Quote: thedoctor said: My example with vehicles is the same as yours with guns. This latest argument about Firestone and the tires is what brings up the apples and oranges tag. Those are defects of the product that makes the merchandise not perform properly. You have not given comparable evidence that all firearms are defective.
I address the issue based on your definition of legal negligence. Now you're trying to down play that and just bring up tax rates. Nice try to shift your argument.
He never claimed the guns were defective. That's why his argument makes no sense, based on his definition of negligence.
Quote: magicjay38 said: A special note to PenWing: Legal mumbo jumbo is what the rules are all about. Deal with it.
That may be, but when you start bringing defective tires into this you should realize that they have nothing to do with the argument at hand. Logic also is what the rules are all about. Your argument is illogical.
"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs
"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
