Moderator: Community Team
It was also very, very illegal. That's how these class action lawsuits came to be. The government, acting on behalf of these gun manufacturers took away your right to justice. They took away your right to file class action lawsuits or any lawsuits against them.jakewilliams wrote: I'm not saying this is right, just stating a fact.
I don't know if reasonable expectation is the appropriate level of culpability (at least for a criminal case).MeDeFe wrote:No.thegreekdog wrote:So, just to be clear juan, if I purchase a weapon and shoot someone with it, it's the gun company's fault?
But if the gun manufacturers flood the market with their goods in places with little to no regulation, and can even reasonably be expected to realize that the weapons are going to end up in the hands of felons, then they are effectively aiding and abetting crime.
Why should gun corporations be held responsible for sales made in the black market, which is beyond their control, and more so in the realm of the FBI, local police, DEA, etc?Juan_Bottom wrote:It was also very, very illegal. That's how these class action lawsuits came to be. The government, acting on behalf of these gun manufacturers took away your right to justice. They took away your right to file class action lawsuits or any lawsuits against them.jakewilliams wrote: I'm not saying this is right, just stating a fact.
In this country Corporations are given many of the same powers and privileges that individual people have. Which is why knowingly putting guns in the hands of criminals used to be illegal for them. In this case, they were compelled by law to act morally. So they changed application of the law.
I'm sorry but I'm not comfortable with the idea of a jailed rapist getting a job and earning money, or getting an education for free when I have to pay for own education out of pocket. But yes, I can see the need for some sort of incentive for released felons so they don't go back to crime.Juan_Bottom wrote:What you guys want, is to punish PUNISH PUNISH! You're not thinking about tomorrow. If you don't give prisoners an outlet, and HOPE that they can get out with good behavior, and make a fresh start for themselves with money they saved while in prison, and the education they got, THEY WHY wouldn't they end up back on the streets? Why wouldn't they kill a lying guard? Why not start riots? You already took their future away.
I am not familiar with the prison system, but I always hear or read about the rampant violence and gang activity in our prisons. I don't know if this is a trumped-up Hollywood-esque mythos of our culture, but if it's true, I think this could solve a lot of the problems. If the prisoners are limited to their cells all day, and aren't allowed to associate with others, where would the violence come from? IMO it might cut down crime rates as well. Who would want to sit in a jail cell for 5 years doing nothing? IDK admittedly I don't know much about the prison system.thegreekdog wrote:I think the state should just let them sit in their cells and not work. I think that's the appropriate solution (and one that would be acceptable to the prisoners).
I agree with you whole-heartedly there, Juan. I am in favor of decriminalization of all drugs, whereupon the only illegal activities would be driving under the influence or selling to minors, etc. etc., anything that would subject others to harm. If someone wants to fry their brains and f*ck up their teeth on meth, that's fine, just do so in their home or whatever.Juan_Bottom wrote:The vast majority of these are drug charges. Some dude gets busted with weed 3 times and you want him to stay in a cold dungeon getting raped twice a day, while paying Johnny Taxpayer for it. I'd also like to add that these charges fall heaviest on the Black American minority, due to some kind of ingrained racism. SUFFER YOU NON-WHITES! SUFFER IN DUNGEON HELL!
MeDeFe wrote:This makes sense, if they're made to work they should be compensated fairly for it, no?* · A LIVING WAGE FOR WORK
JESUS SAVES!!!PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
The difference is that violent criminals are the target consumer group for the gun manufacturers. They purposely flood the legal market in an attempt to feed those guns into the black market. The judges can't predict the future, their job is to use their best judgment. But the gun companies have a way of doing things that enables them to predict who will buy their weapons.thegreekdog wrote: I don't know if reasonable expectation is the appropriate level of culpability (at least for a criminal case).
Let me twist this around for a second: If a judge imposes a prison sentence of 5 years (instead of, say, 20) on a violent criminal and the violent criminal serves 2 years, gets out of jail, and kills a police officer, can the judge be reasonably expected to realize that the violent criminal is going to end up killing a police officer? This based on a real life scenario in Philadelphia (and from what I understand, this sort of thing happens often in Philadelphia).
You missed my point somewhere.BigBallinStalin wrote: Why should gun corporations be held responsible for sales made in the black market, which is beyond their control, and more so in the realm of the FBI, local police, DEA, etc?
