HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » It's time to repeal the G...

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:52 AM

It's time to repeal the GOP/NRA liability protection of gun makers and sellers

They need to be held accountable for their products that are designed to kill.

yup

97 replies, 5222 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 97 replies Author Time Post
Reply It's time to repeal the GOP/NRA liability protection of gun makers and sellers (Original post)
jpak Dec 2012 OP
socialindependocrat Dec 2012 #1
GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #3
jpak Dec 2012 #4
socialindependocrat Dec 2012 #6
jpak Dec 2012 #8
socialindependocrat Dec 2012 #12
jpak Dec 2012 #15
socialindependocrat Dec 2012 #20
jpak Dec 2012 #22
socialindependocrat Dec 2012 #25
Crunchy Frog Dec 2012 #92
GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #28
jpak Dec 2012 #30
GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #33
jpak Dec 2012 #34
Glaug-Eldare Dec 2012 #35
jpak Dec 2012 #36
Glaug-Eldare Dec 2012 #37
jpak Dec 2012 #43
shadowrider Dec 2012 #95
Travis_0004 Dec 2012 #52
Crunchy Frog Dec 2012 #93
Thinkingabout Dec 2012 #53
GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #57
Thinkingabout Dec 2012 #61
beevul Dec 2012 #68
Thinkingabout Dec 2012 #91
beevul Dec 2012 #46
sir pball Dec 2012 #31
jpak Dec 2012 #39
sir pball Dec 2012 #44
krispos42 Dec 2012 #56
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #29
SQUEE Dec 2012 #42
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #45
SQUEE Dec 2012 #47
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #51
SQUEE Dec 2012 #54
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #58
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #67
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #73
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #74
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #81
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #82
ManiacJoe Dec 2012 #83
PavePusher Dec 2012 #84
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #75
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #76
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #77
generalhh Dec 2012 #49
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #50
generalhh Dec 2012 #63
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #80
PavePusher Dec 2012 #70
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #78
PavePusher Dec 2012 #85
sanatanadharma Dec 2012 #59
Glaug-Eldare Dec 2012 #64
gejohnston Dec 2012 #65
Glaug-Eldare Dec 2012 #71
socialindependocrat Dec 2012 #72
Glaug-Eldare Dec 2012 #79
Hudjes Dec 2012 #87
GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #2
jpak Dec 2012 #5
socialindependocrat Dec 2012 #7
jpak Dec 2012 #9
socialindependocrat Dec 2012 #18
jpak Dec 2012 #21
ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #10
jpak Dec 2012 #11
-..__... Dec 2012 #19
ileus Dec 2012 #14
jpak Dec 2012 #16
socialindependocrat Dec 2012 #23
Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #26
Tuesday Afternoon Dec 2012 #66
ileus Dec 2012 #13
jpak Dec 2012 #17
socialindependocrat Dec 2012 #24
GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #32
jpak Dec 2012 #41
Hudjes Dec 2012 #88
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #27
gejohnston Dec 2012 #38
jpak Dec 2012 #40
gejohnston Dec 2012 #90
generalhh Dec 2012 #48
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #97
Hudjes Dec 2012 #86
ehrenfeucht games Dec 2012 #96
krispos42 Dec 2012 #55
Tuesday Afternoon Dec 2012 #62
spin Dec 2012 #60
apocalypsehow Dec 2012 #69
Hudjes Dec 2012 #89
Howzit Dec 2012 #94

Response to jpak (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:58 AM

1. They do what they are designed to do -

If you sue gun manufacturers you just end up with no American gun manufacturers

and all our guns coming from foreign manufacturers.

that doesn't solve the problem....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:03 AM

3. That was their goal.

And by suing the distributors there would be no imported gun either. The gun banners were trying to do an end run around the Second Amendment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:11 AM

4. Drug companies can be sued for defective products designed to save lives

Why are gun manufacturers different?

I know...Gun Nuts think they are "special".

"The Precious, The Precious".

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:19 AM

6. You can sue a gun manufacturer for a defective gun.

If you buy a gun where because of an error of design or manufacturer there is a malfunction that causes injury

I would think you could sue for injury and damages.

I am not aware of this happening - someone else may have heard of an example.


You can not sue because the gun did function in the manner for which it was intended.

Simple logic...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #6)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:26 AM

8. You can sue a bar or a host for serving alcohol

to someone that kills someone in a drunken driving accident.

Why not be able to sue a gun shop that caters to straw buyers and ultimately criminals?

Why not be able to sue a gun manufacturer for making a gun that allows you to kill kids in school with ease?

I know....

"The Precious, The Precious"

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:40 AM

12. That's because they have established a responsibility for serving someone alcohol who is already...

visualy impaired.

They probably could sue a gun shop for selling to known criminals but they would have to proove it first.

Are you trying to practice for your highschool debating team here?

You seem to be asking questions that seem to be on your wish list
but that have very simple answers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:48 AM

15. How did the GOP/NRA establish that guns are different from anything else?

I know...

"The Precious, The Precious"

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #15)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:59 AM

20. I don't understand your question

Some things are similar and some things are different.

How do you mean that guns are considered different?

If you mean we can sue bartenders but not gun shops
it is because bartenders are exascerbating a condition that may lead to an accident that will hurt someone

Gun stores sell guns that are know to have a particular function.
The user is not know to be under the influence of alcohol at the time of sale
and are expected to follow safe gun handling procedures - i.e., do not drink alcohol and use firearms
After the sale of the firearm the slaes person in not responsible for the misuse of the gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #20)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:03 AM

22. Why are gun manufacturers and gun shops different from other businesses?

Why are they treated differently?

Because they know that their products kill tens of thousands of Americans each year.

and they make billions in the process.

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #22)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:13 AM

25. Because they are being misused

Cars are also misused and kill thousands of people every year

So the police stop speeders and they have sobriety checkpoints
they have been able to "catch" people misusing cars
So, they still sell cars
And the dealers make millions of dollars

what we are trying to do is find a way to identify people who will misuse firearms
but we are finding it difficult to do so people are liooking to limit the types of
firearms that can be purchased to ct down..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #25)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 12:40 AM

92. Cars also have to be registered, licenced and insured.

Why are guns different?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #22)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:39 AM

28. Because you side was filing loads of frivilous lawsuits against the gun industry.

You side hoped to bury the gun industry in legal expenses, and force them out of business. You did force Colt to withdraw from the civilian market. So law abiding gun owners pressured congressperson to protect lawful commerce in arms from your side's attacks.

Your side lost. Frontlash in 2005.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #28)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:42 AM

30. Wrongful Death is not "frivolous" - except to Wayne LaPierre wannabees

Families should have a right to sue those responsible for those deaths.

Murder apology fail.

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #30)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:45 AM

33. The sue the one who pulled the trigger.

That is the one responsible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #33)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:48 AM

34. Nope - sue the gun maker for selling a product designed only to kill - efficiently

Let the courts decide if it is "frivolous" or not.

Second Amendment idolaters should have no problem with the rest of our Constitutional Government - especially the Judiciary.

These gun liability laws are a clear indication that we have a gun problem in this country.

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #34)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:56 AM

35. Are baseball bats designed only to maim?

I suppose so, if I find some way to convince myself that baseball is an illegitimate sport, and not the *true* purpose for baseball bats. Nobody needs such a dangerous toy just to swat a ball (a deadly projectile!!!!!!!!!) around, anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glaug-Eldare (Reply #35)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:58 AM

36. Guns are specifically designed to kill - baseball bat afllacy fail

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #36)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:10 PM

37. Sure looks to me like bats were specifically designed to maim.

They're derived from ancient clubs designed to kill and maim, they're frequently used in assaults, manufacturers advertise that their bats will impart great force on objects (skulls, for instance), and their so-called "sporting use" is frivolous and unnecessary. It is outrageous that any baseball nut yahoo can go into the Sports Authority and walk out with a cheap weapon like that without any background checks at all, no registration, and no restrictions on size, weight, or material.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glaug-Eldare (Reply #37)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:42 PM

43. Then sue the fuck out of baseball bat AND gun makers

Let the courts decide.

