d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Remington Settles
Prev134567Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 92,978
Joined: Dec 31 2007
Gold: 2,299.94
Feb 16 2022 01:33pm
Quote (fender @ Feb 16 2022 02:11pm)
i mean, obviously they don't openly advertise to school shooters directly, lol - so i don't really know what you'd expect there. they do, however, market specifically to the fragile / compensating male crowd by invoking images of masculinity and power. they also do everything in their power to prevent that mentally unstable people could be excluded from obtaining firearms, and that gun violence could be researched sufficiently. you don't strike me as the person who genuinely needs help to put two and two together, and apparently you've already drawn similar conclusions and made according choices for your own store - which i find extremely commendable btw, considering it's a moral choice that hurts your own bottom line.

the main distinction i see is that you're trying to pry apart those groups, while i consider the venn diagram between wannabe badasses, law enforcement cosplayers, and insecure (bullied) kids that would turn into mass shooters largely a circle - at least when it comes their general psychological makeup and what type of imagery would appeal to them. that and the acknowledgement of centuries of political lobbying and the responsibility resulting from that.


the reason i was looking for distinction is because having spent a lot of time with paramilitary and wannabe bad ass types i dont see many if any similarities between them and school shooter bullied kids. if i was a marketing executive at Remington the type of advertisements i'd target for open carry in subway people i wouldnt expect to land with a social outcast at all. they're typically in my experience not interested in masculinity or badassness at all. a gun to them is just a tool for revenge.

as to the points about lobbying against common sense gun control by the gun lobby, 100%. ive been an outcast for a long time for being pro gun control, and heard the term slippery slope enough times to gag me. o well.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Feb 16 2022 01:33pm
Member
Posts: 2,614
Joined: Sep 17 2021
Gold: 0.00
Member
Posts: 52,225
Joined: Jan 3 2009
Gold: 8,902.00
Feb 16 2022 02:32pm
Quote (fender @ Feb 16 2022 11:03am)
nice try to nitpick your way out of the main argument, but still a fail, l2r. i am not saying guns are entirely unregulated, i'm saying that gun manufacturers spent billions to lobby for as few regulations as possible. feel free to address the rest, oh right, you won't, because it'd topple your flimsy "frivolous lawsuit" claim...


I read the rest of the drivel. I didn't think it merited a response, but since you're apparently desperate to have it refuted, sure.

Quote
don't forget to accompany your sale with decades of marketing campaigns, cultivating an image of manliness and freedom for owning and using nuclear warheads, spending billions in lobbying efforts to keep those warheads legal and unregulated, as well as paying politicians to introduce legislation banning the government from funding even just research into the impact of nuclear warhead proliferation in society...

but hey, no one could reasobably conclude from all this that you had any share of responsibility, it's just capitalism at work, right? nothing objectionable...


"don't forget to accompany your sale with decades of marketing campaigns, cultivating an image of manliness and freedom" is meaningless tripe designed to appeal to feelings and not address any underlying legal issues in the dealing firearms.
"spending billions in lobbying efforts" also fails to address anything on a legal level. It's an emotional argument on your part, and I'm unconcerned with your tender sensitivities. Everyone has a right to advocate for themselves.
"as well as paying politicians to introduce legislation banning the government from funding even just research into the impact" - "just research"... whose sole purpose is to further gun control. Yeah, I don't have a problem with barring funding going to research into what is tantamount to gun control.
Member
Posts: 50,854
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,846.00
Feb 16 2022 02:43pm
Quote (Santara @ Feb 16 2022 02:32pm)
I read the rest of the drivel. I didn't think it merited a response, but since you're apparently desperate to have it refuted, sure.



"don't forget to accompany your sale with decades of marketing campaigns, cultivating an image of manliness and freedom" is meaningless tripe designed to appeal to feelings and not address any underlying legal issues in the dealing firearms.
"spending billions in lobbying efforts" also fails to address anything on a legal level. It's an emotional argument on your part, and I'm unconcerned with your tender sensitivities. Everyone has a right to advocate for themselves.
"as well as paying politicians to introduce legislation banning the government from funding even just research into the impact" - "just research"... whose sole purpose is to further gun control. Yeah, I don't have a problem with barring funding going to research into what is tantamount to gun control.


In this case it was what mattered. Since the law barred them from pursuing legal liability for manufacturing the firearms, they tried to slip through an exception for marketing the firearms. Which is what led to this hilarious convoluted garden path of civil liability where a firearm manufacturer is supposed to be liable for the actions of an individual they've never interacted with, who never read their ads, who never purchased their products, simply because he was somehow impacted by the invisible phlogiston in the air released when Remington made ads with masculine themes. This story read at its legal face value wouldn't be about firearms manufacturing at all, but about advertising. Or in other words, not content to simply trample on the 2nd amendment, they tore up the 1st amendment. But not in the classical and comprehensible "Ban expression you disagree with", but in the insane "I don't like you and you wrote poetry so I'm holding your poetry liable for my chronic diabetes"
Member
Posts: 30,165
Joined: Sep 10 2004
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 30%
Feb 16 2022 02:58pm
Quote (Santara @ 16 Feb 2022 21:32)
I read the rest of the drivel. I didn't think it merited a response, but since you're apparently desperate to have it refuted, sure.



"don't forget to accompany your sale with decades of marketing campaigns, cultivating an image of manliness and freedom" is meaningless tripe designed to appeal to feelings and not address any underlying legal issues in the dealing firearms.
"spending billions in lobbying efforts" also fails to address anything on a legal level. It's an emotional argument on your part, and I'm unconcerned with your tender sensitivities. Everyone has a right to advocate for themselves.
"as well as paying politicians to introduce legislation banning the government from funding even just research into the impact" - "just research"... whose sole purpose is to further gun control. Yeah, I don't have a problem with barring funding going to research into what is tantamount to gun control.


oh yes, famously people who reject research into a topic, because they predict they won't like the outcome, tend to be on the right side of the issue and history... good "argument", lol...

just because you managed to rationalise whatever gun manufacturers do and how they manipulate politics, just because you delude yourself into accepting dead children as a reasonable price for your hobby, doesn't mean that arguments against it hold no merit.
Member
Posts: 4,621
Joined: Jan 30 2021
Gold: 751.50
Feb 16 2022 04:06pm
so do i get this right, some nutjob uses a product of some company to do something and they can be sued for dozens of millions

thats great news for the victims of muslim knife attacks in france, the uk and germany

they can now sue the knife manufacturer for some good cash B)

and just why did i know before clicking that mister fenderp would go apeshit in here
Member
Posts: 30,165
Joined: Sep 10 2004
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 30%
Feb 16 2022 04:21pm
and just when i thought i had already seen the most braindead, simplistic, and uninformed takes imaginable, a wild ampoo appears from far right, smashing all records, and completely re-defining standards that hard working village idiots had set in the past...
Member
Posts: 33,358
Joined: Dec 20 2007
Gold: 11,245.00
Feb 16 2022 04:27pm
Quote (Sh00p @ 15 Feb 2022 20:41)
Its about fucking time one of these weapon manufacturers pays for all of the slaughter theyve caused.

The swarms of people defending murder weapons on top of the piles of childrens corpses is the most pathetic thing ive seen in america to date which is saying a lot, and proves why nobody deserves guns at all.


lol

You anti gunners are a trip.
Member
Posts: 13,313
Joined: May 20 2004
Gold: 253.00
Feb 16 2022 04:40pm
Quote (Sh00p @ Feb 16 2022 09:03am)
I guess if I sell nuclear warheads to terrorists im not resposible for what they might try to do with them. Maybe we should just give them the benefit of the doubt and they only want to decorate them like a festive christmas tree!


I don't think you understand how the firearm industry sales work.


Manufactures such as Remington sell to distributors. Distributors sell to dealers with FFL's. Dealers sell to private citizens whom are required to fill out ATF Form 4473 and undergo a background check. There are at minimum two layers between the manufacturers and public.
Member
Posts: 49,893
Joined: Jun 19 2006
Gold: 3.88
Feb 16 2022 05:03pm
Guns don't kill people, people kill people.
With guns.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev134567Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll