Gun Control & RKBA

MindMover

(5,016 posts)

44. This is not about current defective product laws ...

Reply to ProgressiveProfessor (Reply #32)

Tue Jan 29, 2013, 02:39 PM

Jan 2013

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

60 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If automobile, tobacco, pharmaceutical and other companies .. [View all] MindMover Jan 2013 OP

Gun manufacturers... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #1

I am sure that our Founding Fathers never envisioned the days when we would turn our Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2013 #2

Them Founders... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #5

Can you cite a case where this was successfully accomplished? oldhippie Jan 2013 #3

AFAIK... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #4

Of course they do ... however, knowing that you sell products that kill and maim MindMover Jan 2013 #18

I think you should go for it. discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2013 #21

You can sue a manufacturer ... holdencaufield Jan 2013 #6

O.K. I'll correct you ... spin Jan 2013 #9

Ask the tobacco companies about your theory ... MindMover Jan 2013 #10

Prosecuted if the product can be demonstrated to be misrepresented or defective PuffedMica Jan 2013 #7

You left out tobacco company products ... wonder why .? MindMover Jan 2013 #8

Tobacco companies advertised their products as safe. ... spin Jan 2013 #11

There once was a man called Nader ... MindMover Jan 2013 #14

I have no major problem with "trigger safety technology" as long as it is reliable. ... spin Jan 2013 #29

Of course smart gun technology is more expensive ... MindMover Jan 2013 #35

But adding several hundred dollars to the cost of a firearm might put it out of the reach ... spin Jan 2013 #40

because the product was used correctly and it was misrepresented. Tuesday Afternoon Jan 2013 #12

There was a reason the tobacco lawsuits were sucessful. Travis_0004 Jan 2013 #13

But if the person had been drinking at a bar, you could have sued the bar .. MindMover Jan 2013 #15

Dram shop law DonP Jan 2013 #16

Its getting harder to steal that new Chevy these days .... MindMover Jan 2013 #19

And I think thats a law that can be abused Travis_0004 Jan 2013 #20

I believe that gun manufacturers are responsible for manufacturing there product MindMover Jan 2013 #23

Well, then do something about it. DonP Jan 2013 #24

And I am sure you buckle up everytime you get in your car ... MindMover Jan 2013 #25

but it is gejohnston Jan 2013 #26

The problem with "smart" guns iiibbb Jan 2013 #31

As a matter of fact I do DonP Jan 2013 #28

what safety features are you refering to? iiibbb Jan 2013 #30

There are many ... here is a start .. but of course the gun manufacturers said no ... MindMover Jan 2013 #34

Did you read passed the US manufactures? gejohnston Jan 2013 #36

There are many smart gun technologies that exist ... your wording acceptable is the definition MindMover Jan 2013 #37

under German law, it doesn't exist to an acceptable level where it works gejohnston Jan 2013 #38

Perfection is really the definition ... which sounds more German than American ... MindMover Jan 2013 #39

no it won't gejohnston Jan 2013 #41

When I first learned about firearms, I might have endorsed them iiibbb Jan 2013 #43

Safe for who? ManiacJoe Jan 2013 #33

Tobacco? PuffedMica Jan 2013 #42

If they designed an unsafe or defective product maybe. ileus Jan 2013 #17

If a gun maker makes a shoddy gun, then they can be sued. krispos42 Jan 2013 #22

Has an automobile company been sued for the act of someone deranged? iiibbb Jan 2013 #27

Not under current law ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2013 #32

This is not about current defective product laws ... MindMover Jan 2013 #44

Then unless you are planning to overturn black letter with supporting precedent, you are wasting ProgressiveProfessor Jan 2013 #47

I will not divulge any of our already mounting details other than to refer you to MindMover Jan 2013 #48

Just one thing gejohnston Jan 2013 #49

Why oh why would you refute this book when you could so easily have MindMover Jan 2013 #50

one has nothing to do with the other gejohnston Jan 2013 #54

A semantically inclined person .. counter it is ... MindMover Jan 2013 #56

If you were for real iiibbb Jan 2013 #51

If this is telegraphing then on with it ... MindMover Jan 2013 #55

There has to be an element of fraud kudzu22 Jan 2013 #45

Automobile, pharmaceutical and others did not commit fraud ... MindMover Jan 2013 #46

or unreasonably dangerous Deep13 Jan 2013 #53

Not under current law, and there is a distinction... Deep13 Jan 2013 #52

Oh let me count the ways ... enough, I could not count that high .. examples are better .. MindMover Jan 2013 #57

Did they all know guns are deadly weapons? Deep13 Jan 2013 #58

Yeah, go with that one. gejohnston Jan 2013 #59

Of course they cannot be held liable for negligence or the stupidity of an end user ... MindMover Jan 2013 #60