GED programs are often offered for free in liberal states, and although the taxpayer flips the bill, think of how much they save when a criminal sets his life on the right track. To keep someone in prison: $70,000 a year average. To lock up someone without hope costs much more.TA1LGUNN3R wrote:I'm sorry but I'm not comfortable with the idea of a jailed rapist getting a job and earning money, or getting an education for free when I have to pay for own education out of pocket. But yes, I can see the need for some sort of incentive for released felons so they don't go back to crime.
Wouldn't work. Firstly, the human rights groups would be all over it. We've actually tried this in the past, and it's where "segregation" punishment came from. We had a whole prison where people were confined to their cells, and prisoners went mad.TA1LGUNN3R wrote: I am not familiar with the prison system, but I always hear or read about the rampant violence and gang activity in our prisons. I don't know if this is a trumped-up Hollywood-esque mythos of our culture, but if it's true, I think this could solve a lot of the problems. If the prisoners are limited to their cells all day, and aren't allowed to associate with others, where would the violence come from? IMO it might cut down crime rates as well. Who would want to sit in a jail cell for 5 years doing nothing? IDK admittedly I don't know much about the prison system.
Exactly. The entire program is designed to keep the public afraid, and to keep the tax dollars flowing. Non-Violent drug offenders don't belong confined to their cells, or deprived of exercise, healthy food, ect. That's at least 20% of prison populations.TA1LGUNN3R wrote: I think that the gov't imprisons drug-offenders just for self-aggrandizement, a way to convince the white bread Americans that the gov't has their back against those damned druggies who might corrupt everyone else. Plus it lines the pockets of the federal agencies involved in drug-related crimes.
FAIL.Borderdawg wrote:
The taxpayer's wrote the laws...jay_a2j wrote:All their NEEDS are provided for by the taxpayers.
I'm all for fair treatment of inmates. But demanding a "living wadge" is absurd. If you'd rather make more money than the .20 per hour the state gives you while you work at a prison, don't go to prison.Juan_Bottom wrote: The taxpayer's wrote the laws...
What about all the money that an offender may have already paid in taxes?
JESUS SAVES!!!PLAYER57832 wrote:Too many of those who claim they don't believe global warming are really "end-timer" Christians.
So do you think that even if, ideally, the drug crime offenders were released, that it would still be overcrowded? I'm still not sure that isolation wouldn't work (at least from other prisoners). How would you propose that the violence and gang activity be stifled?Juan_Bottom wrote:Wouldn't work. Firstly, the human rights groups would be all over it. We've actually tried this in the past, and it's where "segregation" punishment came from. We had a whole prison where people were confined to their cells, and prisoners went mad.
Rampant gang activity in prisons is cultured by the people who operate prisons. The main problem is overcrowding... Which no one wnats to address... except for early parole programs for dangerous offenders that no one expects the public to notice. But all of the stories are sold to the public, and the public then wants stiffer punishments. $$$
Borderdawg wrote: Juan, usually I can see your point, even if I might disagree, but this is the most irrational thing I believe I have ever read!
Borderdawg wrote: Wow!! You've just achieved Player status for illogical and farcical statements!!
Again, WOW!! You really believe that shit???? Ever hear of the NICS?? You obviously have no idea how the firearms industry really works. Although I do find it interesting how a person like you who seems fairly well balanced and reasonably intelligent and educated can have such a serious case of rectal/cranial inversion on this subject! And, we have gotten way off topic, so we need to drop this now. If you would care to continue the discussion, we can start another thread?Juan_Bottom wrote:Borderdawg wrote: Juan, usually I can see your point, even if I might disagree, but this is the most irrational thing I believe I have ever read!Borderdawg wrote: Wow!! You've just achieved Player status for illogical and farcical statements!!
Lets say that there are two states right next to each other that Smith and Wesson wants to sell guns in.
In state #1 a buyer has to provide three proofs of I.D., be over the age of 21, wait 30 days, submit to a background check, and attend a gun safety class before they can buy a firearm.
In state #2 a buyer needs to provide a photo I.D.
What Smith & Wesson does is send 100 guns per dealer to state #1, which is the state with tuff laws. Then they send 900 guns per dealer to state #2, the state with lax laws. This floods the market in the easy state with so many firearms that dealers struggle to get rid of them all. So, they sell to criminals without realizing it. But the gun companies make so much more money that they really don't care who buys the guns. With 800,000 trace requests yearly from the ATF alone, how is it that the gun companies haven't realized that criminals have found a way to get ahold of their product? The answer is that the black market is the most profitable place that they sell to. I've listed all the names that you need to look this up for yourself if you don't follow/believe me.
