Lets disregard this absurd idea and look at one more realistic. The wife of Paul whats his name, the cat that made those hideous fast and furious movies is suing Porsche because his seat belt failed. Never mind that he burned to death ( I think) never mind that he was going some absurd speed. Her case is predicated on the fact that they made the car and made it able to go as fast as it did then they should have made the seat belts strong enough to do their job. I'm not sure where the case is now but I heard one of the talking heads say that she will win, meaning Porsche will settle.
That's what I'm saying. Why should you be able to do that, sue DeWalt because I drilled a hole in my finger but not S&M? I'm saying neither should be able to be sued under frivolous circumstances. Not just 1 or the other.
As it stands now there is no law protection gun manufacturers, Dewalt, Walmart, Starbuck or anybody else from frivolous lawsuits. Because they are frivolous, judges will dismiss the cases and throw them out of court whenever somebody does file a silly lawsuit without merit. Happens all the time. What the gun grabbers who now include Bernie want is for there to be a law specifically holding gun manufacturers responsible for the misuse of a gun that they did not even directly sell to the end user. What kind of car do you drive? Let's say it's a Ford. If the Ford you bought not from Ford Motor Company but from a car dealer or an individual has a defect that causes you injury you can sue Ford Motor Company and likely collect damages that were caused by the defective car or part, such as if the air bag fails to deploy during an accident. But if you are walking across the street and somebody driving a Ford hits you and causes injury FoMoCo is not responsible. The driver is. Unless the driver hit you because of the failure of a defective part. But lets say the driver of the Ford was just drunk or negligent. You still have the right to sue Ford if you want to, just as you have the right to sue Smith & Wesson if somebody shoots you with a gun made by Smith & Wesson. You have the right to file a lawsuit for almost any reason. You can sue your neighbor because his dog is ugly if you want to. But the lack of a specific law protecting Ford, S&W or your neighbor doesn't mean that any of them are liable or in any way responsible for your grievance. What Bernie now wants to do along with Hildecunt and the other gun grabbers is to pass laws specifically holding the manufacturers of firearms responsible for someone completely out of their control misusing a firearm made by whichever company manufactured it. There is no special protection for the manufacturers of anything, tools, guns, Coca Cola, knives, baseball bats. Louisville Slugger has no specific legal protection from being sued because somebody hit you with a bat they made. They, like the manufacturers of guns, have the common sense protection that the burden of proof for damages caused by the misuse of their products falls specifically to the litigant. If you don't understand by now I'm going to hit you with my Louisville Slugger bat. I don't have enough money for you to collect a large amount from. Louisville Slugger does. Their protection under the law for the misuse of one of their products is defacto, not specific.
You guys are wasting your time, I understand your premise. I'm trying to say that if gun companies are protected all companies should be. It's that simple.
They essentially are, from "frivolous" law suits. Attorneys can get slapped with sanctions for bringing those forth.
You are failing to grasp the gist of it. If you drill a hole through your finger with a Dewalt drill you CAN sue Dewalt. You won't win but you can sue. As it stands now if somebody shoots you with a Smith & Wesson you CAN sue Smith &Wesson. Same as with Dewalt you won't have a ghost of a chance of winning. That's as it should be. Neither Dewalt or S&W have acted negligently in the manufacture of their products. Each does now have equal protection under the law from being held legally responsible for something out of their control. That's what the libs want to change. They don't want Dewalt held responsible for the misuse of their product but they do want to make gun manufacturers legally responsible for the misuse of theirs. Just because you sue some company or person doesn't mean you have a legitimate case but you still have the right to sue. Suing does not mean you have right on your side. It just means you have the right to file suit. Even though you live in Louisiana you have the legal right to sue a marijuana grower in Colorado for not selling his weed to you in Louisiana, even though to do so would violate Louisiana and federal law. You won't win but you have the right to litigate.
