gun stores in the area of the firefight.....people forget to mention that part. that whole deal in CA was the COPS' fault. not the assault weapons. if the cops had real guns to begin with like a lot of them do now, it would have ended right in the parking lot of the bank they had just robbed. just the same as its the people that kill other people, it holds true that not only is hindsight 20/20, but people are ignorant to real issues when they are frighted of something. making bank robbery a felony didnt stop it from happening. what is banning the guns going to do? come on now. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
SaltPeter 6 Posted September 12, 2004 Report Share Posted September 12, 2004 Just for the record: in the North Hollywood bank shootout, fifteen people were injured including ten police officers, but the only ones killed were the two suspects. The police did barrow guns from a local gun shop, but never fired them for some reason. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Siagalova 0 Posted September 13, 2004 Author Report Share Posted September 13, 2004 You know - I think it set a precident throughout the country for the police officers to cary some better fire power than a shotgun. most law officers carry an ar for that very reason! that one event. GOD when I first saw the footage, it was unbeleivable! I said to my self "this isn't a movie I'm watching! this is real life" BTW the one guy killed himself, the other was shot and was allowed to bleed to death - they weren't certain if he was controlled or not. Hard to say if there was any fault anywhere - people were open fired upon. who knows. you guys ok over there SALTPETER? gees, what a summer?!?! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.