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glaug-Eldare (Reply #35)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 08:46 AM

95. Baseball bats can kill, I know

My ex-son-in-law was murdered with a bat 7 years ago. Several healthy smacks to the head made sure.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #30)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:50 PM

52. So if somebody is speeding, and kills somebody, should we be allowed to sue GM?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Travis_0004 (Reply #52)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 12:43 AM

93. Good argument for requiring all gun owners to carry insurance on their guns.

Do you people have a problem with that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #28)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:53 PM

53. Now it is time to protect the innocent from the crazy gun owners.

For the simple fact gun lovers use their guns to kill innocent people it is time to turn around this useless group and restore law and order. If you end up not liking changes in the rules you can tell your gun loving friends these guns are being used to kill innocent people. It is time for law abiding citizens to be protected from crazy gun owners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #53)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 07:41 PM

57. You are smearing a rather large group.

Very, very, few legal gun owners use their gun for wrong. Almost all murderers have their guns illegally. You are wanting to punish the many innocent with the few guilty. In the process you are alienating a huge group of voters. There are about 80 to 100 million legal gun owners.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #57)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 08:45 PM

61. Then it is time to split the NRA, the good from the bad, then we can smear the bad.

Just because this might be a large group does not make their policies right, they still have nit made a statement condemning the Shady Hook shooting, this condemns the group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Thinkingabout (Reply #61)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:40 PM

68. And you differentiate between then, presumable, by which agree with you and which don't? N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to beevul (Reply #68)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 08:07 PM

91. It is an easy decision, those who are deluded and think armed guards in every school

From the reasonable who knows putting 11 rounds into a child has to stop and if it means banning rapid fire weapons then the NRA has to realize they should be about gun safety rather than selling more weapons which can not be controlled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #15)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 04:53 PM

46. They didn't. The anti gun lobby did. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:43 AM

31. Ya can't sue the liquor manufacturer

Least I've never heard anybody trying to.

Sue the store that's selling illegally into oblivion though, 100%

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sir pball (Reply #31)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:23 PM

39. Well then, gun manufacturers should object to a repeal

they are innocent

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #39)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:11 PM

44. Till somebody like you ends up on the jury

Damn the fact that they exercised due legal diligence in their sales, it's IMMORAL AND WRONG AND THEY MUST BE PUNISHED ANYWAY YUP YUP YUP

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 07:39 PM

56. Try suing Budweiser or Sam Adams for the death of a drunk person first.

Oh, and can people who get shot in a designated gun-free zone sue you for advocating and supporting those zones?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #6)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:39 AM

29. It happened in the Sandy Hook massacre.

 

The governor on the AR-15 Bushmaster either malfunctioned or was missing due to a design error of this civilian product.

How else could it have fired so many bullets in such a short time?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #29)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:35 PM

42. Governor?

The Bushmaster in question was semi auto, and I have heard no reports it was converted.
I am all for a legitimate discussion of solving our violence epidemic, but that would involve people coming to the table, educated and knowledgeable on multiple disciplines, Mental Health, Constitutional, and at least a basic idea of the mechanics and multiple uses of civilian firearms. Less agenda, blaming and screeching and far more thoughtful discourse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SQUEE (Reply #42)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:18 PM

45. Yes, a governor. We do it with cars all the time.

 

Governor (device)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A governor, or speed limiter, is a device used to measure and regulate the speed of a machine, such as an engine. A classic example is the centrifugal governor, also known as the Watt or fly-ball governor, which uses weights mounted on spring-loaded arms to determine how fast a shaft is spinning, and then uses proportional control to regulate the shaft speed.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governor_(device)

If a properly designed auto that you drive down the street can have a governor, why not a semi-auto?

It simply a question of properly designing products intended for civilian use.

We're talking about a defective product here. A consumer product that is extremely unsafe due to a poorly thought out and negligent design.

That should create clear liability, should anybody be injured or killed as a result of this rather obvious design defect.

Auto manufacturers have been designing and manufacturing their products with governors for years.

Why have gun manufacturers been so negligent?

Why did so many bullets come out of that AR-15 Bushmaster so fast?

Why did the AR-15 accept multiple 30-round Classroom Clips in such a short period of time?

Did the gun not know what was happening?

Was the gun not aware of what was transpiring in that classroom?

Were there no sensors?

Why is it that my car is self aware enough to notify me when maintenance is needed, and this gun is is too stupid to recognize that there may be a massacre going on?

In 2012, such stupidity on the part of a dangerous consumer product is a design flaw.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #45)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 05:40 PM

47. Considering your name...

you should realize that an automobile and a firearm are not even remotely functionally equivalent.
Odd we are told that cars are not the same as guns when death rates from auto accidents are mentioned, yet you want to somehow use them in your inelegant analogies.
Classroom clips.. really? so every US soldier and many LEO in America are using classroom clips...
And your car is not self aware.. but I am sure you knew that. Abelard is not amused.

... Rate of fire, volume of fire.. also seemed to have slipped your grasp as well

Although my Steampunk Mosin would look snazzy with a whirlygig...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SQUEE (Reply #47)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:47 PM

51. Autos, Semi-autos, and Jarts are all different consumer products.

 

So what?

Why should only Semi-autos be immune from product liability?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #51)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 07:22 PM

54. where have I said this?

I am just questioning your logical fallacies.
I actually believe aside from a protection against agenda based frivolous lawsuits specifically meant to drive them out of business, they should be beholden to all the consumer protection laws and statutes.. oh, wait.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SQUEE (Reply #54)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 07:43 PM

58. I'm a Logician by profession, so if I've made a logical error...

 

...I'd be really interested in knowing just what it was.

As a consumer product, it seems pretty obvious to me that the AR-15 Bushmaster has design flaws.

And that those design flaws led quite directly to the deaths of 20 children and 6 adults in Sandy Hook.

As for "Classroom Clips", I agree. Classroom sizes are indeed much larger than 30 these days (typically about 180 per class for me), but still, one of those clips (oops...should have said "magazines") could still do quite a bit of damage in any of my classes, especially since an individual bullet is quite capable of passing through multiple people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #58)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:31 PM

67. Please point out the design defects.

> As a consumer product, it seems pretty obvious to me that the AR-15 Bushmaster has design flaws.

From all the news reports, the gun seem to function exactly as designed and as expected. With each pull of the trigger a single bullet was fired, the empty shell was ejected, a new round was loaded into the chamber, and everything stopped. Have you heard reports to the contrary?

Everyone seems to agree that the user should not have had access to the gun.
Everyone seems to agree that the user's choice of targets was not acceptable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #67)


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #67)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 12:09 AM

74. The governor either malfunctioned or was nonexistant, due to a design flaw.

 

Pointing out that it performed as designed, when that very design was itself (quite literaly) fatally flawed, is hardly a defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #74)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 01:23 AM

81. The "governor" worked just fine.

Only one bullet was fired per trigger pull.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #81)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 01:37 AM

82. The governor didn't work just fine if it failed to detect that the trigger pulls were...

 

...were coming too quickly in succession.

Also, it should have detected the multiple Classroom Clip swaps and refused them.

Remember, we aren't living in the stone age.

These aren't muskets and powder.

This is 2012.

We live in the computer age.

Sorry, but you seem to be excusing a design error that resulted in the murder of multiple innocent women and children.

We have the capability to design consumer products much more advanced and better operating than this.

This seems to be a case of simple incompetence in the design of consumer products, and a level of incompetence that is certainly negligent and quite probably criminal in nature.

They can't really be this stupid.

I simply don't believe it.

Nobody is this stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #82)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 01:44 AM

83. Wow.

You are purposely confusing the user's operation for a design error. You know better, but still publish the nonsense for all to see. Just, wow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #82)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 01:45 AM

84. And yet, here you are.... n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #67)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 12:20 AM

75. The governor either malfunctioned or was nonexistant, due to a design flaw.

 

Pointing out that it performed as designed, when that very design was itself (quite literaly) fatally flawed, is hardly a defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #67)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 12:23 AM

76. The governor either malfunctioned, or was nonexistent, due to a design flaw.

 

Pointing out that it performed as designed, when that very design was itself (quite literally) fatally flawed, is hardly a defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #67)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 12:24 AM

77. Not sure why my posts aren't posting to you, but I'm tired of deleting and trying again.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #45)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 05:47 PM

49. no malfunction gun functioned as designed

 

You see a semi automatic firearm fires one round every-time you pull the trigger.

For example most practice shooters can fire 2 reasonably aimed (same target) shots in a second or so.

So it would take about 30sec or less if you pulled the trigger 30 times using all 30 bullets in the magazine.


Also some food for thought. The time that it takes to change a magazine is anywhere from 3-10 sec. Depending on the skill of the shooter. Some competition shooters change mags faster than that.

Even using 10 rd. mags one could fire at a rate of about 30-40 rds a min. or more. utilizing a vest or holster that holds Mags close to you enables "combat reloads" in a fast manner.

check out youtube search for "combat reload" it is a reloading technique designed to allow you to rapidly reload your firearm while keeping your gun in the ready position. this is done with shotguns, handguns and yes rifles.

Yes i know im knew around hear but have lurked since pre 2008. I am a gun owner (responsible all my guns are safe kept except my carry gun which is on me or in a locked quick access safe (car, office, home night stand) We also have a home defense shot gun that is mounted to a special mount at home with a quick access combination or fingerprint.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to generalhh (Reply #49)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 06:39 PM

50. Is a defective design better than a malfunction when it comes to liability?

 

Also some food for thought. The time that it takes to change a magazine is anywhere from 3-10 sec. Depending on the skill of the shooter. Some competition shooters change mags faster than that.


That sounds like a defective design to me.

How long it takes to change Classroom Clips depends on the design of the consumer product.

From what you are saying here, the product was clearly defective in its design.

Look, companies design consumer products all the time, whether we are talking about cars, AR-15 Bushmasters, or Jarts.

Companies are responsible for their consumer product design decisions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #50)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:18 PM

63. No its purpose is to Kill

 

No its purpose is to Kill
Killing people is totally legal in certain situations. The maker of the killing tool is not responsible for its use. The user is and is liable.

The vast majority of these weapons will never be used outside of target practice. Im not following how you say the manufactures are liable.

The product they make is designed for legal killing. Use of it in illegal way or negligent way is not the fault of the manufacture.

For product defects that cause injury their is liability . Remmington is still involved in lawsuits dealing with their model 700 bolt gun safty system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to generalhh (Reply #63)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 01:11 AM

80. I'm opposed to killing school children. (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #29)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:37 PM

70. Are we supposed to be impressed by your ignorance?

 

Or by the fact that you've decided to infect DU with the same personal problems you loosed on Daily Kos?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PavePusher (Reply #70)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 12:27 AM

78. Are you stalking me? (nt)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #78)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 01:46 AM

85. You are posting on a public forum, in a topic I frequent.

 

I'm not stalking you, I'm tripping over you.

Get over yourself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #6)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 07:54 PM

59. When a mass murderer's gun jams...

...s/he can sue the manufacturer. America is truly exceptional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sanatanadharma (Reply #59)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:23 PM

64. I, uh...hm. That's interesting.

I guess the criminal side of things ought to be separate from the civil side of things, but that would be a very interesting case. I'll have to look at the warranty agreement and see if they disclaim responsibility if your gun malfunctions during misuse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glaug-Eldare (Reply #64)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:28 PM

65. I would love to be on that jury

the hard part would to keep from snickering at the plaintiff's opening argument.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #65)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:43 PM

71. I wonder exactly how this would work.

I suppose the plaintiff would have to have been denied warranty service after the malfunction?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sanatanadharma (Reply #59)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:56 PM

72. That's not it at all - How do you people jump to this illogic.

You sue a manufacturer if there is a malfunction that causes something that you can sue for.

Meaning if the gun causes a round to blow back into your face and you lose an eye
you can sue the manufacturer.

Honestly, you people sound like the Teabaggers when they argue against pro-choice.

Listen to yourselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #72)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 12:31 AM

79. Or if they fail to honor a warranty agreement, I imagine.

That's about the only way I can see this happening, even in theory. Even then, it would be a remarkable feat to be able to send a murder weapon in for repair in the first place.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sanatanadharma (Reply #59)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 02:35 AM

87. Jams are actually routine events

 

Depending on design and level of maintenance, failures may be common or rare. A round will not go off after the primer is hit, or the firing pin will fail to hit the primer (a failure to fire, FTF). Or the spent casing will not be extracted, or will be partially ejected, but the bolt returns home before it is all the way out, trapping it in the way (a failure to eject, FTE). I don't think anybody has ever sued for a jam - it is entirely normal for a firearm to malfunction every once in a while. If a well-maintained firearm malfunctions very often, say 1/100 or more, then it should be repaired as part of warranty. Some more rare types of failures are actually dangerous - when a firing pin becomes stuck, resulting in an uncontrollable burst of automatic fire (a slam fire). Or a round may fire normally, but a fault in the metalwork cracks, splitting under the force of the gasses (a 'kaboom' or kb!). These types of malfunction, if due to manufacturer defect, are reasonable claims of liability, as they are dangerous to the user. Other malfunctions are just things to be fixed by regular maintenance or factory reservice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:01 AM

2. No, we are not going to let you sue the gun industry into bankruptcy.

The gun makers ARE responsible for defective products, but are not responsible to the end user's misuse.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:13 AM

5. Yes we are

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:22 AM

7. How about trying to help find a solution to the problem instead of just trying to irritate people?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:29 AM

9. Gun nuts irritate me with their GOP/NRA/ALEC agenda

They celebrate GOP/NRA/ALEC "victories" on concealed carry and guns-everywhere-all-the-time.

They celebrate stand-your-ground and castle law legalized murder.

They defend the right to use weapons of mass killing.

Funny how that works.

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:51 AM

18. Now you know how the Teabaggers feel when we argue for pro-choice.

Actually, after the FL killing of Travon Martin I think the stand your ground thing is too
messy to have on the books.

but

The Castle Law I do believe is of value in protecting one's home.

If you use the "you may shoot one of your friends or neighbors" argument - I will say this -
All my friends know I own guns and would never enter my home without letting me know
they were coming first - They know..

I defend the right to go target shooting with a firearm of my choice
I have done nothing wrong
I have broken no laws
I shoot paper targets and bowling pins and steel targets.

I case you weren't aware - there is a "Zen" to shooting.
You could read "Zen and the Art of Archery"

Do I think that we have a problem with mentally unstable people misusing firearms that needs to
be dealt with - YES

So, let's find a solution for the problem

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #18)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:00 AM

21. Well then - you have nothing to fear from repealing the gun liability law

others?

Not so much

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to socialindependocrat (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:31 AM

10. That would eliminate the Yup factor

Jpak and Dave Hester are birds of a feather

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #10)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:33 AM

11. Pray tell - who is Dave Hester?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #11)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:53 AM

19. Yuuuuuuuuuuuup!!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #10)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:42 AM

14. Ole dave hester is also a big gun hater.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:49 AM

16. I don't hate guns

Just gun nuts and their douchebag agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #16)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:04 AM

23. There you go! We both have a problem with gun nuts!

You see. The more we communicate - the closer we become!

Yup!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #16)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:19 AM

26. Good...goooood.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #16)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:44 PM

66. then why don't you go find some and give 'em hell. yup!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:41 AM

13. They're not designed to kill.

Firearms are designed for three reasons: Save lives, target shoot, hunt.

Any firearm used to kill is being misused.

Unsafe firearms are recalled every year for modification, manufactures care very much about their customers. They also wouldn't design a device made to harm a customer.

Humans on the other hand never get recalled or modified to make them safe for society.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #13)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:50 AM

17. If they are derived from military weapons - they most certainly are....

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:08 AM

24. I have to agree - They are designed for militray use

and home safety does include the potential of killing the intruder
in order to save you and family from harm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:43 AM

32. All guns are derived from military weapons. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #32)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:26 PM

41. and they should be held accountable in court

yup

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #13)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 02:48 AM

88. Well, ethical intent is not neccessarily part of mechanical design.

 

A firearm is designed to push a small dense object at high speed by use of an explosive chemical. This can kill. Or it can knock over steel targets. Or punch a hole in paper. But the base design intent is to move a bullet. If the user intends to push their bullets into tanks, they probably want a large bullet, perhaps filled with a shaped charge. If the user intends to push their bullets into soldiers of a modern conventional military, they probably want a bullet which has a core made of material which will not fracture or deform when it hits a ceramic plate or a number of layers of kevlar cloth. But no matter the end use, all firearms are simply machines used to move bullets. A task which is not intrinsically good or evil. Ethics comes in when the bullet runs into another object.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 11:33 AM

27. If a car careens out of control because of a poorly designed or missing governor, ...

 

...and that defective automobile injures or kills somebody, surely the manufacturer of the car has some liability.

From everything I've read about the Sandy Hook massacre, the AR-15 Bushmaster either had a malfunctioning governor, or the governor was totally missing in the design of this civilian product.

Those bullets came out way too fast, and there were way too many, indicating an obvious malfunction or design flaw of the AR-15 Bushmaster.

I can't believe that such clear and criminal neglect does not create some liability on the part of the manufacturer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #27)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:15 PM

38. so, if some one commits a mass murder with a baseball bat

then the family should be able to sue Louiville or Wilson?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #38)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 12:24 PM

40. Fuck yeah

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Reply #40)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 02:55 AM

90. at least

you are consistent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #27)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 05:46 PM

48. Most likly no malfunction

 

You see a semi automatic firearm fires one round every-time you pull the trigger.

For example most practice shooters can fire 2 reasonably aimed (same target) shots in a second or so.

So it would take about 30sec or less if you pulled the trigger 30 times using all 30 bullets in the magazine.


Also some food for thought. The time that it takes to change a magazine is anywhere from 3-10 sec. Depending on the skill of the shooter. Some competition shooters change mags faster than that.

Even using 10 rd. mags one could fire at a rate of about 30-40 rds a min. or more. utilizing a vest or holster that holds Mags close to you enables "combat reloads" in a fast manner.

check out youtube search for "combat reload" it is a reloading technique designed to allow you to rapidly reload your firearm while keeping your gun in the ready position. this is done with shotguns, handguns and yes rifles.

Yes i know im knew around hear but have lurked since pre 2008. I am a gun owner (responsible all my guns are safe kept except my carry gun which is on me or in a locked quick access safe (car, office, home night stand) We also have a home defense shot gun that is mounted to a special mount at home with a quick access combination or fingerprint.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to generalhh (Reply #48)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 01:29 PM

97. An itchy trigger finger is a poor substitute for a properly functioning mechanical governor.

 

"You see a semi automatic firearm fires one round every-time you pull the trigger"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ehrenfeucht games (Reply #27)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 02:21 AM

86. What's your source for this information?

 

Last edited Sat Dec 22, 2012, 03:18 AM - Edit history (2)

I have no idea what you're talking about with a 'governor'. An automobile may have a governor to limit speed, but there is no comparable mechanism on a firearm. A firearm's rate of fire is a function of its mechanical design - how quickly the gasses from the round push back the bolt to eject the spent casing and chamber a new round. I do not think the rifle was an automatic. As far as I know it was a fairly standard semi-automatic Bushmaster AR-15. I have no cause to believe that it was not in working order from the factory. I would agree with suing a manufacturer for making a faulty product, but suing a manufacturer for misuse by a thief is a different matter. Could you imagine suing General Motors because a thief stole your car and crashed it into someone? Or suing a pharmaceuticals company because a prescription holder resold their pills and the buyer overdosed? It's no fault of the manufacturer that the gun was stolen and used in commission of a crime, their responsibility ends after they sell the product (so long as the product was not faulty). EDIT: Here is an example of a semi-automatic rifle - a round is fired, the spent casing ejected, the bolt is returned home by a spring, carrying a new round into the chamber with it, but the gun stops firing (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=GEJUoNfR6Wk#t=28s). Here is an example of an automatic rifle - instead of stopping after firing one round, the hammer drops again after the bolt returns home, firing another round (#t=0s). The Bushmaster AR-15 is a semi-automatic, it only fires as fast as the user pulls the trigger. So the closest thing to a governor is the shooter's finger.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hudjes (Reply #86)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 01:26 PM

96. A clear example of willful negligence in the design of this consumer product.

 

"An automobile may have a governor to limit speed, but there is no comparable mechanism on a firearm."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 07:37 PM

55. Oo, oo, oo, can I sue US Steel and Alcoa, too?

And Komet? And Haas? And Exxon-Mobile's plastics division? And UPS and FedEx?

Can I? Can I? Can I?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to krispos42 (Reply #55)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 09:10 PM

62. sure you can, kid. this is America, you can sue anybody. will you win? that is the question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 08:28 PM

60. Considering that the House is controlled by Republicans ...

your chances of accomplishing that are slim to none.

Even if it did pass the Supreme Court would most likely overthrow it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpak (Original post)

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 10:57 PM

69. All the fear & gibbering in this thread tells you WHICH tactic is likely to be most effective

short-term in shutting down the NRA and the "RKBA" industry: litigation.

In the long term, it's not going to matter because the country will be solidly Blue in a generation, and there simply won't be any such thing as an AR-15 or any other assault rifle on the civilian market - or in civilian hands, either, despite what our "law abiding gun owners" say about not giving them up unless the government comes and takes them. That ship has sailed, and not one great-grandchild of any "pro gun progressive" posting in this very thread will be able to walk into a Gump's Sporting Goods and purchase anything similar to such weaponry - it will be outlawed for all but the military and L.E., and the "law abiding" among our gun owners will have turned theirs in, and the not-so law abiding among our gun owners who REFUSE to turn their assault rifles in...will be in a Federal prison, where they belong.

But in the short term, massive, targeted litigation against the gun industry and their enablers is the way to go. Drive the cost of that assault rifle to half a million dollars, and there will be no more manufacturer of that weapon. Nationalization of the domestic gun industry coupled with a sky-high import tariff - say, %5,000 of MSRP value - on overseas products is also something that absolutely should be on the table.

One way or the other, the day of the NRA and it's lackeys is drawing to a close: forty years from now people will laugh with puzzled, contemptuous wonder about such things as the "RKBA" movement, just like they laugh with just contempt now about the White Citizen's Councils of the segregated South.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to apocalypsehow (Reply #69)

Sat Dec 22, 2012, 02:54 AM

89. Why do gun owners belong in federal prison?

 

Owning a gun is not intrinsically harmful. Kidnapping a person and locking them in a small room is intrinsically harmful. It looks like you intend to do harm to people who have not done harm. I would call that unjust. For what reason should gun owners be jailed, if they do not misuse their guns to harm another person?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hudjes (Reply #89)

Sun Dec 23, 2012, 02:09 AM

94. You are being too logical - I hope they are gentle with you NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread