Gun Makers: You are be being sued - Page 2

All other manufacturers (not a firearm or military weapon) already can be sued. Example being, lawsuits against auto makers already are the reason our cars have seat belts, air bags and a myriad or other new tech safety features. Not sure what logic classes missed that. Must have skipped out on a few.

Talking about cars being used to commit mass murders...happens too often. Not talking/about malfunction. If a gun blows up in a user's hand, that is malfunction and if it is the fault of manufacturer and not because of misuse, then the maker should be sued. But suing because a lunatic commits murder with the gun, that is like a driver suing automaker because the driver got drunk and crashed it into a group of people, killing and maiming them like the afluenza jerk did. That isn't the manufacturer's fault, it's the user's fault just like it's the user's fault for deliberately pulling the trigger.

Hellery's ulterior motive for wanting gun manufacturers to be sued is to shut down gun manufacturing in this country....she probly has a deal with ch-in-a to import their crappy guns and needs to be rid of the competition.

This country is on a downward spiral so it doesn't matter what happens....ya'l are going t be speaking farsi in the not too far future anyway. Even the citadel is bowing to the sharia law.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seat_belt_legislation_in_the_United_State

 

Seatbelts didn't come about because of automakers being sued.

"Most seat belt legislation in the United States is left to the states. However, the first seat belt law was a federal law, Title 49 of the United States Code, Chapter 301, Motor Vehicle Safety Standard, which took effect on January 1, 1968, that required all vehicles (except buses) to be fitted with seat belts in all designated seating positions.[1] This law has since been modified to require three-point seat belts in outboard seating positions, and finally three-point seat belts in all seating positions.[2] Initially, seat belt use was not compulsory. New York was the first state to pass a law which required vehicle occupants to wear seat belts, a law that came into effect on December 1, 1984."

It is the fear of being sued, that prompts self regulation. The auto manufacturers certainly are sued all the time regarding accidents with defective vehicles. If you find an error of minutiae I have made, good for you. The meat of the matter remains.

 

Fear of being sued will force gun makers to make the safety procedures they know exist, such as fingerprint recognition triggers common place because of such laws.

Talking about MURDER here, not malfunctioning product. Gun manufacturers have been sued already, too, for MALFUNCTION of product, not because an idiot DELIBERATELY uses something, anything, to murder.
Stay focused, bee.

 

Guns already have safety features, it's called a 'safety'. Fingerprint recognition is as unrealistic and impractical as self-driving cars. If people took responsibility for their action and became responsible owners of guns and cars and knives, instead of being so stupid they need laws to legislate responsible ownership/commonscense of potentially dangerous things, then all I can say is that for all those stupid people; it's a good thing that plastic packaging bags are labeled with suffocation warning .

Joan, your point was sue them all. Safety issues are resolved because there are results of death because of negligence. Marketing negligence resulted in deaths, described as murders and is the issue for the courts, here. The key issue is negligence that promotes death as murder. And now the courts will hash this out, with this ruling. The question is, does it matter if the weapon of which death is the sole purpose to be manufactured-- if it has a responsibility to be marketed properly as a military weapon and should not be promoted to the civilian arena.

There is no other purpose for the Bushmaster. Maybe you might use it to break a window with one day, too, but that is not like a car that we buy to use as transport, and then unfortunately decide therein it exists the opportunity to be involved in an act of manslaughter, or worse.

Bee, you are advocating outlawing manufacture of guns in the USA because of stupid, irresponsible crazy people....Hillery is your candidate.

BTW, wasn't pres bush the one who lifted the ban on assault weapons? Maybe he should be sued instead of the manufacturer.

Joan,
BTW...How is it going out there in the twilight zone?