SCOTUS Okays Lawsuit Against Sandy Hook Gunmaker

[Hoosierhawkeye]

It's been 20+ years since I used the M16, but then it was single shot or 3 round burst. They removed automatic at some point after Vietnam. I was told this was removed because in a fire fight people would often panic and waste all of their ammo and/or would over heat and cause it to jam rendering the soldier worthless in the fight.

I know the guy carrying the SAW has an automatic weapon obviously. Plus I think special forces carry rifles with autofire options. But to my knowledge most riflemen don't carry weapons with the auto-fire option.

So the difference seems to be 550 yards of effective range vs 500 yards of effective range.

 

[Mattski]

It's been 20+ years since I used the M16, but then it was single shot or 3 round burst. They removed automatic at some point after Vietnam. I was told this was removed because in a fire fight people would often panic and waste all of their ammo and/or would over heat and cause it to jam rendering the soldier worthless in the fight.

3 rd burst is automatic, just in 3 shot bursts instead of unlimited. It's far closer to full auto than current civilian available semi auto is.

 

[SSG T]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I am under the impression that a lot of soldiers are issued with M-16's that no longer have the automatic fire option available. It's just the single shot and the 3 round burst.

While I'm not wanting them to legalize auto-fire for some very obvious reasons, at the same time the whole "It doesn't fire automatic" is extremely overrated. Only in very specific situations in combat do soldiers themselves use automatic fire.

The remaining differences between the AR-15 and the M-16 are very small. A slightly smaller powder load in the cartridge, rifling that isn't quite as tight as the military version.

The NRA gun nuts like to pretend like these differences are extremely meaningful. All it means is that the AR-15's effective range is 500 yards and the M-16's effective range is 550 yards.

Yeah, none of us are issued fully automatic M-16/M4, they all have SS/Burst. And other than the trigger group they are all the same as the civilian versions. I could build, from an blank receiver, a rifle that is identical to an M4A4 other than the select fire capability. Same sights, same accessories, same adjustable buttstock, same ammo. There are the same weapons with different triggers.

Funny how no one would argue that my heavy barrel Ruger M77 MkII is anything but a Ruger M77 MkII after I replaced the stock trigger with an aftermarket one. But they'll argue that an M-16 with a different trigger is a completely different weapon.

 

[Joes Place]

Woo hoo

https://www.joemygod.com/2019/11/scotus-okays-lawsuit-against-sandy-hook-gunmaker/
SCOTUS Okays Lawsuit Against Sandy Hook Gunmaker
November 12, 2019Guns, Terrorism


Reuters reports:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday dealt a blow to the firearms industry, rejecting Remington Arms Co’s bid to escape a lawsuit by families of victims aiming to hold the gun maker liable for its marketing of the assault-style rifle used in the 2012 Sandy Hook school massacre that killed 20 children and six adults.

The justices turned away Remington’s appeal of a ruling by Connecticut’s top court to let the lawsuit proceed despite a federal law that broadly shields firearms manufacturers from liability when their weapons are used in crimes. The lawsuit will move forward at a time of high passions in the United States over the issue of gun control.

The Associated Press reports:

The court’s order allows the lawsuit filed in Connecticut state court by a survivor and relatives of nine victims who died at the Newtown, Connecticut, school on Dec. 14, 2012 to go forward. The lawsuit says the Madison, North Carolina-based company should never have sold a weapon as dangerous as the Bushmaster AR-15-style rifle to the public.

Gunman Adam Lanza used it to kill 20 first graders and six educators. It also alleges Remington targeted younger, at-risk males in marketing and product placement in violent video games. Lanza was 20 years old.

Lanza earlier shot his mother to death at their Newtown home and killed himself as police arrived at the school. The rifle was legally owned by his mother. The National Rifle Association, 10 mainly Republican-led states and 22 Republicans in Congress were among those urging the court to jump into the case and end the lawsuit against Remington.

 

[Finance85]

Yeah, none of us are issued fully automatic M-16/M4, they all have SS/Burst. And other than the trigger group they are all the same as the civilian versions. I could build, from an blank receiver, a rifle that is identical to an M4A4 other than the select fire capability. Same sights, same accessories, same adjustable buttstock, same ammo. There are the same weapons with different triggers.

Funny how no one would argue that my heavy barrel Ruger M77 MkII is anything but a Ruger M77 MkII after I replaced the stock trigger with an aftermarket one. But they'll argue that an M-16 with a different trigger is a completely different weapon.

No, you can't build an identical M-16/M-4 from a blank receiver unless the receiver is pre-1986, or you have some pretty special machining ability. Why do you persist with this?

 

[SillFontaine]

Speaking of Guns!

 

[B1GDeal]

3 rd burst is automatic, just in 3 shot bursts instead of unlimited. It's far closer to full auto than current civilian available semi auto is.

Well, yes it's automatic because it fires more than one shot. That said, you have to keep pulling the trigger to fire more bursts where fully automatic you just pulled and sprayed until the clip is empty.

 

[seminole97]

Federalist 29 disagrees. And if you feel that every able-bodied male must gather for militia training "once or twice a year"... well, good luck defending that hill.

It’s worth noting the original submission of the second amendment (like others, an amalgamation of several submissions) included a religious scruples clause, intended to provide for the exemption from militia service pacifist sects like Quakers.
That clause was struck in the debates for fear it might be deliberately misconstrued by a future government to deny the right to keep and bear arms to same.
It’s interesting how effort to tie this ‘right of the people’ to militia service happened anyway.
There was no such confusion about militia service when Taney’s Supreme Court observes what Rights were at stake for Dred Scott:

“It would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognised as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went.”