Skip to content
The Browns Board
Theme
  • System
  • Light
  • Dark
  • Login
  • Register
  • Forums
  • Recent
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Donate
  1. Home
  2. Political Discussion
  3. Newtown families allowed to sue Remington

Newtown families allowed to sue Remington

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Political Discussion
34 Posts 11 Posters 939 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • Gorka GorkaG Dedicated Conversation Starter Reacting Well Posting Machine Collaborator First Post One Year In Week One Done One Month Later Very Popular
    • 4k Posts
    • 2k Reputation
    GorkaG Gorka wrote on last edited by
    #7

    This makes two outlandish stories in 2 days that turned out to be bogus...the other being about cops being required to call in before using their firearms.

    This one IS bogus right?

    RIGHT??

    C 1 Reply Last reply
    Quote Reply
    • calfoxwc C Dedicated Very Popular Conversation Starter Collaborator First Post Posting Machine Reacting Well Week One Done One Year In One Month Later
      • 64k Posts
      • 8k Reputation
      C calfoxwc wrote on last edited by calfoxwc
      #8

      you know democrat judges and their rulings are based on whatever their fellow activist hater dems want.

      they almost owned the U.S. Supreme Court, except we elected PRes Trump and saved America.

      1 Reply Last reply
      👍
      Quote Reply
      • GorkaG Gorka

        This makes two outlandish stories in 2 days that turned out to be bogus...the other being about cops being required to call in before using their firearms.

        This one IS bogus right?

        RIGHT??

        Clevfan4life C Banned Very Popular
        • 24k Posts
        • 1k Reputation
        C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by
        #9

        @gorka said:

        This makes two outlandish stories in 2 days that turned out to be bogus...the other being about cops being required to call in before using their firearms.

        This one IS bogus right?

        RIGHT??

        This one comes from the Washington post. Uc that right?

        VamboV 1 Reply Last reply
        Quote Reply
        • C Clevfan4life

          @gorka said:

          This makes two outlandish stories in 2 days that turned out to be bogus...the other being about cops being required to call in before using their firearms.

          This one IS bogus right?

          RIGHT??

          This one comes from the Washington post. Uc that right?

          Vambo VamboV Dedicated Reacting Well Conversation Starter First Post Posting Machine Collaborator Week One Done One Year In One Month Later Very Popular
          • 18k Posts
          • 6k Reputation
          VamboV Vambo wrote on last edited by
          #10

          @clevfan4life said:

          This one comes from the Washington post. Uc that right?

          This is basically what AOC said of Wells Fargo...

           "If there was a leak from the Dakota Access Pipeline," Ocasio-Cortez asked rhetorically, "why shouldn’t Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it, since it paid for the construction of the pipeline itself?”

          "Because we don't operate the project," Sloan responded. "We provide financing to the company that’s operating the pipeline.”

          This is getting embarrassing.

          C 1 Reply Last reply
          Quote Reply
          • VamboV Vambo

            @clevfan4life said:

            This one comes from the Washington post. Uc that right?

            This is basically what AOC said of Wells Fargo...

             "If there was a leak from the Dakota Access Pipeline," Ocasio-Cortez asked rhetorically, "why shouldn’t Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it, since it paid for the construction of the pipeline itself?”

            "Because we don't operate the project," Sloan responded. "We provide financing to the company that’s operating the pipeline.”

            This is getting embarrassing.

            Clevfan4life C Banned Very Popular
            • 24k Posts
            • 1k Reputation
            C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by
            #11

            @vambo said:

            This is basically what AOC said of Wells Fargo...

             "If there was a leak from the Dakota Access Pipeline," Ocasio-Cortez asked rhetorically, "why shouldn’t Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it, since it paid for the construction of the pipeline itself?”

            "Because we don't operate the project," Sloan responded. "We provide financing to the company that’s operating the pipeline.”

            This is getting embarrassing.

            Yeah and? I wrote about it a few days ago and whst bullshit it was.

            VamboV 1 Reply Last reply
            Quote Reply
            • C Clevfan4life

              @vambo said:

              This is basically what AOC said of Wells Fargo...

               "If there was a leak from the Dakota Access Pipeline," Ocasio-Cortez asked rhetorically, "why shouldn’t Wells Fargo pay for the cleanup of it, since it paid for the construction of the pipeline itself?”

              "Because we don't operate the project," Sloan responded. "We provide financing to the company that’s operating the pipeline.”

              This is getting embarrassing.

              Yeah and? I wrote about it a few days ago and whst bullshit it was.

