Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
39 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Post removed (Original Post) Post removed Jun 2015 OP
Did the gun malfunction? It is meant to shoot bullets when the trigger is pulled NightWatcher Jun 2015 #1
the purpose of a gun is to kill. the purpose of a Ford is transportation nt arely staircase Jun 2015 #5
A gun is a legal product Travis_0004 Jun 2015 #7
"We should not be suing manufactures of legal products." arely staircase Jun 2015 #12
Let me clarify "Non defective legal products" Travis_0004 Jun 2015 #24
I afraid have to agree rock Jun 2015 #37
"We should not be suing manufactures of legal products" NCTraveler Jun 2015 #18
did it malfunction? NightWatcher Jun 2015 #10
so who can be sued? the Medellin Cartel? arely staircase Jun 2015 #28
Unless they're mine, those are designed to protect/save lives. ileus Jun 2015 #21
Should DUI victims sue Budweiser? Travis_0004 Jun 2015 #2
is budweiser specifically designed to kill? nt arely staircase Jun 2015 #6
Its designed to get you drunk Travis_0004 Jun 2015 #8
It is not designed to get you drunk. That would be Everclear. Throd Jun 2015 #13
No. 840high Jun 2015 #3
No. pintobean Jun 2015 #4
Sue them because their product works as designed? bunnies Jun 2015 #9
If they sell a defective product sure. ileus Jun 2015 #11
any product that can shred a classroom in seconds is inherently defective nt arely staircase Jun 2015 #15
Tell that to the Armed Forces (n/t) derby378 Jun 2015 #20
for sale to the general public is implied. nt arely staircase Jun 2015 #33
Yes gratuitous Jun 2015 #14
How are gun manufactures overproducing? Travis_0004 Jun 2015 #19
For example gratuitous Jun 2015 #27
The result of lawsuits like this is the Brady campaign writng a few checks when they loose Travis_0004 Jun 2015 #32
No. HappyMe Jun 2015 #16
Sue them for what? Not for the willful act or criminal negligence petronius Jun 2015 #17
I think it depends... Spazito Jun 2015 #22
it depends Amishman Jun 2015 #23
Only for not following laws or producing defecting products which victims still can. aikoaiko Jun 2015 #25
Not a fan of guns, but no. arcane1 Jun 2015 #26
Should the families sarisataka Jun 2015 #29
Should the terminally ill or the family of dead smokers not be able to sue the tobacco co? Sheepshank Jun 2015 #30
Yes, sue them out of existence mwrguy Jun 2015 #31
Of course. Guns are designed to kill. onehandle Jun 2015 #34
Oh hell yeah..... (NT) ghostsinthemachine Jun 2015 #35
silly H2O Man Jun 2015 #36
Hell yes! leftofcool Jun 2015 #38
If you cut your hand Aerows Jun 2015 #39

NightWatcher

(39,343 posts)
1. Did the gun malfunction? It is meant to shoot bullets when the trigger is pulled
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:27 PM
Jun 2015

You cannot sue Ford when a drunk driver kills a family member, so why this now?

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
7. A gun is a legal product
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:33 PM
Jun 2015

Yes, its misused. So are cars, knives, beer, etc. We should not be suing manufactures of legal products.

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
12. "We should not be suing manufactures of legal products."
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:37 PM
Jun 2015

Who else would you sue? Makers of illegal products?

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
24. Let me clarify "Non defective legal products"
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:47 PM
Jun 2015

If I take a ford, and the brakes fail, that is the basis of a lawsuit.

If I'm drag racing a ford on a public street, nobody should be suing ford because their car is capable of going 90mph. They should be suing me for not using it in a responsible manner.

rock

(13,218 posts)
37. I afraid have to agree
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 04:12 PM
Jun 2015

It sounds demented to say we should be able to sue a manufacturer because his product worked.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
18. "We should not be suing manufactures of legal products"
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:40 PM
Jun 2015

That goes completely against anything that can be seen in America today, with very few exceptions. Gun manufacturers being one of them. It also goes against the concept of justice itself.

NightWatcher

(39,343 posts)
10. did it malfunction?
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:36 PM
Jun 2015

If you've a problem with a legal product, address the legality of that product. I'll help you.

arely staircase

(12,482 posts)
28. so who can be sued? the Medellin Cartel?
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:54 PM
Jun 2015

You know, in this world where ":makers of legal products" can't be sued. the kids that were killed at sandyhook were ripped apart by a product that worked exactly as designed and was perfectly legal and is immune from responsibility thanks to gun humpers (like Bernie Sanders?)

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
8. Its designed to get you drunk
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:34 PM
Jun 2015

One needs to be responsible when drunk.