I have simplified beyond stupidity what happens, but this is what the gun manufacturer's actually do.
This is OT, we can talk here. You can refute my points, and the class action lawsuit that already won in court (this isn't my pet idea, it's a fact that was proven in court), and was struck down only when Congress passed a law granting immunity to the firearms industry. I showed all my work.Borderdawg wrote: Again, WOW!! You really believe that shit???? Ever hear of the NICS?? You obviously have no idea how the firearms industry really works. Although I do find it interesting how a person like you who seems fairly well balanced and reasonably intelligent and educated can have such a serious case of rectal/cranial inversion on this subject! And, we have gotten way off topic, so we need to drop this now. If you would care to continue the discussion, we can start another thread?
I think that lady doesn't have a case. It's mostly speculation.Juan_Bottom wrote:Borderdawg wrote: Juan, usually I can see your point, even if I might disagree, but this is the most irrational thing I believe I have ever read!Borderdawg wrote: Wow!! You've just achieved Player status for illogical and farcical statements!!
Lets say that there are two states right next to each other that Smith and Wesson wants to sell guns in.
In state #1 a buyer has to provide three proofs of I.D., be over the age of 21, wait 30 days, submit to a background check, and attend a gun safety class before they can buy a firearm.
In state #2 a buyer needs to provide a photo I.D.
What Smith & Wesson does is send 100 guns per dealer to state #1, which is the state with tuff laws. Then they send 900 guns per dealer to state #2, the state with lax laws. This floods the market in the easy state with so many firearms that dealers struggle to get rid of them all. So, they sell to criminals without realizing it. But the gun companies make so much more money that they really don't care who buys the guns. With 800,000 trace requests yearly from the ATF alone, how is it that the gun companies haven't realized that criminals have found a way to get ahold of their product? The answer is that the black market is the most profitable place that they sell to. I've listed all the names that you need to look this up for yourself if you don't follow/believe me.
I have simplified beyond stupidity what happens, but this is what the gun manufacturer's actually do.
That isn't true if you take Juan at his word:BigBallinStalin wrote: Besides, she hasn't explained how overflooding a market is profitable, and I don't see how a company can profit from the black market indirectly. (either they sell to corrupt distributors or not). If they do, they'll be punished severely (at least they should be).
Juan Bottom wrote:the class action lawsuit that already won in court (this isn't my pet idea, it's a fact that was proven in court)
I too would like to read this case. Do you have a name of one of the parties? If so, I can probably pull the case and its history.BigBallinStalin wrote:Lemme go reread that...
=P
EDIT: It just says that the case was thrown out. Now, I know how Juan worded why, but JUan_BOTTOM, where's the case/history on this?
This is interesting stuff!
The names that you are looking for are Steven Fox, and Eliza Barnes. The NAACP had similar lawsuits brewing as did the City of New Orleans. I believe that both of these two other groups were bringing on Class Action Lawsuits on behalf of poor African-American communities.Juan_Bottom wrote:I think that it's by design, the Military-Industrial complex has many faces. I'll give my favorite example, the gun trade. Statistically, when it comes to gunshots wounds, America is more dangerous than Iraq for Americans. ATF sends out about 800,000 requests for traces every year. That's just the ATF. 800,000 requests and yet no one at Smith & Wessen and Co. have realized that a large portion of their clientele are criminals. Or have they?
Steven Fox, a hero to all Americans, was shot in the head by a mugger - permanently paralyzing him. He can remember feeling portions of his brain shooting out of his skull, and how it felt. Mr. Fox hooked up with Eliza Barnes, a do-gooder who had a bone to pick with the Big Firearms dealers. For years she toiled away compiling statistic and figures, in an effort to bring them all down. She worked out that each of the big companies works to saturate the market with faaaar too many guns than could ever be sold through legal markets. And they do this saturation, only in states that have few rules on purchases. They dumped millions, MILLIONS of weapons into these states knowing that they would end up being sold to criminals. The saturation of weapons ensured it, yet it also increases their profits dramatically. Eventually, they all flow to black market hot spots like New York and Chicago.
So Steven Fox and Eliza Barnes sued the gun manufactures in a large suit. These two Dudley do rights and their tort reform went after everyone. And how did the gun manufacturers respond??? Disinformation, buyouts, and something that would make Roosevelt (both of them) roll over in their graves.Wild Bill Frist (R) and Harry Reid (D) worked together to pass a law on July 29, 2005 giving immunity to gun owners. Despite having won several battles earlier in court, the law suit was effectively thrown out. So were similar suits brought by the NAACP and the City of New Orleans. The reason we have sooo many people in the system is because there is sooo much money in it. Bob Barker & Uncle Sam aren't the only one's cleaning up.
Borderdawg wrote: Just curious, Juan, why do you keep naming S&W? My favorite daily carry guns are both S&W's!
I use them because my favorite guns are all S&W guns. I believe that hypothetically speaking, if these non-violent drug offenders were released our government would try to fill in the gap that those offenders would leave. We have the world's biggest prison population yet we are not the world's safest nation. It's a business.TA1LGUNN3R wrote: So do you think that even if, ideally, the drug crime offenders were released, that it would still be overcrowded? I'm still not sure that isolation wouldn't work (at least from other prisoners). How would you propose that the violence and gang activity be stifled?
Considered to be one of the most haunted locations in the world, Eastern State Penitentiary first opened its doors in 1829. The prison was designed to hold 253 prisoners, each occupying a solitary confinement cell for their entire sentence. The harshest punishment, solitary confinement was meant to help criminals find penance, remorse and salvation. In reality, it drove many prisoners insane.
Before the opening of Eastern State, prisons were nothing more than holding pens for the unwanted and corrupt; men, women and children were housed alongside petty criminals and violent killers. In the late 18th century, The Philadelphia Society for Alleviating the Miseries of Public Prisons, led by founding father Benjamin Franklin, worked to transform these wasted prisons into facilities that fostered reform.
Their ideas became tangible in 1822 when construction began on Eastern State. It was an expensive undertaking to bring the groundbreaking design to fruition. It featured vaulted ceilings and skylights to let in "God's light" and each cell was equipped with a toilet, running water, heat and a Bible. After its completion, more than 300 prisons all over the world copied its designs, systems and practices.
Isolation was impressed upon prisoners even when they left their cells for work detail. Each inmate wore heavy masks that prohibited communication with one another. The loneliness and isolation was oppressing; too much for some prisoners to bear, many took their own lives at Eastern State Penitentiary.
I'm wary about the NAACP and its intentions for "promoting liberty," because they'll try just about any case to get headlines.Juan_Bottom wrote:The names that you are looking for are Steven Fox, and Eliza Barnes. The NAACP had similar lawsuits brewing as did the City of New Orleans. I believe that both of these two other groups were bringing on Class Action Lawsuits on behalf of poor African-American communities.Juan_Bottom wrote:I think that it's by design, the Military-Industrial complex has many faces. I'll give my favorite example, the gun trade. Statistically, when it comes to gunshots wounds, America is more dangerous than Iraq for Americans. ATF sends out about 800,000 requests for traces every year. That's just the ATF. 800,000 requests and yet no one at Smith & Wessen and Co. have realized that a large portion of their clientele are criminals. Or have they?
Steven Fox, a hero to all Americans, was shot in the head by a mugger - permanently paralyzing him. He can remember feeling portions of his brain shooting out of his skull, and how it felt. Mr. Fox hooked up with Eliza Barnes, a do-gooder who had a bone to pick with the Big Firearms dealers. For years she toiled away compiling statistic and figures, in an effort to bring them all down. She worked out that each of the big companies works to saturate the market with faaaar too many guns than could ever be sold through legal markets. And they do this saturation, only in states that have few rules on purchases. They dumped millions, MILLIONS of weapons into these states knowing that they would end up being sold to criminals. The saturation of weapons ensured it, yet it also increases their profits dramatically. Eventually, they all flow to black market hot spots like New York and Chicago.
So Steven Fox and Eliza Barnes sued the gun manufactures in a large suit. These two Dudley do rights and their tort reform went after everyone. And how did the gun manufacturers respond??? Disinformation, buyouts, and something that would make Roosevelt (both of them) roll over in their graves.Wild Bill Frist (R) and Harry Reid (D) worked together to pass a law on July 29, 2005 giving immunity to gun owners. Despite having won several battles earlier in court, the law suit was effectively thrown out. So were similar suits brought by the NAACP and the City of New Orleans. The reason we have sooo many people in the system is because there is sooo much money in it. Bob Barker & Uncle Sam aren't the only one's cleaning up.
Borderdawg wrote: Just curious, Juan, why do you keep naming S&W? My favorite daily carry guns are both S&W's!