              Vambo VamboV Dedicated Reacting Well Conversation Starter First Post Posting Machine Collaborator Week One Done One Year In One Month Later Very Popular
              • 18k Posts
              • 6k Reputation
              VamboV Vambo wrote on last edited by
              #12

              @clevfan4life said:

              Yeah and? I wrote about it a few days ago and whst bullshit it was.

              I'm happy for you!😁

              C 1 Reply Last reply
              Quote Reply
              • VamboV Vambo

                @clevfan4life said:

                Yeah and? I wrote about it a few days ago and whst bullshit it was.

                I'm happy for you!😁

                Clevfan4life C Banned Very Popular
                • 24k Posts
                • 1k Reputation
                C Clevfan4life wrote on last edited by
                #13

                @vambo said:

                I'm happy for you!😁

                U have noticed I don't care for her one bit right? Honestly not a single left leaning person here really does. That's the difference between the two sides here. One side still has some of its rationing and reasoning faculties intact. So someone like aoc doesnt get apologized for unlike.....

                VamboV 1 Reply Last reply
                Quote Reply
                • C Clevfan4life

                  @vambo said:

                  I'm happy for you!😁

                  U have noticed I don't care for her one bit right? Honestly not a single left leaning person here really does. That's the difference between the two sides here. One side still has some of its rationing and reasoning faculties intact. So someone like aoc doesnt get apologized for unlike.....

                  Vambo VamboV Dedicated Reacting Well Conversation Starter First Post Posting Machine Collaborator Week One Done One Year In One Month Later Very Popular
                  • 18k Posts
                  • 6k Reputation
                  VamboV Vambo wrote on last edited by
                  #14

                  @clevfan4life said:

                  U have noticed I don't care for her one bit right? Honestly not a single left leaning person here really does. That's the difference between the two sides here. One side still has some of its rationing and reasoning faculties intact. So someone like aoc doesnt get apologized for unlike.....

                  I'm happy for you!😁

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  Quote Reply
                  • Vambo VamboV Dedicated Reacting Well Conversation Starter First Post Posting Machine Collaborator Week One Done One Year In One Month Later Very Popular
                    • 18k Posts
                    • 6k Reputation
                    VamboV Vambo wrote on last edited by
                    #15

                    53801499_393449921212800_3466099682306949120_n.jpg

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    😂
                    Quote Reply
                    • TexasAg1969 T Conversation Starter Dedicated Reacting Well Very Popular Posting Machine Collaborator First Post One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
                      • 23k Posts
                      • 6k Reputation
                      T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by TexasAg1969
                      #16

                      I've said for some time that military level weapons like the Bushmaster should not be in he hands of civilians any more than anti-tank weapons, grenades, Claymore mines, etc. If you have seen any of the advertisement Remington uses to peddle these things, then as a parent of one of the defenseless elementary school children in the shootings, you'd likely file suit on them too if you were being honest. The 2nd amendment was written even before repeating rifles, let alone this level of military weapon. They have no place other than the military and the "well organized militia" that is called The National Guard.

                      GorkaG OldBrownsFanO VamboV 3 Replies Last reply
                      Quote Reply
                      • T TexasAg1969

                        I've said for some time that military level weapons like the Bushmaster should not be in he hands of civilians any more than anti-tank weapons, grenades, Claymore mines, etc. If you have seen any of the advertisement Remington uses to peddle these things, then as a parent of one of the defenseless elementary school children in the shootings, you'd likely file suit on them too if you were being honest. The 2nd amendment was written even before repeating rifles, let alone this level of military weapon. They have no place other than the military and the "well organized militia" that is called The National Guard.

                        Gorka GorkaG Dedicated Conversation Starter Reacting Well Posting Machine Collaborator First Post One Year In Week One Done One Month Later Very Popular
                        • 4k Posts
                        • 2k Reputation
                        GorkaG Gorka wrote on last edited by
                        #17

                        @texasag1969 said:

                         They have no place other than the military and the "well organized regulated militia" that is called The National Guard.

                        No.

                        A militia is generally an army or some other fighting organization of non-professional soldiers, citizens of a nation, or subjects of a state, who can be called upon for military service during a time.

                         Bear in mind that when the 2nd Amendment was written, there *was* no National Guard. The militia was ‘every man willing and able to show up with a musket, powder and bullets.’ The term ‘Well-regulated’ is another point of contention and confusion; a ‘well-regulated militia’ is not one subject to reams of rules and paperwork, but rather one that is skilled and capable of carrying out its duties. It wasn’t enough to be a bunch of guys with muskets; they actually had to be able to fight as a small unit. In order for that to happen, they had to have their own firearms to practice with on their own time.

                        Even today, with all the various Federal regular and reserve forces and the National Guard units, there is still a legal body deemed “the unorganized militia” which is basically every male citizen 17–45 who doesn’t wear a military or first-responder uniform.

