Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Herschel Sends - Nothing Good Will Come From This

Discovery In The Sandy Hook Families Versus Remington Case

BLUF: For the most regulated industry in America, a Connecticut Judge rules for "Social Justice" not Rule of Law.  A symbolic case against Bushmaster for the companies perceived complicity in the Sandy Hook Massacre is starting to gain traction with the help of Connecticut’s Superior Court Barbara Bellis. 

Even though the Bushmaster rifle used in the shooting was stolen, the prosecution seeks to prove that the rifle's intent is for killing.  Let that roll around in your mind for a second.


Chiu ChunLing said...

Okay, let's get one thing out of the way.

Firearms are designed for killing. Yes, you can do target shooting with firearms, but the target shooting is practice for one day pointing a weapon at a living body and making it dead. You may never have to do that, you may honestly hope you never have to do that. But if it were about pointing a tool at something and making it wet, or differently colored, or illuminated, or something other than dead, we wouldn't be using a firearm and we'd practice with something more like the tool that does those other things.

This is also why we have military servicemen, and police...a fact that apparently some people can't confront without being just as insane about it.

Consider that the woman ranting about the evils of tactical PMDAS was relatively sane compared to the typical 'gun-control' advocate. She actually took the next logically required inference of "killing is always evil and wrong, and thus all tools made for it are likewise evil and wrong." Most 'gun-control' advocates have to support the idea of the government having armed men to enforce their edicts, because they realize that, without armed enforcement, there can be no enforcement. Especially of disarmament, because people who have lethal weapons generally can't be defeated by people who don't have them.

The point is that we can't give credence to the idea that there is anything wrong with marketing or depicting firearms as weapons that are purpose designed for killing. We need to fully and completely internalize that, or any argument we attempt to make will collapse at the first serious challenge to the easily falsified premise that firearms aren't specifically judged in terms of how good they are at allowing us to kill more efficiently and effectively.

We also need to confront this fact about government. The fundamental point of government, the essential question behind all politics and legislation and jurisprudence, is deciding who we need to kill to protect what we value. It is the essential mechanism without which you don't have a government at all, just unenforced exhortations. There's nothing wrong with that in principle, I like having religion and schools and such where you get to decide for yourself whether you even attend, let alone do as instructed. But those things are not government.

And if we recognized that, government could be a lot smaller. If, instead of saying of every idea that tickles someone's fancy, "this ought to be enforced by the government", we first asked "are we willing to kill people over this?" and "do we need to kill people over this?", our laws could be focused on things that we're actually willing to see cops (or, my preference, deputized local militia) gun down people in the streets (or their homes, hideouts, etc.) over.

And then disarmament advocates could face the reality of what happens when you make laws that are going to provoke armed dispute.

Anonymous said...

This is the liberal goal. To demonize ALL firearms, thus making it easier to push for universal confiscation...which will only bring on the apparently much needed purge of socialism, and socialists, in this country. I think it's what your father had in mind when he said, in comment on the "100 heads" idea, (and I paraphrase),that "the right 100 heads could end this conflict".

Anonymous said...

What these inJustices in Black Robes don't seem to remember, is that the RoL (Rule of Law) protects THEM from US, as much as it protects US from THEM.
Once that breaks down, and we, as a society, become a world WRoL (Without etc), all bets are off.


Anonymous said...

Let's insert the corrupt court system who fails to rule on the Constitution for Bushmaster - resulting in the DEATH of the nation as it was created. Using this courts thought process it would then seem that we should get "Social Justice" in the same manner as this court is using against Remington.
And, since this court lives in a house we should confiscate that house to pay the VICTIMS of the courts actions.
Makes just as much *sense* as this "social justice" ruling. Insanity rules in America now days. Common sense left a long time ago.
I am trying to remember the last time a 'court ruling' was the result of ruling based on the Constitution and not on the liberal thoughts process which has replaced the Rule of Law.

Jackie Juntti

Longbow said...

Hunting and target shooting are forms of entertainment.

Isn't that nice?

Anonymous said...

