The Unprecedented Law Giving Gun Makers And Dealers Immunity

[Cecilie1200]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Read the law and the subsequent court orders. Strict liability is for unintended consequences, such as eating a snickers bar that had poison chemicals that killed you down the line.

But guns are made to to kill. Killing is not an unintended consequence. Similar to the immunity that alcohol and tobacco receive!

Only a sick fuck would think that the purpose of guns is to kill people. You know, you. Guns are a tool. Table saws and baseball bats aren't made to kill either, but hey can

Say what you want, but the purpose of a gun is to kill or harm a target!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The purpose of a gun is to fire a projectile. Choice of target is up to you, and may I say that I find it telling that the only target you can think of is other people?

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Read the law and the subsequent court orders. Strict liability is for unintended consequences, such as eating a snickers bar that had poison chemicals that killed you down the line.

But guns are made to to kill. Killing is not an unintended consequence. Similar to the immunity that alcohol and tobacco receive!

Only a sick fuck would think that the purpose of guns is to kill people. You know, you. Guns are a tool. Table saws and baseball bats aren't made to kill either, but hey can

Say what you want, but the purpose of a gun is to kill or harm a target!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

or hit a target, like skeet shooting. Or for self defense.

Hell, people around here like to fire them into the air just to make loud noises.

Admittedly, the police department frowns on that.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Why is it that you just can't identify how gun makers are not held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers?

Well, possibly because this law doesn't say anything about not holding them as liable as other manufacturers.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Like when someone gets blind drunk and plows his Chevy into a crowd?

The bartender can be liable.

Sure he can . . . IF he's directly and knowingly responsible.

However, if the bartender serves the guy normally, and then the guy goes out and drinks the bottle of Vodka he had stashed in his car and THEN plows into a crowd, the bartender isn't liable. Likewise, if the bartender serves the guy normally, and then the guy goes out and plows his car into the crowd just because he's nuts, the bartender is also not liable.

 

[kaz]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Read the law and the subsequent court orders. Strict liability is for unintended consequences, such as eating a snickers bar that had poison chemicals that killed you down the line.

But guns are made to to kill. Killing is not an unintended consequence. Similar to the immunity that alcohol and tobacco receive!

Only a sick fuck would think that the purpose of guns is to kill people. You know, you. Guns are a tool. Table saws and baseball bats aren't made to kill either, but hey can

Say what you want, but the purpose of a gun is to kill or harm a target!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The purpose of a gun is to fire a projectile. Choice of target is up to you, and may I say that I find it telling that the only target you can think of is other people?

It's another chance for liberals to show how sick they are. I am obsessed with my guns not shooting anyone, but shooting people is all they can think of

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Such as? See the car maker or alcohol makers and sellers held responsible for drunk driving fatalities?

 

[Ernie S.]

Guns sales are big money. Less gun sales mean less money. Therefore, it's all about money and how that money is used to influence legislators. There is no doubt that criminals, mentally ill, and domestic abusers should not have access to firearms. So, if gun manufacturers, suppliers, and the NRA were held liable each time a gun was used in a crime - I bet gun control laws would change in a hurry.

Should we be able to sue Estwing if one of their hammers is used to build a house?

Yes, idiot. Sometimes evil people use guns to kill good people. Guns make a very efficient tool. Most work perfectly as they were designed to do. Suing Smith and Wesson for building a product that works as advertised and for which they have no control once it leaves the factory is ridiculous.

 

[LOki]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Why is it that you just can't identify how gun makers are not held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers?

Well, possibly because this law doesn't say anything about not holding them as liable as other manufacturers.

That doesn't EXEMPT them. What's wrong with you?

Why is it that you just can't identify how gun makers are not held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Why is it that you just can't identify how gun makers are not held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers?

Does GM get sued when some drunk guy steals a Tahoe and run down a bunch of kids?
Does the maker of the alcohol the drunk guy consumed just before he stole the Tahoe?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Why is there no longer expectation of individual responsibility? Individual accountability?

Blame the gun. Blame the car. Blame the ping pong ball. Blame the Jart. Blame the booze. Blame the bar that served the booze. Blame the friend that let the friend drive the car after drinking the booze.

Blame the enablers and the enabling devices. The individual perpetrator is just an innocent bystander.

Welcome to liberal lalaland..... the only person responsible is the other guy.

Liberals are idiots.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Why is it that you just can't identify how gun makers are not held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers?

Well, possibly because this law doesn't say anything about not holding them as liable as other manufacturers.

That doesn't EXEMPT them. What's wrong with you?

Why is it that you just can't identify how gun makers are not held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers?

If a gun, properly used, blows up in your face, the manufacturer is in a heap of trouble. Trust me. Now, if you get drunk and shoot your foot off, different story.. or, create some crazy home grown load that exceeds what the gun is designed for, again you're screwed.

 

[LOki]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

In what way are gun makers not held liable like other manufacturers?

 

[LOki]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Why is it that you just can't identify how gun makers are not held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers?

Well, possibly because this law doesn't say anything about not holding them as liable as other manufacturers.

That doesn't EXEMPT them. What's wrong with you?

Why is it that you just can't identify how gun makers are not held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers?

If a gun, properly used, blows up in your face, the manufacturer is in a heap of trouble.

OK.

Trust me.

OK.

Now, if you get drunk and shoot your foot off, different story.. or, create some crazy home grown load that exceeds what the gun is designed for, again you're screwed.

OK. So....

So far, it looks to me like gun makers are held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers. Why is it that you just can't identify how gun makers are not held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers?

In what precise way are gun makers not held just as liable for their products as other manufacturers? Be specific.

Thank you.

 

[asaratis]

.......

The purpose of a gun is to fire a projectile. Choice of target is up to you, and may I say that I find it telling that the only target you can think of is other people?

That is not the only hole in his logic.

.......

Hell, people around here like to fire them into the air just to make loud noises.

Admittedly, the police department frowns on that.

As well they should. What goes up in air will eventually come down. A bullet can fall through someone's skull. If there's no wind and you fire at exactly 45degrees, the skull hit will be at the maximum range of the firearm. At any other angle excluding straight up, the skull hit will be closer to you. If you fire exactly straight up, the skull hit may be yours.

 

[Lakhota]

Gun Shop Ordered To Pay $6 Million For Selling Weapon That Injured Police Officers

MILWAUKEE (AP) — A jury ordered a Wisconsin gun store on Tuesday to pay nearly $6 million to two Milwaukee police officers who were shot and seriously wounded by a gun purchased at the store.

The ruling came in a negligence lawsuit that the officers filed against the owners and operators of Badger Guns. The suit alleged the shop allowed an illegal sale despite several warning signs that should have prompted a store clerk to stop the transaction and know the gun was being sold to a "straw buyer," or someone who was buying the gun for someone who couldn't legally do so.

Jurors sided with the officers, ruling that the store was negligent in selling the gun.

More: Gun Shop Ordered To Pay $6 Million For Selling Weapon That Injured Police Officers

EVERYONE should have this same legal right. EVERYONE!!!!!

 

[Conservative65]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Because the trigger doesn't pull itself.

What other manufacturers are held liable and for what?

 

[Lakhota]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Because the trigger doesn't pull itself.

What other manufacturers are held liable and for what?

Funny. So why are these two cops getting $6 million?

 

[asaratis]

Gun Shop Ordered To Pay $6 Million For Selling Weapon That Injured Police Officers

MILWAUKEE (AP) — A jury ordered a Wisconsin gun store on Tuesday to pay nearly $6 million to two Milwaukee police officers who were shot and seriously wounded by a gun purchased at the store.

The ruling came in a negligence lawsuit that the officers filed against the owners and operators of Badger Guns. The suit alleged the shop allowed an illegal sale despite several warning signs that should have prompted a store clerk to stop the transaction and know the gun was being sold to a "straw buyer," or someone who was buying the gun for someone who couldn't legally do so.

Jurors sided with the officers, ruling that the store was negligent in selling the gun.

More: Gun Shop Ordered To Pay $6 Million For Selling Weapon That Injured Police Officers

EVERYONE should have this same legal right. EVERYONE!!!!!

The Gun Store erred. The Gun Manufacturer did not. The Gun Store should pay. (Their license should be revoked also.) The Gun Manufacturer should not.

Go back to sleep.

 

[Lakhota]

Gun Shop Ordered To Pay $6 Million For Selling Weapon That Injured Police Officers

MILWAUKEE (AP) — A jury ordered a Wisconsin gun store on Tuesday to pay nearly $6 million to two Milwaukee police officers who were shot and seriously wounded by a gun purchased at the store.

The ruling came in a negligence lawsuit that the officers filed against the owners and operators of Badger Guns. The suit alleged the shop allowed an illegal sale despite several warning signs that should have prompted a store clerk to stop the transaction and know the gun was being sold to a "straw buyer," or someone who was buying the gun for someone who couldn't legally do so.

Jurors sided with the officers, ruling that the store was negligent in selling the gun.

More: Gun Shop Ordered To Pay $6 Million For Selling Weapon That Injured Police Officers

EVERYONE should have this same legal right. EVERYONE!!!!!

The Gun Store erred. The Gun Manufacturer did not. The Gun Store should pay. (Their license should be revoked also.) The Gun Manufacturer should not.

Go back to sleep.

Duh, that's true. But Bush's law excludes dealers.

 

[Conservative65]

Why shouldn't gun makers be held liable like other manufacturers?

Because the trigger doesn't pull itself.

What other manufacturers are held liable and for what?

Funny. So why are these two cops getting $6 million?

Because the store was negligent. The gun didn't shoot itself. Someone that shouldn't have had a gun did due to that negligence. You still blame the gun itself. Are you still claiming the trigger pulled itself? You probably think a piece of cloth pulled the trigger in Charleston, SC in June.

I had a gun stolen out of my LOCKED car. It wasn't in sight as it was in the glove compartment according to my State's laws. If that CRIMINAL misuses the gun, who is responsible?