It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Judge rules Newtown families' lawsuit against gun maker can go forward

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 11:22 AM

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: mobiusmale

How many of our military personnel are issued semi-automatic AR-15s? Is there even 1? Can you imagine the look on that soldiers face when they hand him a semi-auto?

Ummm...MOST military personnel, when issued an M-16 or an M-4 rifle, are issued semi-automatic versions. Yes, they have a 3-round burst option, but if you're implying that all M-16s and M-4 rifles in the military are fully-automatic weapons, you're grossly mistaken.

Army Times

The Army-wide modification of about 483,000 M4 rifles into M4A1 started in 2014, an upgrade now about 11 percent complete according to Picatinny Arsenal spokesman Pete Rowland. The Army's targeted finish line: the end of September 2020.
The re-vamp of the M4 includes a heavier barrel, ambidextrous safety controls and conversion from three-round burst to fully automatic.
The Army is also replacing M16s with M4A1s, though so far only 1 percent of that initiative is complete. The official M16 replacement program will start in earnest this January [2016]. The Army has a roughly even split of M4 and M16 rifles.

So, yes, the vast majority of people in the military--or at least the Army--have regular ol' semi-automatic rifles that include a 3-round burst option, which is really just semi-auto on rifle growth hormones.

No, semi auto means one and only one bullet per trigger pull.

Any number of rounds beyond 1 per pull equals automatic fire.

If you have a 3 round burst and get caught without the proper permits.... The judge will explain how there is a giant difference, as he is sentencing you to prison time.

So no, 3 round burst is not semi auto on steroids, it is the little brother of full auto fire!

posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 11:59 AM

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: Nexttimemaybe

I can only speculate, but i wonder if the far left sent their lawyers into newtown to stir this pot? Surely this has been a long and expensive campaign to get even this far after this much time. I wonder who is footing the bill? The families? Or special interest groups? How many politicians will back this with their support?

I certainly would be interesting to know who their lawyers are, and who is footing the legal costs...or if it is being done pro bono, what politicians they are in bed with.

Clinton has been quite vocal during this Primary season about the fact that she thinks gun manufacturers should not be protected from law suits like this - and in fact has taken Bernie Sanders to task, for voting for the Bill that made this kind of lawsuit (for the most part) something that can not be filed.

posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 12:44 PM
a reply to: AVtech34

Correct! I recall seeing news coverage of police officers finding and clearing the "bushmaster" that was in the trunk of the suspects car!! I'm calling Bushmaster to give them a heads up. Bad thing is, since the investigation apparently says it was the rifle, and the coroner lied his a** off about the ballistics, the only way Bushmaster can win, if this goes anywhere, is to dispute it's usage in the event. If that happens, you might as well
throw the original investigation out the window. If I was Bushmaster, I would say bring it on. Let's reopen this fraud/hoax investigation and get to the truth. I guarantee if this does move forward, the case will be sealed to the public.

posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 02:00 PM
a reply to: Sargeras

I think that you're missing what I said:

...but if you're implying that all M-16s and M-4 rifles in the military are fully-automatic weapons, you're grossly mistaken.

My whole argument stems from that claim. I get that, as a civilian, a rifle with 3-round burst is considered an NFA weapon, and therefore you need the lovely permit to purchase/own one, but I was talking about the military and differentiating between full-auto and what the vast majority of Service Members receive.

Sure, maybe we're arguing semantics, and maybe I misinterpreted Woodcarver's comment, but the reality is that, until recently, fully-automatic weapons were not available to your average Service Member. When I hear "automatic," I think "fully-automatic."

We'll just agree to call "3-Round Burst" the teenager of the maturing from semi-auto (child) to fully-auto (adult). Yeah?

posted on Apr, 15 2016 @ 02:23 PM
A bumpfire stock turns a semi auto AR platform into a full automatic. if you can maintain the grip required to make it actuate properly that is.
a reply to: SlapMonkey

posted on Apr, 16 2016 @ 05:13 AM

originally posted by: KawRider9
a reply to: mobiusmale

That Judge needs disbarred ASAP. To say semiautomatic rifles are military weapons and should not be sold to civilians, shows how ignorant and unwilling to be impartial she is.

GTFO with that nonsense!

The judge didn't say that. The families' lawyer said that. The decision was related to a Motion to Dismiss where the standard is that the suit continues if it is not impossible that a jury could find for the plaintiff. And if you would bother to actually read the opinion rather than merely regurgitating NRA talking points, you might understand this. The victims' families didn't win the suit. The judge just ruled that the gun builders didn't win. Yet.

posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 03:45 PM
Not that it surprises anyone with any familiarity with the law, but the judge dismissed the case today, ruling that federal law protects firearms manufacturers in the case of criminal misuse of product. For my part, the only thing wrong with this decision is that it should have come sooner.

edit on 14-10-2016 by vor78 because: (no reason given)

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in