1BB
1BB
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 5339
Joined: Oct 10, 2011
December 30th, 2012 at 6:51:05 AM permalink
That didn't take long. There has been a $100 million lawsuit filed against the State of Connecticut on behalf of a six year old student. Not one of the deceased or injured students but one of the physically unharmed students who heard the gunfire.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
JohnnyQ
JohnnyQ
  • Threads: 262
  • Posts: 4021
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
December 30th, 2012 at 7:31:07 AM permalink
As if this tragedy wasn't bad enough, some low life
parents and a DB attorney now look to gain from
it ?

Unbelievable.

from yahoo.com:

"The unidentified client, referred to as Jill Doe, heard "cursing, screaming, and shooting"
over the school intercom when the gunman, 20-year-old Adam Lanza, opened fire,
according to the claim filed by New Haven-based attorney Irv Pinsky.
There's emptiness behind their eyes There's dust in all their hearts They just want to steal us all and take us all apart
RonC
RonC
  • Threads: 40
  • Posts: 4874
Joined: Jan 18, 2010
December 30th, 2012 at 7:43:59 AM permalink
Another quality lawyer helping harmed citizens...

This lawyer has been disciplined by a state licensing authority.
State Citation type Year cited Last updated by Avvo
Connecticut Suspended 2003 06/20/2012
Connecticut Reprimand 1989 06/20/2012

http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/06511-ct-irving-pinsky-1449309.html

I'm sorry...we all know people were "harmed" in this incident whether it was physically or emotionally...but $100 million? Really? Honestly, even $100 million is going to help the kid get over the incident--it will just make the parents and lawyer wealthy. The harmed child will need counseling and time, not money, to get over the "harm"...

Does anyone wonder why lawyers have lost their reputation, as a group, over the years???
JohnnyQ
JohnnyQ
  • Threads: 262
  • Posts: 4021
Joined: Nov 3, 2009
December 30th, 2012 at 7:56:57 AM permalink
I also have to fault the parents who contacted
Irv the scumbag.

I bet they were a real treat for the staff at the school
to deal with at parent-teacher conferences, etc.
There's emptiness behind their eyes There's dust in all their hearts They just want to steal us all and take us all apart
Doc
Doc
  • Threads: 46
  • Posts: 7287
Joined: Feb 27, 2010
December 30th, 2012 at 8:01:58 AM permalink
Quote: RonC

Does anyone wonder why lawyers have lost their reputation, as a group, over the years???


Over just which years? In Shakespeare's Henry the Sixth, Part 2, Dick the butcher suggests, "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."

Not that Dick was one of the good guys in that story, but it doesn't suggest that lawyers had a very solid reputation even back then.
1BB
1BB
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 5339
Joined: Oct 10, 2011
December 30th, 2012 at 9:21:43 AM permalink
I live in Connecticut and can tell you that people are furious. The state may be exempt from these lawsuits. Let's hope so. Most decent people are just trying to remember the victims and their families as well as the firefighters from New York.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
MrV
MrV
  • Threads: 364
  • Posts: 8158
Joined: Feb 13, 2010
December 30th, 2012 at 11:37:16 AM permalink
The lawyer, Irv Pinsky, seems to have forgotten, or perhaps he is too stupid to realize, that he MUST join the local school district as a necessary party to any such tortious claim.

Gee, no wonder this legal lightweight had his license suspended earlier.

Melvin Belli he ain't ...

"What, me worry?"
1BB
1BB
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 5339
Joined: Oct 10, 2011
December 16th, 2014 at 3:36:23 AM permalink
Sunday marked the two year anniversary of Newtown. Some of the families remembered it by filing suit against Bushmaster, the manufacturer of the rifle used in the killing. The two year window for filing is up. Isn't the guilty party the one who pulled the trigger?
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
Daddydoc
Daddydoc
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 153
Joined: Jun 22, 2014
December 16th, 2014 at 3:52:03 AM permalink
Quote: 1BB

.. Isn't the guilty party the one who pulled the trigger?



Oh, you silly. Of course it's the evil gun that caused all of this. It couldn't possibly be the fault of the person that actually did the deed. Why, that would mean we would hold someone responsible for their actions. Much better that we should attack the organization with the most money.
If government is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.
1BB
1BB
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 5339
Joined: Oct 10, 2011
December 16th, 2014 at 3:59:58 AM permalink
Quote: Daddydoc

Oh, you silly. Of course it's the evil gun that caused all of this. It couldn't possibly be the fault of the person that actually did the deed. Why, that would mean we would hold someone responsible for their actions. Much better that we should attack the organization with the most money.



I hear ya. I cut myself shaving this morning. Look out Gillette, I'm coming after you!
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
Greasyjohn
Greasyjohn
  • Threads: 135
  • Posts: 2178
Joined: Dec 8, 2013
December 16th, 2014 at 4:17:04 AM permalink
Quote: 1BB

That didn't take long. There has been a $100 million lawsuit filed against the State of Connecticut on behalf of a six year old student. Not one of the deceased or injured students but one of the physically unharmed students who heard the gunfire.



Will somebody please sue the parents who are bringing the lawsuit? I honestly believe that what will have more lasting negative consequences for this child is reconciling the materialistic parents that are trying to turn this tragedy of others into a comfortable retirement for themselves.

This is what I hate about this country. We're going to let this happen.
Dicenor33
Dicenor33
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 624
Joined: Aug 28, 2013
December 16th, 2014 at 4:58:02 AM permalink
The victims of 9-11 received a compensation. 3 millions? A lawsuit seems to be wrong, but a standard reimbursement should become a norm with a tragedy of such magnitude.
SOOPOO
SOOPOO
  • Threads: 121
  • Posts: 10942
Joined: Aug 8, 2010
December 16th, 2014 at 5:30:01 AM permalink
Quote: Dicenor33

The victims of 9-11 received a compensation. 3 millions? A lawsuit seems to be wrong, but a standard reimbursement should become a norm with a tragedy of such magnitude.



Whatttttt?????? Life happens.... and shit happens...... "a standard reimbursement" from WHOM?????
I'm sorry..... If the state of Connecticut or the local town wants to offer free counseling services, that I could agree with...... but no more......
Greasyjohn
Greasyjohn
  • Threads: 135
  • Posts: 2178
Joined: Dec 8, 2013
December 16th, 2014 at 5:38:14 AM permalink
So every child that was at the school that day should receive money? Or just those who can demonstrate emotional trauma? How much do you think is fair? Who should be required to pay this compensation? Should every person that witnesses a crime where someone is hurt be eligible for monetary compensation?

I don't think our government owed the survivors of 9-11 compensation for the loss of their loved ones. If they didn't want to pay the premiums for life insurance, why should the government give them compensation anyway? (Not that the government owes them anything.)

Money is not the answer.
MrV
MrV
  • Threads: 364
  • Posts: 8158
Joined: Feb 13, 2010
December 16th, 2014 at 7:59:05 AM permalink
Quote: Greasyjohn

Will somebody please sue the parents who are bringing the lawsuit? I honestly believe that what will have more lasting negative consequences for this child is reconciling the materialistic parents that are trying to turn this tragedy of others into a comfortable retirement for themselves.



The lawsuit on behalf of the six year old was dropped shortly after it was filed; the kids' lawyer backed out due to "negative backlash."

However, a different, seemingly more experienced firm recently filed a new action on behalf of about ten kids, suing Bushmaster.
"What, me worry?"
Greasyjohn
Greasyjohn
  • Threads: 135
  • Posts: 2178
Joined: Dec 8, 2013
December 16th, 2014 at 8:38:51 AM permalink
They should sue the store that sold the ammo. Maybe Michael Moore can go to Bushmaster with photos of the carnage. What a grandstanding, shallow person he is.
1BB
1BB
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 5339
Joined: Oct 10, 2011
December 16th, 2014 at 9:26:17 AM permalink
Quote: Greasyjohn

They should sue the store that sold the ammo. Maybe Michael Moore can go to Bushmaster with photos of the carnage. What a grandstanding, shallow person he is.



Sue the trucking company that delivered the ammo to the store. Sue the station that sold fuel to the truck. Sue the driver......
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
ThatDonGuy
ThatDonGuy
  • Threads: 117
  • Posts: 6219
Joined: Jun 22, 2011
December 16th, 2014 at 9:51:00 AM permalink
Quote: Greasyjohn

They should sue the store that sold the ammo. Maybe Michael Moore can go to Bushmaster with photos of the carnage. What a grandstanding, shallow person he is.


