• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Glock being ignorantly sued. Also, California legislature voted yes to ban Glocks outright. (1 Viewer)

Maidenrules29 said:
Pretty idiotic to think this suit or ban will get anywhere.

nypost.com

Brooklyn subway mass shooting victims sue Glock over rampage, arguing gunmaker is at fault

Furong Hu and Zhuoxuan Ye were among 10 shot when James, 62, opened fire with his legally purchased Glock 17 9mm handgun, they said in a Brooklyn Federal Court lawsuit against the gunmaker.
nypost.com nypost.com
Click to expand...
The post isn't a valid source. It's owned by a self-admitted lying sack of shit.
Maidenrules29 said:
Click to expand...
 
braindrain said:
It’s not me who doesn’t understand the deference between a product being defective and a product being misused. That is all you.
Click to expand...

The issue is that Glock KNOWS that its products will be misused, resulting in death/injury, but continues to sell them anyway.
 
Rich2018 said:
The issue is that Glock KNOWS that its products will be misused, resulting in death/injury, but continues to sell them anyway.
Click to expand...
So does every single car manufacturer, alcohol producer, baseball bat maker, knife maker and drug manufacturer.
Strange those are not being sued.
 
braindrain said:
So does every single car manufacturer, alcohol producer, baseball bat maker, knife maker and drug manufacturer.
Strange those are not being sued.
Click to expand...

No, people do not buy cars, baseball bats, alcoholic drink, with the intention of hurting people. Moreover none of the above are manufactured for that aim

(the opinion of one poster on here who thinks cars are designed to kill, excepted).
 
Rich2018 said:
No, people do not buy cars, baseball bats, alcoholic drink, with the intention of hurting people. Moreover none of the above are manufactured for that aim

(the opinion of one poster on here who thinks cars are designed to kill, excepted).
Click to expand...
And right to the immediate goal post move. Definitely didn’t see that coming /s

You claimed the reason Glock can be sued is because they know thier product will be misused. All the car manufacturers, alcohol producers, baseball bat makers, knife makers and drug manufacturers know their products will miss used.
And no some knives, bats, and drugs have been bought with the intention of hurting other people.

So even with your dishonest attempt at goalpost moving you still failed rather epically. Seems to be the norm for you.

But who knows. Maybe you can post a response, delete it, and then repost it again. That will definitely help your argument.
 
Rich2018 said:
No, people do not buy cars, baseball bats, alcoholic drink, with the intention of hurting people. Moreover none of the above are manufactured for that aim

(the opinion of one poster on here who thinks cars are designed to kill, excepted).
Click to expand...
Sure, people are buying those items without the intention of hurting people. That has nothing to do with the fact that the manufacturer knows they will be misused. Nice try though.
 
Rich2018 said:
The issue is that Glock KNOWS that its products will be misused, resulting in death/injury, but continues to sell them anyway.
Click to expand...
You can not in any way support this claim.
 
Rich2018 said:
No, people do not buy cars, baseball bats, alcoholic drink, with the intention of hurting people.
Click to expand...
You can not support this claim.
Rich2018 said:
Moreover none of the above are manufactured for that aim
Click to expand...
Neither are firearms.
Rich2018 said:
(the opinion of one poster on here who thinks cars are designed to kill, excepted).
Click to expand...
Why do you talk about people in such a cowardly way, instead of addressing the poster directly? Is it the same reason you make a post, copy it, delete it, and then repost it in order to be last? 😂
 
Rich2018 said:
No, people do not buy cars, baseball bats, alcoholic drink, with the intention of hurting people. Moreover none of the above are manufactured for that aim

(the opinion of one poster on here who thinks cars are designed to kill, excepted).
Click to expand...

I don't believe you. I claim you are lying. Quote that "one poster on here".

😆
 
braindrain said:
And right to the immediate goal post move. Definitely didn’t see that coming /s
Click to expand...

What goal post move ?
Please explain in detail how you perceive "goalpost" movement.

braindrain said:
You claimed the reason Glock can be sued is because they know thier product will be misused.
Click to expand...

Yes, but makers of sports car and alcoholic drinks also know this

braindrain said:
All the car manufacturers, alcohol producers, baseball bat makers, knife makers and drug manufacturers know their products will miss used.
And no some knives, bats, and drugs have been bought with the intention of hurting other people.
Click to expand...

The difference, as I've already explained, is that no-one buys a fast sports car or alcoholic drink, in order to hurt someone

There a VERY few instances of people using fast sports cars to hurt people, and I'm unaware of any instances of people ingesting alcoholic drink with the aim other hurting others.

braindrain said:
So even with your dishonest attempt at goalpost moving
Click to expand...

You've yet to demonstrate this "dishonesty"

If anyone is guilty of it, it's you for making unfounded accusations.

braindrain said:
But who knows. Maybe you can post a response, delete it, and then repost it again. That will definitely help your argument.
Click to expand...

I just did.
 
Maidenrules29 said:
Sure, people are buying those items without the intention of hurting people. That has nothing to do with the fact that the manufacturer knows they will be misused. Nice try though.
Click to expand...

It makes a HUGE difference

People buy Glocks (and other firearm brands) with the specific purpose of harming others.
 
Rich2018 said:
It makes a HUGE difference

People buy Glocks (and other firearm brands) with the specific purpose of harming others.
Click to expand...

Leaving aside that self defense might indeed result in harming someone (and tough shit for those harmed for that reason), we're left with very few people who buy firearms with the idea of harming others. Or at least, we're not seeing these intentions you claim on their behalf actually playing out in reality to any great extent.

You do understand that people could (and some likely do) buy knives and baseball bats with the specific purpose of harming others? Fulfilling the purpose "harming others" is not limited to gun purchases.
 
Rich2018 said:
What goal post move ?
Please explain in detail how you perceive "goalpost" movement.
Click to expand...

You changed your argument from "Glock knows that some will misuse their product" to "People buy Glocks with the intention of misusing them".

And still face-planted in an attempt at special pleading.

Rich2018 said:
Yes, but makers of sports car and alcoholic drinks also know this



The difference, as I've already explained, is that no-one buys a fast sports car or alcoholic drink, in order to hurt someone

There a VERY few instances of people using fast sports cars to hurt people, and I'm unaware of any instances of people ingesting alcoholic drink with the aim other hurting others.



You've yet to demonstrate this "dishonesty"

If anyone is guilty of it, it's you for making unfounded accusations.



I just did.
Click to expand...
 
Rich2018 said:
What goal post move ?
Please explain in detail how you perceive "goalpost" movement.



Yes, but makers of sports car and alcoholic drinks also know this



The difference, as I've already explained, is that no-one buys a fast sports car or alcoholic drink, in order to hurt someone

There a VERY few instances of people using fast sports cars to hurt people, and I'm unaware of any instances of people ingesting alcoholic drink with the aim other hurting others.



You've yet to demonstrate this "dishonesty"

If anyone is guilty of it, it's you for making unfounded accusations.



I just did.
Click to expand...
Easy enough.
Rich2018 said:
The issue is that Glock KNOWS that its products will be misused, resulting in death/injury,
Click to expand...
Rich2018 said:
No, people do not buy cars, baseball bats, alcoholic drink, with the intention of hurting people.
Click to expand...
That is known as moving the goal posts. But let’s be honest we both know you won’t admit it and instead will just continue to play your silly dishonest games.

So where are all the lawsuits going after alcohol producers.

One you can’t prove that and two it’s interesting how fast you decided to only talk about a couple of examples I gave while ignoring the rest as you know it proves your claims wrong.

And what difference do you think it makes if they are fast sports cars or heavy SUVs. And plenty of girls have been date raped after they person they are with gets them intoxicated.


No I have proven your dishonesty rather clearly. You just lack the integrity to admit it.

Yes your attention seeking is rather pathetic.
 
braindrain said:
And right to the immediate goal post move. Definitely didn’t see that coming
Click to expand...

You've still to explain your perceived goalpost move
It's getting like you don't perceive one at all and are just engaging in mindless "Trumpism", of throwing mud and seeing what sticks.

A contemptible way of "arguing".

braindrain said:
You claimed the reason Glock can be sued is because they know thier product will be misused.
Click to expand...

No, as I said very CLEARLY - buy obviously not clear enough for you in post#44:
"Tobacco companies and Ford all knew their products were harmful, but they sold them anyway"

braindrain said:
All the car manufacturers, alcohol producers, baseball bat makers, knife makers and drug manufacturers know their products will miss used.
Click to expand...

The difference is that people do not buy fast cars, baseball bats, alcoholic drink, with the intention of hurting people. Moreover none of the above are manufactured for that aim*

Your post is at best disingenuous and at worst dishonest.

*The opinion of one poster on here who thinks cars are designed to kill, excepted.
 
Rich2018 said:
You've still to explain your perceived goalpost move
It's getting like you don't perceive one at all and are just engaging in mindless "Trumpism", of throwing mud and seeing what sticks.

A contemptible way of "arguing".



No, as I said very CLEARLY - buy obviously not clear enough for you in post#44:
"Tobacco companies and Ford all knew their products were harmful, but they sold them anyway"



The difference is that people do not buy fast cars, baseball bats, alcoholic drink, with the intention of hurting people. Moreover none of the above are manufactured for that aim*

Your post is at best disingenuous and at worst dishonest.

*The opinion of one poster on here who thinks cars are designed to kill, excepted.
Click to expand...
I quoted your goal post move. That you lack the integrity to admit it is not my problem.


More lying from you.
Rich2018 said:
The issue is that Glock KNOWS that its products will be misused, resulting in death/injury, but continues to sell them anyway.
Click to expand...


This stupidity has already been disproven. And you know it.


I have already proven the dishonest in your posts multiple times. You know it , I know it and anytime who reads this thread will know it. But please keep playing your little game.
Maybe posting then copying and deleting that posts so you can repost it will help you.


A claim you make of a poster yet can never prove. Wonder why.
 
Rich2018 said:
You've still to explain your perceived goalpost move
It's getting like you don't perceive one at all and are just engaging in mindless "Trumpism", of throwing mud and seeing what sticks.

A contemptible way of "arguing".



No, as I said very CLEARLY - buy obviously not clear enough for you in post#44:
"Tobacco companies and Ford all knew their products were harmful, but they sold them anyway"



The difference is that people do not buy fast cars, baseball bats, alcoholic drink, with the intention of hurting people. Moreover none of the above are manufactured for that aim*

Your post is at best disingenuous and at worst dishonest.

*The opinion of one poster on here who thinks cars are designed to kill, excepted.
Click to expand...

You wrote:
Rich2018 said:
The opinion of one poster on here who thinks cars are designed to kill, excepted.
Click to expand...

Guns and cars are both in the category: Things That Can Be Used To Kill.

Start there and see if you can figure it out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top Bottom