A 9-year-old boy shot his older sister to death over a video game controller, sheriff

smb said:
Where did I say they have zero liability. I said they are immune from strict liability thanks to Congress being paid by the NRA. The only liability they have is if the there gun malfunctions. Why are you lying about what I have said?
Click to expand...

Lie

Btw knife manufacturers can't be sued for a murder. So kindly stfu. And do you even know why congress limited some of their liability? It was to protect the second amendment from litigious states.
 
Yaya said:
Lie

Btw knife manufacturers can't be sued for a murder. So kindly stfu. And do you even know why congress limited some of their liability? It was to protect the second amendment from litigious states.
Click to expand...

Non-sequitur.
 
Hello Yaya,

Yaya said:
I thought you wanted civil discourse and threatened to place on ignore those who insult you and yet here you are insulting another member.
Click to expand...

There were no insults.

And I wasn't even talking to a human who could answer a simple verification question.

Is it possible to insult a bot?

Besides, it is in the interest of Russia to support pro-gun legislation.

That way, Americans will be shooting Americans. Russians don't have to. It's perfect for them.
 
Yaya said:
LOL, you ha e no idea what that word means.

You're laughably ignorant.
Click to expand...

I do. It is clear you don't. If I say A=B and then you turn around and say but what about F=D. That is a non-sequitur. Saying that gun manufacturers should be, if not given immunity by a bribed Congress, liable under strict liability. You then say why shouldn't knife manufacturers be liable for murder. See how your ignorant non-sequitur works now. Fucking idiot.
 
I feel compelled to educate your dumbass.

Non sequitur means someone says something that logically doesn't follow the discussion or argument.

You : guns are inherently dangerous

Me: so are knives

You discussed whether guns were inherently dangerous and thus deserve strict liability and that the manufacturer should be held liable, which of course privity must be shown. So, at your core argument was that they are inherently dangerous. I replied so are knives.

Yet you claim that has nothing to do with your inherently dangerous argument.
 
Yaya said:
I feel compelled to educate your dumbass.

Non sequitur means someone says something that logically doesn't follow the discussion or argument.

You : guns are inherently dangerous

Me: so are knives

You discussed whether guns were inherently dangerous and thus deserve strict liability and that the manufacturer should be held liable, which of course privity must be shown. So, at your core argument was that they are inherently dangerous. I replied so are knives.

Yet you claim that has nothing to do with your inherently dangerous argument.
Click to expand...

Like I said you have no clue what a non-sequitur is.

A non-sequitur is NOT something that doesn't follow the discussion or point. A non-sequitur is drawing a false conclusion that doesn't fit the given premises.

The premise.

Gun's are inherently dangerous and not used during normal interactions.

Conclusion

Gun manufacturers are liable under strict liability tort. (or should be if not given immunity by a bribed Congress).


Your Conclusion

Knives are also inherently dangerous so should be the same.


Except they don't fit the premise. The premise is that guns are inherently dangerous and not used during normal interactions.

Knives are used by every person almost everyday. They are also not inherently dangerous as they are not designed for the sole purpose of killing and maiming.

Ergo you conclusion that knives should be treated similar as I have stated guns should be treated is a non-sequitur.

Consider yourself schooled.
 
leaningright said:
That’s crazy. Assess risk? Risk? You know when you shoot someone it ain’t good ... and you don’t have to be 25 years and one day to know it either. That type of thought or pseudoscience just offers someone below 25 an excuse for stupid decision making and it gives potential ammunition to the gun restrictors/banners of America.
Click to expand...

It's not pseudoscience and it doesn't apply strictly to handling guns. In fact scientists have scanned the pre-frontal cortex and they show the brain hasn't finished developing until age 25. The article quoted here doesn't even mention guns.

AAMODT: So the changes that happen between 18 and 25 are a continuation of the process that starts around puberty, and 18 year olds are about halfway through that process. That's the part of the brain that helps you to inhibit impulses and to plan and organize your behavior to reach a goal.

And the other part of the brain that is different in adolescence is that the brain's reward system becomes highly active right around the time of puberty and then gradually goes back to an adult level, which it reaches around age 25 and that makes adolescents and young adults more interested in entering uncertain situations to seek out and try to find whether there might be a possibility of gaining something from those situations.

https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=141164708
 
volsrock said:
Bet the kid is black, the girl was named Dijonae

The boy felt disrespected so he did what Nigers do pop of a gun! Guess he learned it form his Niger friends



Just another sad chapter in the annals of American Niger Thug Culture
Click to expand...
It's two g's you dumb fuck. If you're going to be racist at least do it right.

Sent from my SM-G530T using Tapatalk
 
Yaya said:
I feel compelled to educate your dumbass.

Non sequitur means someone says something that logically doesn't follow the discussion or argument.

You : guns are inherently dangerous

Me: so are knives

You discussed whether guns were inherently dangerous and thus deserve strict liability and that the manufacturer should be held liable, which of course privity must be shown. So, at your core argument was that they are inherently dangerous. I replied so are knives.

Yet you claim that has nothing to do with your inherently dangerous argument.
Click to expand...

I told him to email his overlords and give him better responses, they evidently haven't replied.
 
I just put 1 and 1 together and considered the fact that this killing was caused by a no doubt killing video game. which video game addiction is responsible for this production of evil ? is video game title known ? I don't always read much stuff right now.
 
Yaya said:
A 9-year-old boy shot his older sister to death over a video game controller, sheriff says

A 9-year-old boy retrieved a gun from his parents' bedroom and shot his 13-year-old sister to death, authorities said, after the two got into an argument over a video game controller.

The incident occurred over the weekend in rural Monroe County, Mississippi, as the children's mother was preparing lunch in the kitchen, the country sheriff said.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...y-shot-sister-over-video-game-trnd/index.html

So young he likely doesn't even know he did something so horrible. Can't be prosecuted under the, maybe a mental facility.
Click to expand...

a video game controller is a powerful weapon in the video game realm. mind games. deepstate thinks it is cute. hahaha. funny.
 
iewitness said:
I just put 1 and 1 together and considered the fact that this killing was caused by a no doubt killing video game. which video game addiction is responsible for this production of evil ? is video game title known ? I don't always read much stuff right now.
Click to expand...
Here we go. Video game addiction? Really? There is no such thing.

Sent from my SM-G530T using Tapatalk
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top