Don't laugh - some anti-gun types recommend doing just that in such a situation. If you can sue either the gun manufacturers or the bullet manufacturers out of existence, then the "gun problem" is solved.

Looks like a classic "deep pockets fishing expedition" - sue everybody you can in the hopes that a jury can find somebody liable, and preferably somebody with a lot of money.

"If you or a love one were killed (yes, I have heard commercials include those words verbatim), physically injured, or emotionally scarred by this event, including from the shock resulting from just turning on the TV or bringing up a website and seeing the news, we can help - call 888-555-01 something something!"
petroglyph
petroglyph
  • Threads: 19
  • Posts: 3360
Joined: Jan 3, 2013
December 16th, 2014 at 12:28:06 PM permalink
Never let a good crisis go to waste. "Rahm Emanuel"
EvenBob
EvenBob
  • Threads: 441
  • Posts: 28576
Joined: Jul 18, 2010
December 16th, 2014 at 1:07:02 PM permalink
Quote: MrV





Ace? Giving you any ideas? A rolling divorce van..
"It's not called gambling if the math is on your side."
aceofspades
aceofspades
  • Threads: 366
  • Posts: 6506
Joined: Apr 4, 2012
December 16th, 2014 at 1:15:19 PM permalink
Zcore13
Zcore13
  • Threads: 41
  • Posts: 3808
Joined: Nov 30, 2009
December 16th, 2014 at 2:26:55 PM permalink
In more stupid news... Employees of Sony are now suing Sony for being hacked by (most likely) North Korea or North Korea sympathizers. They say Sony didn't protect their information enough. What a joke. Criminal acts are being committed and people want to sue the victims.


ZCore13
I am an employee of a Casino. Former Table Games Director,, current Pit Supervisor. All the personal opinions I post are my own and do not represent the opinions of the Casino or Tribe that I work for.
terapined
terapined
  • Threads: 89
  • Posts: 6092
Joined: Dec 1, 2012
December 16th, 2014 at 5:10:56 PM permalink
Quote: Zcore13

In more stupid news... Employees of Sony are now suing Sony for being hacked by (most likely) North Korea or North Korea sympathizers. They say Sony didn't protect their information enough. What a joke. Criminal acts are being committed and people want to sue the victims.


ZCore13



They may have a case.
What was revealed in the hacked emails was that Sony really didn't take the security issue seriously.
IT guys at Sony were horrified regarding security.
beachbumbabs
beachbumbabs
  • Threads: 100
  • Posts: 14260
Joined: May 21, 2013
December 16th, 2014 at 7:30:00 PM permalink
Saw the lawyer for the plaintiffs on tv last night.

The basis of their case seems to be:

1. The AR-15/M16/long number that's the same gun was developed specific to military requirements by the A-brand people, and they sold many to the federal gov't. Colt took over the manu of what is now the military version M16. Bushmaster manu's the same gun under a different number.

2. Several of the requirements were, for a gun that could load armor-piercing bullets, be light enough to be carried long distances, easily maneuvered, allow loading of large clips, certain rate per second shot rate without overheating, etc.

3. Those rifles were issued to soldiers and law-enforcement officers, who were extensively trained in the specific uses of their weapons, the situations in which it would be appropriate to use them, safeguards, maintenance, ethics, and the parameters of their jobs, including following a chain of command before loosing weapons.

4. Bushmaster is/was selling this weapon, designed solely for mass warfare by trained personnel, to the general public, without training, education, social or ethical constraint, or legal requirement beyond registering the fact of their ownership under the checkerboard of confusion that is state-based gun law.

5. Knowing what their product is, what it's designed to do, and the degree of lethality it represents, and who it was supposed to be made for, they still sold it to people unqualified to operate it safely, including availability to mentally ill family members (if any). Which represents some degree of conscious negligence in offering the product, and responsibility for crimes committed during its "normal and intended" use. Which makes them liable.

Congress passed a bill in 2004, written by the NRA, specifically exempting gun manufacturers from this kind of liability, though there is massive precedent in successful tort claims against manufacturers as varied as toy companies, small electronics, cars, flammable fabrics, paint, drugs, implants, plastics which exude chemicals by osmosis or fire, airframes, foods, a thousand other products.

Chances are this is going to the Supreme Court, and my guess is the liability shield law will be overturned. But my crystal ball is cloudy, and of course the whole thing involves money and politics, so anything could happen. But I think the families have a case.

There is a twisted logic that says, while everything else manufactured I mentioned above is designed to make some part of human life easier, prettier, more beneficial, healthier, whatever, this particular object is DESIGNED to kill and maim as efficiently as possible, so if you buy one, you must know what you're buying it for, and the manufacturer has not hidden anything from you about it being used for that. And if you use it in an illegal act, which defines nearly every possible use of it (and I don't buy that "home defense" is a legal use of it; it's a justification for an illegal act of intentional or actual murder), then it's on you if you do it, not the purveyor who made it possible. If Bushmaster wins, I think the argument will be along those lines.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
Daddydoc
Daddydoc
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 153
Joined: Jun 22, 2014
December 16th, 2014 at 7:39:31 PM permalink
Lanza allegedly stole the rifle from his mother. Are we going to hold GM responsible for the death of someone crossing a street when they are run over by a felon who stole a Cadillac Escalade from the rightful owner and blew through a red light? Should we hold responsible the Seagram's company for selling liquor to a bar when a patron of said bar drinks too much and then dies of alcohol intoxication or aspiration pneumonia? No matter how you slice it, the responsibility (and evil) still rests with the individual who points/drives/drinks the rifle/vehicle/vodka in an inappropriate, unsafe or lethal fashion.
If government is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.
beachbumbabs
beachbumbabs
  • Threads: 100
  • Posts: 14260
Joined: May 21, 2013
December 16th, 2014 at 7:45:38 PM permalink
Quote: Daddydoc

Lanza allegedly stole the rifle from his mother. Are we going to hold GM responsible for the death of someone crossing a street when they are run over by a felon who stole a Cadillac Escalade from the rightful owner and blew through a red light? Should we hold responsible the Seagram's company for selling liquor to a bar when a patron of said bar drinks too much and then dies of alcohol intoxication or aspiration pneumonia? No matter how you slice it, the responsibility (and evil) still rests with the individual who points/drives/drinks the rifle/vehicle/vodka in an inappropriate, unsafe or lethal fashion.



Not arguing your logic; I made the same point above. But I think there's also a reasonable argument in what they're saying, too, at least in our society as it is.

It's illegal to give a minor booze, drugs, cigarettes, or commit sexual acts with them if you're an adult. Why are those laws?

Untrained civilians using lethal military equipment designed for professional soldiers is pretty analogous to children doing any of the above. They don't have the judgment, knowledge, or ethics to use them responsibly.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
Daddydoc
Daddydoc
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 153
Joined: Jun 22, 2014
December 16th, 2014 at 7:47:08 PM permalink
And, to your point #2, most any rifle, pistol or even shotgun can fire "armor-piercing" ammo. What product should be specifically designed to be LESS convenient to use? Regarding #3, the AR-15 platform is probably the most popular firearm in this country (and certainly the most popular rifle) and may only be exceeded throughout the rest of the world by the AK-47 which is much cheaper to produce and has been made in Chinese, Bulgarian, Yugoslavian, and Polish as well as Russian variants. I am not sure how it can be claimed or implied that this was a "military/police-only" weapon.
If government is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.
aladyat42
aladyat42
  • Threads: 1
  • Posts: 72
Joined: Mar 10, 2011
December 16th, 2014 at 7:47:44 PM permalink
Evenbob1000 demands the right to own a nuclear weapon.
Daddydoc
Daddydoc
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 153
Joined: Jun 22, 2014
December 16th, 2014 at 7:53:34 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

Untrained civilians using lethal military equipment designed for professional soldiers is pretty analogous to children doing any of the above. They don't have the judgment, knowledge, or ethics to use them responsibly.



I won't make presumptions about your experiences with firearms. Any firearm I have ever purchased from a manufacturer (as opposed to from a private party) comes with a rather extensive manual regarding safety, appropriate use, cleaning and disassembly/reassembly instructions, and the importance of NEVER pointing a firearm at something you don't intend to destroy. I guess an illiterate individual could argue that a DVD should be provided for instructions. The onus is on the owner of the firearm to use it in an appropriate fashion, or to be instructed regarding the same.
If government is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.
beachbumbabs
beachbumbabs
  • Threads: 100
  • Posts: 14260
Joined: May 21, 2013
December 16th, 2014 at 9:12:00 PM permalink
Quote: Daddydoc

And, to your point #2, most any rifle, pistol or even shotgun can fire "armor-piercing" ammo. What product should be specifically designed to be LESS convenient to use? Regarding #3, the AR-15 platform is probably the most popular firearm in this country (and certainly the most popular rifle) and may only be exceeded throughout the rest of the world by the AK-47 which is much cheaper to produce and has been made in Chinese, Bulgarian, Yugoslavian, and Polish as well as Russian variants. I am not sure how it can be claimed or implied that this was a "military/police-only" weapon.



What I'm saying is,

A critical part of their argument (not mine) is:

The government put out a requirements document. (I used to help write these, both as part of the federal gov't in DC, and after retirement as an expert consultant to a company responding to them.)

A requirements document details every single thing down to the nanodetails (they can run hundreds of pages), saying exactly what a procured item must do, look like, weigh, interact/interface with, ad nauseum.

These are some of the requirements specifications that the Armalite corporation bid on and won, resulting in the development of the AR-15, which the military designated the M-16, and the civilian "copycat" gun goes by another name.

The requirements (request for proposal, budget scoring, a forest of paper) specified who was to use it, what kind of experience and training they would have to have (which the manu usually provides in some form, then the gov't teaches from their manual or adapts it to their use), lots of other stuff.

The gun was not developed for civilian deployment or sales. So, to provide those unskilled people with the weapon was irresponsible and liable.

That's how their argument goes, at least in part. No idea whether it will prevail, but that's the basis for the lawsuit against Bushwhosis as I understood it last night.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
petroglyph
petroglyph
  • Threads: 19
  • Posts: 3360
Joined: Jan 3, 2013
December 16th, 2014 at 9:35:11 PM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs

What I'm saying is,

A critical part of their argument (not mine) is:

The government put out a requirements document. (I used to help write these, both as part of the federal gov't in DC, and after retirement as an expert consultant to a company responding to them.)

A requirements document details every single thing down to the nanodetails (they can run hundreds of pages), saying exactly what a procured item must do, look like, weigh, interact/interface with, ad nauseum.

These are some of the requirements specifications that the Armalite corporation bid on and won, resulting in the development of the AR-15, which the military designated the M-16, and the civilian "copycat" gun goes by another name.

The requirements (request for proposal, budget scoring, a forest of paper) specified who was to use it, what kind of experience and training they would have to have (which the manu usually provides in some form, then the gov't teaches from their manual or adapts it to their use), lots of other stuff.

The gun was not developed for civilian deployment or sales. So, to provide those unskilled people with the weapon was irresponsible and liable.

That's how their argument goes, at least in part. No idea whether it will prevail, but that's the basis for the lawsuit against Bushwhosis as I understood it last night.



I wonder if anyone from Mexico will sue Eric Holder and company for weapons that crossed the border because of "Fast and Furious"?
beachbumbabs
beachbumbabs
  • Threads: 100
  • Posts: 14260
Joined: May 21, 2013
December 16th, 2014 at 9:36:53 PM permalink
Quote: Daddydoc

I won't make presumptions about your experiences with firearms. Any firearm I have ever purchased from a manufacturer (as opposed to from a private party) comes with a rather extensive manual regarding safety, appropriate use, cleaning and disassembly/reassembly instructions, and the importance of NEVER pointing a firearm at something you don't intend to destroy. I guess an illiterate individual could argue that a DVD should be provided for instructions. The onus is on the owner of the firearm to use it in an appropriate fashion, or to be instructed regarding the same.



I grew up in a hunting family, so around rifles and shotguns, did some trap and skeet shooting, but game hunting (pheasant, quail, duck, deer, elk) was dad and brothers, not women (they would field dress, we would pluck/skin/clean/cook). NRA member in Jr High thru college. Owned and learned to shoot a SW revolver (nice model 66, 4 inch barrel, recessed sights, presentation grips, stainless steel finish - had great balance) for self-protection; bought in 1991 at a gun show, sold in 2012. Married a Vietnam Vet who retired military, and gun collector; we went range shooting for fun.

So probably more than most women, less than most men? Just so you won't have to make presumptions. :)

I think there's a lot more to training a person to have a weapon like that than just "this is how you release the banana clip, that's the safety" type of training on the particular model. If you can empty a 30 round clip at people in 3 seconds, you'd better have pretty good impulse control, for example, or you're an effing menace. That's training people get in Basic, or the Police Academy, sort of like "with great power comes great responsibility". And still, even after that training, how many squadrons in Vietnam fragged their LT's?

I think that's the larger point they're trying to make, whether it resolves into a cogent legal argument or not. Responsible gun ownership is more than having a gun safe or a trigger lock.
If the House lost every hand, they wouldn't deal the game.
Daddydoc
Daddydoc
  • Threads: 8
  • Posts: 153
Joined: Jun 22, 2014
December 17th, 2014 at 1:36:36 AM permalink
I'd say that's quite a bit of firearms experience ;)
If government is the answer, it must have been a very stupid question.
AZDuffman
AZDuffman
  • Threads: 240
  • Posts: 13885
Joined: Nov 2, 2009
December 17th, 2014 at 3:28:51 AM permalink
Quote: beachbumbabs



Chances are this is going to the Supreme Court, and my guess is the liability shield law will be overturned. But my crystal ball is cloudy, and of course the whole thing involves money and politics, so anything could happen. But I think the families have a case.



It would be a shame if the shield is overturned. And I have to say I do not see how an intelligent person could think there is any liability on the gun manufacturer at all. The parents are just plain greedy and want to make a buck off the tragedy.
All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others
1BB
1BB
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 5339
Joined: Oct 10, 2011
December 17th, 2014 at 4:05:13 AM permalink
Quote: Daddydoc

I'd say that's quite a bit of firearms experience ;)



Yeah, but can she field strip those weapons blindfolded? In less than a minute? While counting down a deck of cards? Okay, I got carried away on the last one. :-)

Where are you, Face? You must have done it.
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
RS
RS
  • Threads: 62
  • Posts: 8626
Joined: Feb 11, 2014
December 17th, 2014 at 12:18:44 PM permalink
BB, you mean you can't count down a deck blindfolded in less than a minute? I'm usually 40-45 seconds.
1BB
1BB
  • Threads: 18
  • Posts: 5339
Joined: Oct 10, 2011
December 17th, 2014 at 12:25:07 PM permalink
Quote: RS

BB, you mean you can't count down a deck blindfolded in less than a minute? I'm usually 40-45 seconds.



Heck yeah! Me and Stevie Wonder. Can't guarantee the results though. :-)
Many people, especially ignorant people, want to punish you for speaking the truth. - Mahatma Ghandi
Face
Administrator
Face
  • Threads: 49
  • Posts: 4448
Joined: Dec 27, 2010
December 17th, 2014 at 12:53:00 PM permalink
Quote: AZDuffman

It would be a shame if the shield is overturned. And I have to say I do not see how an intelligent person could think there is any liability on the gun manufacturer at all. The parents are just plain greedy and want to make a buck off the tragedy.



It's like anything else. I remember the Suzuki LT500, or "Quadzilla". Did damn near 100mph right off the showroom floor. It was, and still is, the baddest quad ever built.

But people are stupid, and many wrapped it around a tree. It only lasted three years due to "consumer safety issues". The same can be said for the Honda ATC three wheelers. And I'm sure we could list all day the products that have been litigated out of existence.

I agree with Babs that they have a case. But said case is the result of our absolutely asinine and disgusting practice of liability litigation.

Quote: 1BB

Yeah, but can she field strip those weapons blindfolded? In less than a minute? While counting down a deck of cards? Okay, I got carried away on the last one. :-)

Where are you, Face? You must have done it.



Field stripping any of my Glocks blindfolded in a minute is cake. Anyone here could do it. I just attempted a full disassemble and reassemble without looking (no blindfold, had to do it behind my back). To go from carry condition three to totally broken down back to carry condition three again took 34 seconds.

My Mosin is 5 minutes minimum, even while looking. Not looking would probably take 15 minutes, and I'd strip the living hell out of the action bolts. Of course, it's Russian, so a bit of wood glue and a staple gun and I'd still be driving nails at 150yds ;)

My M-10 I might could do under a minute blindfolded. But the M-4 has been so customized I wouldn't have a chance, eyes or no.

I can't count without looking. Might get lucky and guess, though =)
The opinions of this moderator are for entertainment purposes only.
  • Jump to: