How would you respond: Big Tobacco was sued, why not sue gunmakers?

How would you respond: Big Tobacco was sued, why not sue gunmakers?

This is a discussion on How would you respond: Big Tobacco was sued, why not sue gunmakers? within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; It's a question I've seen posed on Facebook. I'm curious how you'd respond. It's such a ludicrous notion, I'd have a hard time picking a ...

Results 1 to 13 of 13
Like Tree13Likes
  • 2 Post By Doodle
  • 2 Post By wsquared
  • 2 Post By msgt/ret
  • 7 Post By Hopyard

Thread: How would you respond: Big Tobacco was sued, why not sue gunmakers?

  1. #1
    Member Array skatalite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    184

    How would you respond: Big Tobacco was sued, why not sue gunmakers?

    It's a question I've seen posed on Facebook. I'm curious how you'd respond.

    It's such a ludicrous notion, I'd have a hard time picking a place to start.


  2. #2
    Ex Member Array Doodle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Tomball TX
    Posts
    948
    a short explanation followed by the face book unfriend button.
    wmhawth and msgt/ret like this.

  3. #3
    Member Array wsquared's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    358
    Because it's already been tried, and has failed miserably.
    Bad Bob and msgt/ret like this.

  4. #4
    VIP Member
    Array msgt/ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    7,362
    Quote Originally Posted by wsquared View Post
    Because it's already been tried, and has failed miserably.
    I think the Lawful Trade Act prohibits it now.
    skatalite and archer51 like this.
    When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
    "Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."

  5. #5
    Member Array wsquared's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    358
    Quote Originally Posted by msgt/ret View Post
    I think the Lawful Trade Act prohibits it now.
    I believe you're right....but I couldn't think of the name of the act, and wasn't 100% sure of my facts so I refrained from opening my mouth. I know that's not how the interwebs are supposed to work, but I'll try to do better in the future.

  6. #6
    Member Array skatalite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    184
    Quote Originally Posted by msgt/ret View Post
    I think the Lawful Trade Act prohibits it now.
    That was my very first thought.

  7. #7
    VIP Member
    Array msgt/ret's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    7,362
    Quote Originally Posted by wsquared View Post
    I believe you're right....but I couldn't think of the name of the act, and wasn't 100% sure of my facts so I refrained from opening my mouth. I know that's not how the interwebs are supposed to work, but I'll try to do better in the future.
    I was just a bit off in the name, the correct name is "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act".

    Full Text of S. 397 (109th): Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act - GovTrack.us
    When you have to shoot, shoot. Don't talk.
    "Don't forget, incoming fire has the right of way."

  8. #8
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,662
    There is no such thing as a safe use of tobacco. It should be your right to put it into your body if
    you want to poison yourself, but that is your business. We as a society would prefer that you don't
    harm yourself, but we believe you have a right to do so as part of the basic human freedom we all believe in.
    (I'd use the same reasoning with most prescription drugs and non-prescription drugs of abuse.)

    Guns unlike tobacco* can be used safely. They are used safely every
    day for sport. They are used safely everyday by licensed concealed carriers. They are used safely every day by law enforcement officials and by the military. They are, unlike tobacco, an inherently safe product. There is no such
    thing as a gun accidentally firing, not anymore so than there is such a thing as an auto accident. We don't hold the
    automaker responsible for the idiot who drives his new sports car at 110 mph; we hold the idiot responsible for whatever
    carnage s/he causes.

    There is nothing on earth that can't be abused in some fashion, or misused in some fashion.
    The manufacturer of a gun is no more responsible for what is done with
    it by a criminal than the manufacturer of a frying pan is responsible for what an angry spouse might do with it, or what
    a criminal might do with a baseball bat. The bat, the frying pan, and the gun are all safe products, barring very rare
    and extremely unusual mechanical malfunctions.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

  9. #9
    Senior Member Array CanuckQue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Maritimes Canada
    Posts
    1,141
    I have never seen a gun manufacturer both market to children and simultaneously deny the risks of 'intended use' of their product (while engaging in deliberate changes to their product to increase its addictiveness).

    Honestly, if a gunmaker did so, and someone got hurt .... I might have some sympathy for the plaintiffs!
    Our current plan for Universal Iron Lung coverage, just sayin'.
    Wisest. Retirement. Plan. Ever.
    Good thing the March of Dimes worked. How, why?

    Alternately, for those with a tool shed, ideas, or creative loved ones to tell..


  10. #10
    VIP Member Array Sig 210's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Southwestern OK
    Posts
    2,017
    i have zero sympathy for the tobacco companies. Those companies knowingly added substances to their product in order to make it more addictive.

  11. #11
    Member Array soonershoote's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    304
    S&W M&P 9c
    Ruger LCR + P (.38)
    Kahr PM9
    Taurus M851 (.38)

  12. #12
    Distinguished Member Array GlassWolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Columbia, SC
    Posts
    1,747
    Quote Originally Posted by skatalite View Post
    It's a question I've seen posed on Facebook. I'm curious how you'd respond.

    It's such a ludicrous notion, I'd have a hard time picking a place to start.
    It's already been tried, several times.

  13. #13
    VIP Member
    Array TX expat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    3,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Hopyard View Post
    There is no such thing as a safe use of tobacco. It should be your right to put it into your body if
    you want to poison yourself, but that is your business. We as a society would prefer that you don't
    harm yourself, but we believe you have a right to do so as part of the basic human freedom we all believe in.
    (I'd use the same reasoning with most prescription drugs and non-prescription drugs of abuse.)

    Guns unlike tobacco* can be used safely. They are used safely every
    day for sport. They are used safely everyday by licensed concealed carriers. They are used safely every day by law enforcement officials and by the military. They are, unlike tobacco, an inherently safe product. There is no such
    thing as a gun accidentally firing, not anymore so than there is such a thing as an auto accident. We don't hold the
    automaker responsible for the idiot who drives his new sports car at 110 mph; we hold the idiot responsible for whatever
    carnage s/he causes.

    There is nothing on earth that can't be abused in some fashion, or misused in some fashion.
    The manufacturer of a gun is no more responsible for what is done with
    it by a criminal than the manufacturer of a frying pan is responsible for what an angry spouse might do with it, or what
    a criminal might do with a baseball bat. The bat, the frying pan, and the gun are all safe products, barring very rare
    and extremely unusual mechanical malfunctions.
    This is exactly correct. Also, it's worth remembering that for many, many years the tobacco industry denied any/all health related issues that were brought about by smoking. That's been, to the best of my knowledge, one of the cornerstones of the lawsuits against the tobacco industry. They promoted the use of a product and they intentionally misled people to believe it was not harmful to your health.
    NRA Life Member

    "I don't believe gun owners have rights." - Sarah Brady

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors