# No Reasonable Civilian Purpose.



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

That's the claim of the lawsuit against Bushmaster for the gun Lanza used in the Newton whooting.

Isn't a militia a civilian purpose? Since when does anything say a gun has to only be for a sporting purpose?

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/15/us-usa-connecticut-shooting-idUSKBN0JT1QQ20141215


----------



## 1shotwade (Jul 9, 2013)

Remember back when and S&W got sued for making something that could kill you! How lame! I can kill you with an ink pen so,should we sue bic?They just keep trying and trying to convince the public we don't need guns and because we have guns is the only reason they still have the right to sue!

Wade


----------



## deaconjim (Oct 31, 2005)

The Liberal agenda is dependent on the ignorance of the general population, just as Jonathan Gruber so eloquently explained.


----------



## Roadking (Oct 8, 2009)

Sue the manufacturer of the car/bus that got him there as well.
I think I can see the tid-e-bowl man coming up fast for this country.

Matt


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

simi-steading said:


> That's the claim of the lawsuit against Bushmaster for the gun Lanza used in the Newton whooting.
> 
> Isn't a militia a civilian purpose? *Since when does anything say a gun has to only be for a sporting purpose?*
> 
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/15/us-usa-connecticut-shooting-idUSKBN0JT1QQ20141215



*Since Adolf Hitler said so *in his 1930's gun control campaign , it worked very successfully in getting most European nations to register and restrict arms to civilians.


As for a sporting purpose , I am seeing more and more AR pistols in the woods at deer season , can't have a rifle but the law leaves pistols chambered in rifle cartridges wide open here 

not to mention 3 gun competition , service rifle competition , varmint hunting 

so even considering they do have a sporting purpose but no they did not need it

heck Remington even started making AR10 frames and chambering them in 243 and 7mm-08


----------



## rockyriver (Nov 23, 2014)

another reason for me to get more serious about preparing for trouble!


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

rockyriver said:


> another reason for me to get more serious about preparing for trouble!


Add to this the new Surgeon General is very anti-gun, but "promises" not to use his position for that... 

Obama is about to start the gun sale madness again I have a feeling... Glad I got my ammo..


----------



## watcher (Sep 4, 2006)

Hum. . .didn't the Miller case state, in effect, that to be protected by the second it has to be a weapon the military does or has used?


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

Kinda the way I read it.. 

_*"The Court cannot take judicial notice that a shotgun having a barrel less than 18 inches long has today any reasonable relation to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, and therefore cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees to the citizen the right to keep and bear such a weapon."*_


----------



## diamondtim (Jun 10, 2005)

simi-steading said:


> That's the claim of the lawsuit against Bushmaster for the gun Lanza used in the Newton whooting.
> 
> Isn't a militia a civilian purpose? Since when does anything say a gun has to only be for a sporting purpose?
> 
> http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/15/us-usa-connecticut-shooting-idUSKBN0JT1QQ20141215


This lawsuit proves the phrase - "Hurting people hurt people."

The involved families are trying to make someone "pay" for the loss of their loved ones and they can't go after Adam Lanza or his mother. What they haven't realized yet is that nothing material can repay for their loss. No matter what the lawyers tell them.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

does that mean it should now be reversed since the Army does in fact use short barrel shotguns IE the Master Key for breaching doors


----------



## Silvercreek Farmer (Oct 13, 2005)

"...the Second Amendment was not written in order to protect your right to shoot deer, it was written to protect your right to shoot tyrants if they take over the government. How about chewing on that one.&#8221;

Judge Andrew Napolitano


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

That's one Judge I've actually liked...


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

There is a civilian use for an AR type rifle. It's called home defense. If I have 5 home invader thugs break into my house, I want an AR with a 50 round magazine, not a single shot, double barrel, bolt action, or even a pump or semi-auto with a 5 round mag. I would need to quickly put a lot of lead in the air to discourage them.

The people bringing the lawsuit are either truely antigun fanatics or they think they will get rich by sueing the manufacturer. Either way, there is a serious flaw in the logic behind the lawsuit. 

They have this cute little mantra that says, "someone has to be held accountable". This sounds reasonable until you think about it for a minute. The people that should be held accountable are Adam Lanza and his mother but they are both dead and they didn't have much money anyway. No one is going to get rich sueing their estate.


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

deaconjim said:


> The Liberal agenda is dependent on the ignorance of the general population, just as Jonathan Gruber so eloquently explained.


I don't think the general population is as ignorant as some might hope. It appears PBS is still learning that public masturbation is not in their best interests. Once again their poll results are not supporting their possible expectations. They got whacked in 2013 too.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/poll-support-connecticut-gun-law-state/


----------



## 1shotwade (Jul 9, 2013)

Nimrod said:


> There is a civilian use for an AR type rifle. It's called home defense. If I have 5 home invader thugs break into my house, I want an AR with a 50 round magazine, not a single shot, double barrel, bolt action, or even a pump or semi-auto with a 5 round mag. I would need to quickly put a lot of lead in the air to discourage them.
> 
> The people bringing the lawsuit are either truely antigun fanatics or they think they will get rich by sueing the manufacturer. Either way, there is a serious flaw in the logic behind the lawsuit.
> 
> They have this cute little mantra that says, "someone has to be held accountable". This sounds reasonable until you think about it for a minute. The people that should be held accountable are Adam Lanza and his mother but they are both dead and they didn't have much money anyway. No one is going to get rich sueing their estate.




Winning a civil suit and collecting are two different things. There is no enforcement for civil cases. Remember the person that sued Mcdonnels 'cause her coffee was hot/ She won x million dollars and has not and will not collect a dime to this day.

Wade


----------



## Darren (May 10, 2002)

1shotwade said:


> Winning a civil suit and collecting are two different things. There is no enforcement for civil cases. Remember the person that sued Mcdonnels 'cause her coffee was hot/ She won x million dollars and has not and will not collect a dime to this day.
> 
> Wade


There is enforcement but it's involved and depends on the local sheriff. It some cases the winner has been able to start proceedings to sell the loser's property to settle the judgement. 

In one case that I had more than a passing interest,  a lawyer was forced into bankruptcy,  but the plaintiff and winner still got some money. :happy:

Some times you just have to do what you have to do. :thumb:


----------



## JJ Grandits (Nov 10, 2002)

"A Lawyer forced into bankruptcy" for some reason my day seems a little brighter. I think lawyers should be held responsible for the cases they file.


----------



## FarmboyBill (Aug 19, 2005)

Although I usta think that people didn't have a use or need for AR type rifles or machine guns, I reluctantly think they do now, in order to match the Govmt armements.

I DONT agree with the idea of one poster that if 5 robbers broke into your home you would want a gat the subdue them. ONLY in the movies do a gang of armed thugs stay in the fight till the last goes down. Almost always, when one or 2 are hit, the rest vamoose. In many states, having and using extra ammunition to shoot them in the back as they are vamoosing is a definite NO NO. Even having shot them up front, and continuing as they are trying to leave is a no no.

When I think about it, IF they are shot up front, and are trying to leave, a householder should let them. Either they'll die on their own trying to stay away from getting medical help, OR they'll report to a hospital where they will be arrested.


----------



## Lookin4GoodLife (Oct 14, 2013)

simi-steading said:


> That's the claim of the lawsuit against Bushmaster for the gun Lanza used in the Newton whooting.
> 
> Isn't a militia a civilian purpose? Since when does anything say a gun has to only be for a sporting purpose?


I get so sick of that whole argument. We don't telegraph each other, we use smart phones. We don't use typewriters any more, we use computers. We don't use horse and buggies, we drive cars. An AR-15 is nothing but a modern version of the musket, or the rock, if you will. There's precedent to defend these rifles all over the place. In 20 years, we'll probably be shooting deer with phasers. Either change the Constitution through PROPER CHANNELS or STFU about it.


----------



## Lookin4GoodLife (Oct 14, 2013)

And that wasn't aimed at YOU Simi, I mean the "grabbers".


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I know.. :thumb:


----------



## FarmboyBill (Aug 19, 2005)

I guess im a wanna be grab her. Specially with the right woman lol


----------



## Nimrod (Jun 8, 2010)

FarmboyBill said:


> Although I usta think that people didn't have a use or need for AR type rifles or machine guns, I reluctantly think they do now, in order to match the Govmt armements.
> 
> I DONT agree with the idea of one poster that if 5 robbers broke into your home you would want a gat the subdue them. ONLY in the movies do a gang of armed thugs stay in the fight till the last goes down. Almost always, when one or 2 are hit, the rest vamoose. In many states, having and using extra ammunition to shoot them in the back as they are vamoosing is a definite NO NO. Even having shot them up front, and continuing as they are trying to leave is a no no.
> 
> When I think about it, IF they are shot up front, and are trying to leave, a householder should let them. Either they'll die on their own trying to stay away from getting medical help, OR they'll report to a hospital where they will be arrested.


I never said I was going to shoot intruders in the back as they ran away. A rifle with a large capacity mag is for when they don't decide to run away. I will not be staring down home invaders with an empty gun.


----------



## RobinD69 (Feb 8, 2010)

1shotwade said:


> Remember back when and S&W got sued for making something that could kill you! How lame! I can kill you with an ink pen so,should we sue bic?They just keep trying and trying to convince the public we don't need guns and because we have guns is the only reason they still have the right to sue!
> 
> Wade


It will come to that? I was trained from childhood how to kill with my bare hands or use pretty much anything for a weapon, but just like a gun the man is in control of the weapon and the weapon is useless without the man.


----------



## Lookin4GoodLife (Oct 14, 2013)

Remember in The Godfather..... I think it was III, when the guy grabbed the cardinal's (or bishop or whatever he was) glasses off his face and plunged the leg of the glasses into his jugular? Awesome.


----------



## krackin (Nov 2, 2014)

Never had much use for any AR. They are over rated, stamped out, massed produced tools that function as designed but do not excel. Personally I prefer an M-14, GI Issue, Springfield Amory, 1994. One of 640, Last of the Breed.


----------



## simi-steading (Sep 27, 2012)

I'm not an AR fan either... Myself, I'm an SKS fan if I want spray and pray...simpler, more forgiving hardware... I also prefer the 7.62 over the .223...


----------



## TnAndy (Sep 15, 2005)

1shotwade said:


> Winning a civil suit and collecting are two different things. There is no enforcement for civil cases.


Say what ? 

Sure you can collect a judgment in a civil case IF they have anything to collect ON...and you can find it.

I (no attorney) sued a renter for damages and won. (she didn't even show for court). I took the judgment to the court clerk's office and had the choice of direct collection from her bank account (if I knew where it was located), or garnishment of her wages (if I knew where she worked), or a forced Sheriff's sale of enough of her personal property to pay the amount of the judgment (if I knew where that was located in this county)

Well, I did know where she banked, since I made a copy of her deposit check, so the clerk issued a writ that a deputy took to her bank, where they withdrew the amount from her account, sent it to the clerk's office, who cut me a County check after the bank's check cleared, including all the court fees involved in the process. 

Over 4 grand ! But I was just lucky she actually had money, and hadn't bothered to move her account.


----------



## krackin (Nov 2, 2014)

simi-steading said:


> I'm not an AR fan either... Myself, I'm an SKS fan if I want spray and pray...simpler, more forgiving hardware... I also prefer the 7.62 over the .223...


I'm kind of just lovin' my Ruger Ranch Rifle in 6.8 Remington SPC. It is exactly the combination I was looking for. I use see through mounts and a fixed 4x scope. I'm in at 300 yards. 6 for 6. Two with an aught 6 , and two with an oh eight. Yes, that means 14 total.


----------



## 1shotwade (Jul 9, 2013)

TnAndy said:


> Say what ?
> 
> Sure you can collect a judgment in a civil case IF they have anything to collect ON...and you can find it.
> 
> ...




Well lucky you! I did the same thing in Ohio. Got a renter that quit paying and the law wouldn't let me throw them out. They racked up $2675 before I got them out. Took them to court and won,but couldn't collect.Got a garnishment against him and he quit his job. Got a garnishment against her and she quit her job! This went on back and forth for 18 months! The law stipulates you can only collect 10% of one weeks income that is above minimum wage one time a month.Every month I had to re-apply for a garnishment and that cost me $15 from the court and they handled the rest. 6 weeks later i get a check from the court for $10, ONE TIME PER MONTH ! After 2 months I stopped throwing good money after bad.I went back on them a year later and we started the whole thing all over again! I finally just walked away from it and took the lose! They still owe me $2600 or so.
Either the laws are different in each state or you got a real good buddy system going for ya' cause it ain't that way everywhere.

Wade


----------



## Cornhusker (Mar 20, 2003)

simi-steading said:


> I'm not an AR fan either... Myself, I'm an SKS fan if I want spray and pray...simpler, more forgiving hardware... I also prefer the 7.62 over the .223...


I like my AR, but Not a big fan of the platform.
It serves it's purpose, but pistol grips just seem to get in my way.


----------



## GREENCOUNTYPETE (Jul 25, 2006)

1shotwade said:


> Well lucky you! I did the same thing in Ohio. Got a renter that quit paying and the law wouldn't let me throw them out. They racked up $2675 before I got them out. Took them to court and won,but couldn't collect.Got a garnishment against him and he quit his job. Got a garnishment against her and she quit her job! This went on back and forth for 18 months! The law stipulates you can only collect 10% of one weeks income that is above minimum wage one time a month.Every month I had to re-apply for a garnishment and that cost me $15 from the court and they handled the rest. 6 weeks later i get a check from the court for $10, ONE TIME PER MONTH ! After 2 months I stopped throwing good money after bad.I went back on them a year later and we started the whole thing all over again! I finally just walked away from it and took the lose! They still owe me $2600 or so.
> Either the laws are different in each state or you got a real good buddy system going for ya' cause it ain't that way everywhere.
> 
> Wade



laws are radically different , but getting to be more and more useless every where

sadly landlords were abusing the system as tenants abuse the system when people abuse it everyone looses


----------



## Bentley (Jul 10, 2008)

If someone kills people with a bomb, they blame the bomber. If someone kills people with a gun, they blame the gun. 

Dang peculiar don't ya think?


----------



## Bentley (Jul 10, 2008)

The AR platform is a perfect compromise for what it was designed for. It's actually kind of small for killing people, although it will. It's not terribly accurate, although mine will put five rounds inside a dime at 100. It's not very pretty compared to a pre 64 Model 70, but in a firefight, I'll take the AR every time. 

Yeah, I think I'll keep all of mine.


----------



## JohnnyRebel (Dec 23, 2014)

I don't care if it is civilian reasonable or not, it's my constitutional right.


----------



## Tyler520 (Aug 12, 2011)

The pathetic irony is that he didn't use a bushmaster - it has become an urban legend

That alone should be cause for their suit to be tossed


----------

