How long until that gets approved and some other company or Sig even, sells the convenient (1:56) “slip on cover” for it, which miraculously attenuates the report of fired rounds. Priceless… When that happens it will be a celebration. I’ll bring the cake. Anyway they are suing the ATF right now because they say it was inaccurately deemed a silencer. Imagine that.
Damn short stroke gas pistons are ill. DAT BUTTSTOCK amirite?
Says Elvis Presley Enterprises, who doesn’t like this ad and is suing Beretta:
Elvis Presley Enterprises filed the suit against Beretta, claiming the gun co. hijacked Elvis’s face and good name to hawk its new model 692 shotgun. Elvis impersonators even made an appearance at the Beretta booth at the 2013 SHOT show in Vegas. According to the lawsuit, while Elvis was an outspoken gun enthusiast, neither he nor his estate ever gave Beretta permission to use his image in ad campaigns.
Great looking shotgun… weak Ad. I see very little marketing that I’m impressed with when it comes to the big gun companies. I don’t know if these places have internal marketing departments or if they hire agencies, but whoever is doing the work sucks. Likely they numbers nerds are like “OMG GUYS OUR ELVIS AD MADE US $10.2 MILLION this quarter… raises for everyone!” just to keep their jobs and keep putting out bullshit ads. An Elvis lookalike in 2014? That’s literally the most boring and non relatable thing I’ve ever see to sell a shotgun in my entire life. Why even bother? I know I’m not in the target demographic for fancy-ass shotguns, but if I was I would have preferred they just put nice pics of the amazing details on the gun itself. Last thing I want people being like “Oh the 692! You bought the Elvis shotgun!”
The incident resulted in his termination. Hovan has a concealed weapons permit, but did not inform Walgreens that he was in possession of a gun at work — a weapon he purchased, he said, after the store was robbed in 2007. Walgreens fired him, now he’s suing them.
That’s strike 2 (that I know of) for Walgreens when it comes to not acknowledging some “good” that came from a firearm in one of their stores. If you remember back in May of last year in Omaha NE some punks tried to rob a Walgreens and one of them got ventilated. Walgreens didn’t give a shit and couldn’t even thank the guy.
If I owned Walgreens I would have at least bought the pharmacist a new concealed carry weapon as a thanks, not to mention a “sorry” for having to go through such an ordeal. I wish the pharmacist much luck with his lawsuit.
A retired Los Angeles police officer who sued a gun maker after his 3-year-old son shot him had his lawsuit dismissed Friday by a Los Angeles Superior Court judge.
Enrique Chavez, now 39, of Anaheim, was off-duty when he was shot on July 11, 2006, while driving his Ford Ranger near Harbor Boulevard and La Palma Avenue. His son, who was not in a car seat, got a hold of the father’s .45-caliber Glock while sitting in the back seat and shot him in the back, according to police reports.
Terrible thing to have happen. I’m sure he thought he’d win the lawsuit… but I’m glad he didn’t, that would have set a terrible precedent that would only further inconvience responsible gun owners like the rest of us. Last thing I want is more safeties and warnings all over my guns.
Just goes to show how you need to keep your guns secured around kids because things could go bad in a split second.
James from HellInAHandBasket points out an awesome article in the Associated Press about today’s challenge to Chicago’s 28 year old handgun ban:
CHICAGO – A couple worries that burglars who tried to break in when the wife was home alone will return. A retiree fears the drug dealers and junkies just outside his window will attempt — again — to steal what he spent a lifetime earning. And a businessman wants to protect himself as he could when he was a police officer.
On Tuesday, the four will take their seats inside the U.S. Supreme Court as their attorneys argue a lawsuit that bears their names: David and Colleen Lawson, Otis McDonald and Adam Orlov.
The four plaintiffs are not stereotypical gun rights advocates. They don’t represent the agenda of any national group or organize rallies. Instead they represent average Chicagoans — the kind of people that opponents of the city’s ban say should be allowed to protect themselves from gun violence.
I applaud the kindness of Diane Latiker with her “Kids off the Block” program, I think that is great that those kids have a place to go to escape gun violence. She supports the handgun ban because she “would rather something be in place then nothing be in place”. I’d be willing to bet that all those 200+ people that are represented in her memorial did not did at the hands of law abiding citizens. This is one of those criminals do not care about the law type things, where it’s easy to see that banning handguns in Chicago does not make them any harder for criminals to get. It is the regular person that needs to protect themselves from the criminals.
Although I don’t live in Chicago, I anxiously await the outcome of McDonald v. Chicago (08-1521).
A repeal of the ban would be a huge Second Amendment victory.