Sandy Hook families can sue gun manufacturers.

[Rozman]

Can someone,anyone explain the basis for a lawsuit against a gun manufacturer other then the gun malfunctioned
or failed to perform as advertised?....

If the gun worked properly how can the manufacturer be held liable....for anything?....

 

[Bill Angel]

The same argument would hold true in photography. Canon and Nikon make great cameras, and they may occasionally sell them to people who use them for nefarious purposes like creating child pornography. But I don't think anyone believes that the camera manufacturers should be held liable if their products are put to such a use.

 

[nat4900]

Of course, you right wingers and gun rights proponents are missing the point.....either purposefully or by stupidity. At Sandy Hook, first graders were not "just killed" but torn into pieces by a maniac with a gun intended to be used in military combat..Such guns should NOT be sold to common citizens. The only purpose to sell such guns are either to kill as many people in the shortest number of minutes....OR to satisfy the "machismo" of morons.i

 

[JoeB131]

so adam would have got them from someone else....

The guy had no job, no money, and frankly, probably would have looked just seedy enough to make even most gun dealers look at him twice.

But I'd be all for suing whoever gave him a gun.

 

[Wilbur Right]

If I get hit by a drunk driver, you goddamn right I am about to sue Jim Beam and chevy. Their SOLE purposes are to be driven and get drunk.

Ah but it isn't the purpose that they (drinking and driving) be done TOGETHER.

But let's say I own a gun shop. Right outside of Chicago. And my gun shop sells a LOT of guns. Straw buyers, gang bangers everybody knows where to get guns. And the gun manufacturers know of my reputation and they keep selling me guns.

Should that be stopped by suing the gun manufacturers?

 

[JoeB131]

There is nothing in the product gun manufacturers make that causes addiction. Your argument is false.

Have you read 2AGuy's posts recently? He frankly makes a crack addict going through withdrawls look sedate when you suggest he can't have a gun.

 

[nat4900]

If the gun worked properly how can the manufacturer be held liable....for anything?....

The point is so simple that it defies logic.....The point IS that such lethal weapons should NEVER be sold to common citizens.

 

[Confounding]

Of course, you right wingers and gun rights proponents are missing the point.....either purposefully or by stupidity. At Sandy Hook, first graders were not "just killed" but torn into pieces by a maniac with a gun intended to be used in military combat..Such guns should NOT be sold to common citizens. The only purpose to sell such guns are either to kill as many people in the shortest number of minutes....OR to satisfy the "machismo" of morons.i

He could have walked into that classroom and killed those children with a chef's knife. You're the one missing the point. The people that make weapons are not responsible for the crimes committed by maniacs.

 

[TNHarley]

Of course, you right wingers and gun rights proponents are missing the point.....either purposefully or by stupidity. At Sandy Hook, first graders were not "just killed" but torn into pieces by a maniac with a gun intended to be used in military combat..Such guns should NOT be sold to common citizens. The only purpose to sell such guns are either to kill as many people in the shortest number of minutes....OR to satisfy the "machismo" of morons.i

We can legally obtain surface to air missiles, so your argument fails the logic test.

 

[JoeB131]

So......liar....

gun suicides.....21,175
Accidental gun deaths... 505
Gun murder ......8,124

you got your figures, I have mine. But mine are right.

Anyway, too many gun deaths no matter what the figures are. Too high a price to pay for your fetish.

Here's an idea. We need a gun tax. To compensate us for the 270 BILLION lost every year, I think a tax of $1000 per gun owned would be about right.

 

[TNHarley]

If the gun worked properly how can the manufacturer be held liable....for anything?....

The point is so simple that it defies logic.....The point IS that such lethal weapons should NEVER be sold to common citizens.

Why? Why shouldn't citizens be able to have the same weapons their government has? ESPECIALLY when they have a second amendment.

 

[Confounding]

Why? Why shouldn't citizens be able to have the same weapons their government has? ESPECIALLY when they have a second amendment.

"Because at some point somebody might use one of those weapons for bad. Clearly lack of that weapon would have prevented the crime right...right?"

 

[JoeB131]

There are other violent crimes besides homicides you know

And in the UK they don't classify a any death as a murder unless someone is convicted of murder

House of Commons - Home Affairs - Appendices to the Minutes of Evidence

Look at section 2 paragraph 35

. Since 1967, homicide figures for England and Wales have been adjusted to exclude any cases which do not result in conviction,

We call any death not deemed suicide or an accident a murder

I think you are misinterpreting the British rules, but thats okay, man. You need to live in your own fantasy world.

 

[TNHarley]

If I get hit by a drunk driver, you goddamn right I am about to sue Jim Beam and chevy. Their SOLE purposes are to be driven and get drunk.

Ah but it isn't the purpose that they (drinking and driving) be done TOGETHER.

But let's say I own a gun shop. Right outside of Chicago. And my gun shop sells a LOT of guns. Straw buyers, gang bangers everybody knows where to get guns. And the gun manufacturers know of my reputation and they keep selling me guns.

Should that be stopped by suing the gun manufacturers?

Its the CONSUMERS choice. THEY are the responsible party. Do you know what responsible means?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Of course, you right wingers and gun rights proponents are missing the point.....either purposefully or by stupidity. At Sandy Hook, first graders were not "just killed" but torn into pieces by a maniac with a gun intended to be used in military combat..Such guns should NOT be sold to common citizens.

On what constitutional basis?

The only purpose to sell such guns are either to kill as many people in the shortest number of minutes....OR to satisfy the "machismo" of morons.i

That's your opinion.

If I were to hose you down with deer musk, would you sue the deer and the packaging company?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

If the gun worked properly how can the manufacturer be held liable....for anything?....

The point is so simple that it defies logic.....The point IS that such lethal weapons should NEVER be sold to common citizens.

On what constitutional basis?

 

[Confounding]

On what constitutional basis?

"Constitution be damned! My feelings and assumptions are more important!"

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Of course, you right wingers and gun rights proponents are missing the point.....either purposefully or by stupidity. At Sandy Hook, first graders were not "just killed" but torn into pieces by a maniac with a gun intended to be used in military combat..Such guns should NOT be sold to common citizens. The only purpose to sell such guns are either to kill as many people in the shortest number of minutes....OR to satisfy the "machismo" of morons.i

He could have walked into that classroom and killed those children with a chef's knife. You're the one missing the point. The people that make weapons are not responsible for the crimes committed by maniacs.

It's all about money. DEEP POCKETS. PERIOD.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

On what constitutional basis?

"Constitution be damned! My feelings and assumptions are more important!"

That is precisely their thought process.

 

[BluesLegend]

Inevitably, gun proponents and the NRA will claim that the latest ruling allowing families of the Sandy Hook massacre of children, is a ridiculous ruling.....They will follow up with various scenarios that were someone to be killed by a knife or a rope, that knives and rope manufacturers could ALSO be sued....but when making such comparisons they show both their prejudices and downright stupidity.

Guns are manufactured virtually SOLELY for the purpose of killing....whereas knives or ropes have much different purposes and the flooding of some high-crime areas with weapons whose main purpose is killing of maiming is totally unacceptable.

This ruling is a small but necessary first step toward restoring sanity. The Sandy Hook massacre could not have been as lethal with knives or ropes. Let us join the rest of the sane, and progressive world community where those weapons (mostly made for military purposes) do NOT make their way into deranged and evil hands.

You obviously are ignorant of how many laws there are governing knives. There went your credibility