                        Another source:

                        http://constitutionalmilitia.org/well-regulated-militia/

                        1 Reply Last reply
                        Quote Reply
                        • TexasAg1969 T Conversation Starter Dedicated Reacting Well Very Popular Posting Machine Collaborator First Post One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
                          • 23k Posts
                          • 6k Reputation
                          T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by
                          #18

                          Thanks for the correction. I meant to say well regulated, which the National Guard is. Guys with military level weapons unaffiliated/untrained together are not.

                          W 1 Reply Last reply
                          Quote Reply
                          • T TexasAg1969

                            Thanks for the correction. I meant to say well regulated, which the National Guard is. Guys with military level weapons unaffiliated/untrained together are not.

                            Westside Steve W Dedicated Reacting Well Posting Machine Collaborator First Post Conversation Starter Week One Done One Year In One Month Later Very Popular
                            • 39k Posts
                            • 9k Reputation
                            W Westside Steve wrote on last edited by
                            #19

                            @texasag1969 said:

                            Thanks for the correction. I meant to say well regulated, which the National Guard is. Guys with military level weapons unaffiliated/untrained together are not.

                            Of course nowhere in the amendment is the National Guard or any of that specified. There's absolutely no reason that die hard couldn't put together a couple dozen men and consider them well regulated.

                            WSS

                            www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons
                            T DieHardBrownsFanD 2 Replies Last reply
                            Quote Reply
                            • calfoxwc C Dedicated Very Popular Conversation Starter Collaborator First Post Posting Machine Reacting Well Week One Done One Year In One Month Later
                              • 64k Posts
                              • 8k Reputation
                              C calfoxwc wrote on last edited by calfoxwc
                              #20

                              same old ignorant talking point from texsag, same old no surprise.

                              outside of saying all anti-gun people have a profoundly low IQ, it's apparent

                              that it's a deliberate "in your face because you aren't like us" liberal move.

                                 The bushmaster has a mean name that makes liberals wet their pants, I don't care.

                              It comes in semi-auto, lever action and bolt action. It's just like a regular gun. And the pistol grip doesn't fly off the gun and kill people like a pilotless drone.

                              just so willfully ignorant, liberals are.

                              https://www.ammoland.com/2019/03/connecticut-gun-lawsuit-prosecuting-car-makers-crimes-car-thieves/?utm_source=Ammoland+Subscribers&utm_campaign=dccdf9d5a7-RSS_EMAIL_CAMPAIGN&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_6f6fac3eaa-dccdf9d5a7-20770865#axzz5i7oqUTJR

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              Quote Reply
                              • W Westside Steve

                                @texasag1969 said:

                                Thanks for the correction. I meant to say well regulated, which the National Guard is. Guys with military level weapons unaffiliated/untrained together are not.

                                Of course nowhere in the amendment is the National Guard or any of that specified. There's absolutely no reason that die hard couldn't put together a couple dozen men and consider them well regulated.

                                WSS

                                TexasAg1969 T Conversation Starter Dedicated Reacting Well Very Popular Posting Machine Collaborator First Post One Year In One Month Later Week One Done
                                • 23k Posts
                                • 6k Reputation
                                T TexasAg1969 wrote on last edited by
                                #21

                                @westside-steve said:

                                Of course nowhere in the amendment is the National Guard or any of that specified. There's absolutely no reason that die hard couldn't put together a couple dozen men and consider them well regulated.

                                WSS

                                There are a lot of military retirees right here in Sun City near where I live. We could do that too, but you know we would be infiltrated by the FBI/H.S. in a NY minute to make sure we were not some kind of terrorist group.

                                W 1 Reply Last reply
                                Quote Reply
                                • calfoxwc C Dedicated Very Popular Conversation Starter Collaborator First Post Posting Machine Reacting Well Week One Done One Year In One Month Later
                                  • 64k Posts
                                  • 8k Reputation
                                  C calfoxwc wrote on last edited by
                                  #22

                                  especially in the obamao commie years texsag loved so much.....

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  Quote Reply
                                  • T TexasAg1969

                                    @westside-steve said:

                                    Of course nowhere in the amendment is the National Guard or any of that specified. There's absolutely no reason that die hard couldn't put together a couple dozen men and consider them well regulated.

                                    WSS

                                    There are a lot of military retirees right here in Sun City near where I live. We could do that too, but you know we would be infiltrated by the FBI/H.S. in a NY minute to make sure we were not some kind of terrorist group.

                                    Westside Steve W Dedicated Reacting Well Posting Machine Collaborator First Post Conversation Starter Week One Done One Year In One Month Later Very Popular
                                    • 39k Posts
                                    • 9k Reputation
                                    W Westside Steve wrote on last edited by
                                    #23

                                    @texasag1969 said:

                                    There are a lot of military retirees right here in Sun City near where I live. We could do that too, but you know we would be infiltrated by the FBI/H.S. in a NY minute to make sure we were not some kind of terrorist group.

                                    That's true but it also begs the question so what? It doesn't disprove the fact that would probably be a well regulated militia.

                                    WSS

                                    www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons
                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    Quote Reply
                                    • W Westside Steve

                                      @texasag1969 said:

                                      Thanks for the correction. I meant to say well regulated, which the National Guard is. Guys with military level weapons unaffiliated/untrained together are not.

                                      Of course nowhere in the amendment is the National Guard or any of that specified. There's absolutely no reason that die hard couldn't put together a couple dozen men and consider them well regulated.

                                      WSS

                                      DieHardBrownsFan DieHardBrownsFanD Conversation Starter Dedicated Reacting Well Very Popular Collaborator Posting Machine First Post One Month Later Week One Done One Year In
                                      • 28k Posts
                                      • 6k Reputation
                                      DieHardBrownsFanD DieHardBrownsFan wrote on last edited by
                                      #24

                                      @westside-steve said:

                                      Of course nowhere in the amendment is the National Guard or any of that specified. There's absolutely no reason that die hard couldn't put together a couple dozen men and consider them well regulated.

                                      WSS

                                      Funny you should mention it.  Here's my local militia:

                                      Image result for old man militia pics

                                      "You planning on having a long relationship with that glass or are you going to drink it? Drink up, man. Maybe we can get another.” - Janis Joplin, 1970.
                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      Quote Reply
                                      • T TexasAg1969

                                        I've said for some time that military level weapons like the Bushmaster should not be in he hands of civilians any more than anti-tank weapons, grenades, Claymore mines, etc. If you have seen any of the advertisement Remington uses to peddle these things, then as a parent of one of the defenseless elementary school children in the shootings, you'd likely file suit on them too if you were being honest. The 2nd amendment was written even before repeating rifles, let alone this level of military weapon. They have no place other than the military and the "well organized militia" that is called The National Guard.

                                        OldBrownsFan OldBrownsFanO
                                        • 11k Posts
                                        • 3k Reputation
                                        OldBrownsFanO OldBrownsFan wrote on last edited by
                                        #25

                                        @texasag1969 said:

                                        I've said for some time that military level weapons like the Bushmaster should not be in he hands of civilians any more than anti-tank weapons, grenades, Claymore mines, etc. If you have seen any of the advertisement Remington uses to peddle these things, then as a parent of one of the defenseless elementary school children in the shootings, you'd likely file suit on them too if you were being honest. The 2nd amendment was written even before repeating rifles, let alone this level of military weapon. They have no place other than the military and the "well organized militia" that is called The National Guard.

                                        We agreed on bumpstocks being banned. For me it was because I cannot support anything that will take a semi automatic and make it mimic an  automatic. Although I agree with the slippery slope argument by Logic who disagreed with the ban it is a personal thing with me.

                                        I have a huge disagreement with you on this issue. My battle has always been to keep semi automatic weapons legal. This is the real slippery slope when you start banning one type of a semi automatic that really opens that door to eventually banning all semi automatics. The fact of the matter is the so called assault military style rifles are not much different than other semi automatic hunting rifles in design except it is scary looking to some with the military look (which many of the features are cosmetic). It is not a real military automatic rifle. If someone for example is a veteran and likes the style of a military rifle because it is what they are used to and they are law abiding citizens why should that right be taken away? 

                                        GorkaG 1 Reply Last reply
                                        Quote Reply
                                        • Westside Steve W Dedicated Reacting Well Posting Machine Collaborator First Post Conversation Starter Week One Done One Year In One Month Later Very Popular
                                          • 39k Posts
                                          • 9k Reputation
                                          W Westside Steve wrote on last edited by
                                          #26

                                          If we're looking for Deep Pockets how about the architect the drew up the blueprints for the school?

                                          WSS

                                          www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons
                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          Quote Reply

                                          Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

                                          Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

                                          With your input, this post could be even better 💗

                                          Register Login
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          Theme
                                          • System
                                          • Light
                                          • Dark
                                          The Browns Board Terms Privacy

                                          The Browns Board is an independent fan community. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by the Cleveland Browns, Cleveland Cavaliers, Cleveland Guardians, the NFL, NBA, MLB, or any of their affiliates. Team names, logos, and other marks are the property of their respective owners.

                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Forums
                                          • Recent
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Donate