Posts
Mexico is suing US gun manufacturers over the gun violence in Mexico?
Hey, I have an idea!
Mexico, why don't you close the border? That way all of our nasty guns cannot be, illegally, walked into your fine cesspool of a nation for your cartels to use on each other and innocents.
Speaking of those cartels... I think you're going to be owing us a lot more than our gun companies owe you once we get done tallying the damage done.
And another thing... The guns that keep showing up in vids of cartel violence, those are military. Thanks to the Hughes Amendment, they didn't come from commercial sources in the US. They'd have to come from police or military armories.
It's not the manufacturer's fault those guns are loose.
Consider also the 8% desertion rate in the Mexican Military. The draft is not popular there.
ReplyDeleteThe liars claim that the cartels are buying their guns at gun shows in Texas. Except that there is no reason that the cartels would pay retail. The stories of illegals buying from gun dealers or using straw buyers are mostly fabricated. Most of what travels south across the border is stolen, just like most of the guns used in crime in the US. That's not the gun company's fault. Also, I've never seen some of the things for sale that the cartels have at a Texas gun show. Like RPGs or full auto Chinese made AKs. And a lot, as you note, are military supplied, either through theft or desertion by Mexican Army or Police. But the cartels also have the resources to buy on the international arms markets in places like Pakistan and Afghanistan. In all reality, the cartels are the real government in most of Mexico. The official government is a sham, a facade. What little of the country they claim to control is tenuous at best. And most government and Police officials are on the payroll of the cartels, because they can either take the bribes or be killed. The government down there has been systematically corrupt for generations. The Spanish colonial governments were corrupt, and so has everything since been. But it is worse now.
ReplyDeleteThe US ought to be sending a bill to Mexico and the other countries south of the border for all the healthcare we provide for their nationals, and for all the education of their kids. And all the welfare. Instead we give Mexico trade deals grossly favorable to them (NAFTA) and many of the countries in Central and South America get assistance from the US.
And lets not even go into suing them from the damages that their illicit products cause up here. Poor quality Meth and other things that poison people and drive crime. That's the failure of those countries to stop gangs and control their borders, and properly take care of their people. You can't just blame that on US meddling.
Remington screwed up with the recent Sandy Hook settlement.
ReplyDeleteAnd Mexico smells blood in the water. I mean, what harm could actually happen to Mexico. It's a win-win, either they get settlement monies or they go to court and make America look bad and stand a good chance of winning.
No matter what they do, it will distract the eneMedia and the sheeple from what's really happening.
It's Remington's insurance company making the settlement offer, but otherwise spot on.
DeleteRemington's board could have told the insurance company to not pay out.
DeleteSettlement is settlement. It's pandering to the anti-gunners.
Now if the gun had blown up in the jerk's hand and the fault was with the manufacture of the gun and was not an anomaly, then, yes, I can see the insurance company paying out.
But... (And this is the sick part) the gun worked perfectly. So where's the manufacturer's fault? Oh, that's right, apparently butthurt does count for something.
Just like in New Mexico, where now apparently one can sue the gas station that provided the fuel for the drunk driver who wiped out your family. The drunk driver will probably walk away with little to no charges, but dagnabit, that convenience store and the clerks working there are so at fault! SUE! SUE!
I am not certain that Remington's board has that much power over pre-bankruptcy proceedings.
DeleteIf the insurance company pre-dates the current board, then they may have to go it alone because the company they represented is now gone; although the liability remains.
In a just world, that judge would have cited lawful commerce and no insurance company would have been sweating a lengthy legal battle.
Countersue for damages related to cartel related crime.
ReplyDelete