99.9% of guns in America never killed anybody. Maybe mine is defective and I should sue glock.

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
14. Yes
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:38 PM
Jun 2015

But federal law pre-empts their liability for their lethal products, which when used as intended, kill people. Just like tobacco, which similarly enjoys federal pre-emption from the natural and normal consequences of its use by citizens.

I think there's a case to be made that gun manufacturers are purposely overproducing, knowing that their products will be oversold in jurisdictions with lax gun regulation to be used in areas with stricter standards on gun ownership.

But that would require lawmakers more concerned about citizens and public health than they are about gunmakers' bottom lines and whether Wayne LaPierre and the ghouls in the NRA are happy. So, it's not likely to happen anytime soon. Unless we get another Dylann Roof event that breaks loose the dammed-up sentiments of a majority of the country, and popular opinion manifests itself at last against the merchants of death.

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
19. How are gun manufactures overproducing?
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:41 PM
Jun 2015

How would they control distribution to stop trafficking.

Somebody orders a gun, they make a gun.

gratuitous

(82,849 posts)
27. For example
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:51 PM
Jun 2015

I think it's in Georgia, there is a little old gun merchant who orders quite a lot of stock from the manufacturers. In spite of the fact that Georgia is pretty well-stocked with shootin' arns, a whole bunch of that merchant's sales winds up in places like the District of Columbia, which has heavy local restrictions on gun sales and purchases. Now, either the good people at Colt or Winchester are a remarkably incurious lot in contravention of their "responsible gun owner" pose (negligence), or they know good and well that their wares are winding up where they shouldn't (reckless disregard), and causing a lot of bloodshed.

I would argue that those manufacturers should be held liable for the deaths their products cause because of their negligent or reckless behavior. A few successful lawsuits and some punitive damages awards, and I'd be willing to bet that the manufacturers themselves would be leading the campaign for better regulation.

 

Travis_0004

(5,417 posts)
32. The result of lawsuits like this is the Brady campaign writng a few checks when they loose
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:56 PM
Jun 2015

If the gun store is selling them illegally, go after the gun store.

petronius

(26,581 posts)
17. Sue them for what? Not for the willful act or criminal negligence
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:39 PM
Jun 2015

of a third party, IMO - i.e. not for 'gun violence.'

Like all manufacturers, gun makers should be (and are) liable for their own negligence and misdeeds but not for that of others...

Spazito

(49,784 posts)
22. I think it depends...
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:45 PM
Jun 2015

but I have to say one of my favorite movies is The Runaway Jury, the gun manufacturer representatives were characterized as greedy, don't give a shit about victims, dirty players and that's my take on real representatives of the gun manufacturers.

The movie is fiction, the plaintiff won, yesssss!

Amishman

(5,541 posts)
23. it depends
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:45 PM
Jun 2015

if they are circumventing laws intended to keep guns out of dangerous hands, then definitely yes

but just because they manufactured it and someone down the supply chain did something illegal? no, it is unreasonable to punish them for something outside their control.

And in our litigious society, removing all protections would quickly result in hundreds of lawsuits against each manufacturer. This would bankrupt all of them from legal expenses alone, even if they win every case. I suspect this is what some people have in mind.

aikoaiko

(34,127 posts)
25. Only for not following laws or producing defecting products which victims still can.
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:47 PM
Jun 2015

Bernie's vote was good.

sarisataka

(18,222 posts)
29. Should the families
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:54 PM
Jun 2015

of 9-11 victims be able to sue Boeing?

Same rational- planes are designed to travel through the air, guns are designed to accurately fire projectiles.

The practical use i.e. using either to kill, is on the operator.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
30. Should the terminally ill or the family of dead smokers not be able to sue the tobacco co?
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 03:55 PM
Jun 2015

should the victims of mesothilioma be barred from suing the manufacturer?

Yes, they shuld be able to sue.

When a manufacturer lobbies for and creates a nuisance. When they conspire with huge national organizations to lobby and buy off politicians. When they have systematically created laws that protect shooters of innocent people, and create an environment and a pervasive mind set of shoot or be shot first...yeah, they hava some culpability in creating a society where guns are so prolific and ripe for abuse. They deserve to be sued.

onehandle

(51,122 posts)
34. Of course. Guns are designed to kill.
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 04:00 PM
Jun 2015

To manufacture them is to enable people to kill people.

Common sense, really.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
39. If you cut your hand
Thu Jun 25, 2015, 04:32 PM
Jun 2015

while slicing vegetables, no, you can't sue JA Henckles because you got distracted.

There is a difference between a defective product and a product that works exactly as intended.

Oh, and gun-humper? Wow.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Post removed