Any possible object could be used to kill someone. Have you seen what a sledge hammer does to brick and how easy it is for someone weak to knock out brick with one? Imagine what that would do to someones bones. Why aren't these same libtards also calling for a ban on all knives, all tools, all cars (cars kill way more than firearms in America every year) etc.?

Anonymous said...

I was in a school on a new piece of gear our company was installing. The crusty old Texican who was attempting to teach the class had heard one too many questions along the lines of "Why can't...." or "Why didn't...." having explained more than once that he had no idea why the engineers couldn't or didn't. At which point he turned to face the class and exclaimed "Well, what I want to know is why cain't a pig whistle?"

There's an old joke about teaching a pig to whistle. Supposedly you won't like the results and are likely to really annoy the pig.

And on that vein, let's not spend any more time asking why "libtards" don't behave in a rational manner. If they were capable of rational thought, they wouldn't be "libtards". You may as well try teaching a pig.....

Oh nevermind!

Anonymous said...

Ruger makes a couple of rifles (Mini-14 and Mini-30) that have wood stocks and are "pretty" but they fire the same ammo as the M-16/AR-15 & the AK-47 which are EVIL killing machines because they have hand grips or they are BLACK RIFLES. The ignorant masses even think that having a "Bayonet Lug" on the barrel makes it more dangerous. It is all in the hands of a moron or some nit-wit that turns it into something bad. They can say all they want but I am keeping mine. Just my 2 cents worth.

skybill said...

Hi Sgt. Matt,
Perhaps if the one that ding bat stole from his mother that he used in the "Proported" killings was a "PINK" rifle like the one Anne Barnhard has!!! As the late Frank Gallop would say in his throaty baritone voice would say, "R-E-A-L-L-Y-!!!!"
Could you imagine a "PINK" Rifle being found at the site??
The M-S-M would never have said a word!!!!!!
The operant word here is "B-L-A-C-K-!!!!" It has to be "B-L-A-C-K" to be "E-V-I-L-!!!" so if he stole Anne's Rifle and committed those killings.....Geeze Louise!!
What a "Chinese Cluster Coitus!!" (As Mike would probably say)
just my .25centsworth!!
Got Gunz.....OUTLAW!!!!!!,
PS I like the Photo of Anne Barnhard holding a "AR" in her arms with a "Catholic Rosary" wrapped around her hand...with the caption..."Jihad goes both ways!!"

Anonymous said...

The rifle is a tool, nothing more.

Anonymous said...

We should not fear this lawsuit. We should be daring them to go forward - corrupt judge included! Indeed, we should be daring the judiciary to support thus corrupt judge and her pathetic legislating from the bench attempts.

Go for it. Go ahead black robed ones...go ahead and outright criminalize production of a machine that is essential to exercising a fundamental right. Next up then? Well, PRINTERS and printing presses of course!

The Second Amendment is no different than the First Amendment (so has SCOTUS already admitted outright).

Progressive liberal democrats have harmed this nation by using taxation to harm manufacturer Turing - and they are graduating to using the criminal code like they use the tax code. THEY THINK that they are immune to the evil they think they control...that they will be last to be eaten. As usual they are wrong.

Recently, SCOTUS members had to choose between legitimacy of the court and gun control (stun guns). It chose not gun control. Any chicanery in Connecticut will be disregarded the same way and for the same reason.

Anonymous said...

How can an inanimate object have intent?

- Old Greybeard

Steady Steve said...

It's for killing liberal scum like "Judge" Bellis. Just keep pushing, fools.

Anonymous said...

May the farce be with you. Sandy Hoax was/is a massive psyop. The narrative must continue.........

Keep prepping people. This country is in deep doo.

zsu2357 said...

Sandy Hoax was/is a massive psyop. GOT THAT RIGHT!
How can an inanimate object have intent? I guess the same way it can be violent?
Who the hell knows why they (anti gunners)dream up the crap they do.Well we know why I guess,but it is so plain stupid and they just keep spewing it.

Anonymous said...

I guess that a SPOON is responsible for Hilliary having a BIG BUTT, not her mouth but that EVIL SPOON.