Gun Control & RKBA
Related: About this forumIt'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
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)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....
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)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.
jpak
(41,758 posts)Why are gun manufacturers different?
I know...Gun Nuts think they are "special".
"The Precious, The Precious".
yup
socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)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...
jpak
(41,758 posts)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
socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)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.
jpak
(41,758 posts)I know...
"The Precious, The Precious"
yup
socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)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.
jpak
(41,758 posts)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
socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)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..
Crunchy Frog
(26,587 posts)Why are guns different?
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)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.
jpak
(41,758 posts)Families should have a right to sue those responsible for those deaths.
Murder apology fail.
yup
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)That is the one responsible.
jpak
(41,758 posts)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
Glaug-Eldare
(1,089 posts)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. 
jpak
(41,758 posts)yup
Glaug-Eldare
(1,089 posts)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.
jpak
(41,758 posts)Let the courts decide.
yup
shadowrider
(4,941 posts)My ex-son-in-law was murdered with a bat 7 years ago. Several healthy smacks to the head made sure.
Travis_0004
(5,417 posts)Crunchy Frog
(26,587 posts)Do you people have a problem with that?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)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.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)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.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)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.
beevul
(12,194 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)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.
beevul
(12,194 posts)
sir pball
(4,743 posts)Least I've never heard anybody trying to.
Sue the store that's selling illegally into oblivion though, 100%
jpak
(41,758 posts)they are innocent
yup
sir pball
(4,743 posts)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
krispos42
(49,445 posts)Oh, and can people who get shot in a designated gun-free zone sue you for advocating and supporting those zones?
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)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?
SQUEE
(1,315 posts)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.
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)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.
SQUEE
(1,315 posts)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...
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)So what?
Why should only Semi-autos be immune from product liability?
SQUEE
(1,315 posts)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.
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)...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.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)> 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.
Response to ManiacJoe (Reply #67)
ehrenfeucht games This message was self-deleted by its author.
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)Pointing out that it performed as designed, when that very design was itself (quite literaly) fatally flawed, is hardly a defense.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)Only one bullet was fired per trigger pull.
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)...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.
ManiacJoe
(10,136 posts)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.
PavePusher
(15,374 posts)ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)Pointing out that it performed as designed, when that very design was itself (quite literaly) fatally flawed, is hardly a defense.
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)Pointing out that it performed as designed, when that very design was itself (quite literally) fatally flawed, is hardly a defense.
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)generalhh
(20 posts)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.
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)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.
generalhh
(20 posts)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.
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)PavePusher
(15,374 posts)Or by the fact that you've decided to infect DU with the same personal problems you loosed on Daily Kos?
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)PavePusher
(15,374 posts)I'm not stalking you, I'm tripping over you.
Get over yourself.
sanatanadharma
(3,707 posts)...s/he can sue the manufacturer. America is truly exceptional. 
Glaug-Eldare
(1,089 posts)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.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)the hard part would to keep from snickering at the plaintiff's opening argument.
Glaug-Eldare
(1,089 posts)I suppose the plaintiff would have to have been denied warranty service after the malfunction?
socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)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.
Glaug-Eldare
(1,089 posts)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.
Hudjes
(10 posts)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.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)The gun makers ARE responsible for defective products, but are not responsible to the end user's misuse.
jpak
(41,758 posts)yup
socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)jpak
(41,758 posts)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
socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)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
jpak
(41,758 posts)others?
Not so much
yup
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)Jpak and Dave Hester are birds of a feather
jpak
(41,758 posts)
-..__...
(7,776 posts)
ileus
(15,396 posts)jpak
(41,758 posts)Just gun nuts and their douchebag agenda.
socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)You see. The more we communicate - the closer we become!
Yup!
Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)ileus
(15,396 posts)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.
jpak
(41,758 posts)yup
socialindependocrat
(1,372 posts)and home safety does include the potential of killing the intruder
in order to save you and family from harm.
GreenStormCloud
(12,072 posts)jpak
(41,758 posts)yup
Hudjes
(10 posts)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.
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)...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.
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)then the family should be able to sue Louiville or Wilson?
jpak
(41,758 posts)
gejohnston
(17,502 posts)you are consistent.
generalhh
(20 posts)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.
ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)"You see a semi automatic firearm fires one round every-time you pull the trigger"
Hudjes
(10 posts)Last edited Sat Dec 22, 2012, 04:18 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.ehrenfeucht games
(139 posts)"An automobile may have a governor to limit speed, but there is no comparable mechanism on a firearm."
krispos42
(49,445 posts)And Komet? And Haas? And Exxon-Mobile's plastics division? And UPS and FedEx?
Can I? Can I? Can I?
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)
spin
(17,493 posts)your chances of accomplishing that are slim to none.
Even if it did pass the Supreme Court would most likely overthrow it.
apocalypsehow
(12,751 posts)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.
Hudjes
(10 posts)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?