04-21-2003, 02:26 PM | #1 (permalink) |
Riiiiight........
|
Gun Control
Just read today in the NY Times about Congress potentially passing a bill that will make the gun industry IMMUNE to all potential lawsuits against them.
IMMUNE. I'm not sure if there's any other industry out there that causes so many deaths every day, and is IMMUNE to any possible legal action. Your thoughts on this? Any stories to tell? |
04-21-2003, 02:33 PM | #2 (permalink) |
Human
Administrator
Location: Chicago
|
I don't know the details so I can't really form a good opinion on this. But the gun industry SHOULD be immune to frivelous lawsuits from people saying that the GUN caused a death when a PERSON shot it. However, if there is a malfunction in the gun, then I see nothing wrong with a wrongful death suit in that case.
__________________
Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling |
04-21-2003, 02:36 PM | #3 (permalink) |
ClerkMan!
Location: Tulsa, Ok.
|
Actully the gun idustry does not cause any deaths. I mean not to get all "guns don't kill people" like.. really its true though. If there were no guns just as many deaths would happen. What about all the non gun violence? How many guns were used in 9/11. How many people died? I don't think they should be immune to all lawsuits (and they wont be) but if someone shoots someone with smith and wesson I don't think we should be able to sue smith and wesson. Thats just stupid. Why don't we say the liqour companys too? And we should sue the automobile industy out of buisness. Lets get real and take some damn responbiltie for our actions.
Edited later: Super method just said basically what I ment to say. If there is like a malfuction in a gun or something where it misfires alot or blow up in the face of the shooter then by all means we can sue them for that (if it is a common problem and the ignored it and... well what not but still) but I don't think we should sue them for people shooting other people
__________________
Meridae'n once played "death" at a game of chess that lasted for over two years. He finally beat death in a best 34 out of 67 match. At that time he could ask for any one thing and he could wish for the hope of all mankind... he looked death right in the eye and said ... "I would like about three fiddy" Last edited by BBtB; 04-21-2003 at 02:39 PM.. |
04-21-2003, 02:41 PM | #5 (permalink) |
Crazy
Location: Indiana
|
BBtB: So without guns and accidental shootings, kids would still just randomly die while looking in their parents bedrooms?
If guns are around, people are more likely to die. ANYONE can kill with a gun, not everyone can kill with a knife, and few people can kill with bare hands. That's simply how it is. That said, just because guns lead to increased deaths, it doesn't mean we need more gun control. But I don't think it's realistic to deny that guns increase the number of deaths and injuries in America. |
04-21-2003, 02:49 PM | #7 (permalink) | |
Riiiiight........
|
Quote:
In my country, guns are banned, shooting a gun while committing a crime will earn you a short trip to the gallows. Personally, I'll take this trade-off in my civil rights anyday. I'd rather have the freedom to walk around, safe from being shot, than have the freedom of owning a firearm. Returning to the lethality of firearms, their lethality makes it extremely easy to kill on the spur of the moment. Anger, Jealousy... you name it. Having access to lethal firepower at that moment, simply increases the probability that a simple argument or disagreement, that might otherwise have been settled with a fistfight ( which might or might not be lethal) turns into a murder. |
|
04-21-2003, 02:57 PM | #8 (permalink) |
Crazy
|
Cars kill more people than guns do- we should impose a ban on all cars ;-) - On a more serious note however, I'm not sure if banning guns would solve the problems. There is only a small number of kids who die from accidental gun discharges, and more kids die from drowning in pools or getting hit by cars. Here are the stats-
================= Accidental deaths due to: firearms - 776 drowning - 3,482 poisoning - 12,757 suffocation - 5,648 motor vehicle (all) - 41,994 motor vehicle (occupant only) - 18,649 bicycles ("pedal cyclist") - 740 bicycles ("pedal cyclist", excluding motor vehicle) - 168 ================================= Rather than imposing rules to limit guns, perhaps we should focus on a more effective criminal system- Just look at the story of the Casino security guard who was shot to death recently by a felon who was released early. However... To each their own. |
04-21-2003, 02:57 PM | #9 (permalink) | |
ClerkMan!
Location: Tulsa, Ok.
|
Quote:
Again, not to be cliche but when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns. As far as the kid rumaging through the parents room thats on the parents not on the guns. My dad has/had guns. I rarely went in his room and when I saw a gun guess what I didn't play with it. Wanna know why? Because I am not an idiot and my parents raised my to know what things are. Kids play with guns because they know what they are but have never messed with one before. A little gun knowledge and maybe even a little shooting range time wouldn't be a bad idea. That said I am defintly in favor of gun safes. As far as people can kill people with guns... Maybe. But most criminals who are regulary in gun deaths could just as easily beat someone to death with a bat. I mean you don't have to be THAT big. The fact is they don't increase the deaths and injuries. Which is to say they do. But if they were outlawed they would increase even more so. Because if guns are outlawed and I have gun I am at an advantage. Because I KNOW that this law abiding citizen does not have gun. What am I to do as a law abiding citizen if some criminal pulls a gun on me? And don't think for a second if guns are outlawed criminal death from guns will decrease. They will have just as much guns if not more. Selling guns would be another money maker for them. Again we need to focus on the problem which is the criminal and the society that makes the criminal and not one of the symptoms which is gun violence and defintly not a tool of the sympton. |
|
04-21-2003, 03:08 PM | #10 (permalink) | |
Cracking the Whip
Location: Sexymama's arms...
|
Re: Gun Control
Quote:
The proposed legistlation will simply make it so you can't sue a manufacturer that is guilty of nothing more than making a legal product. You can still sue them if they are negligent. The current situation is akin to suing Ford because your kid was killed by a drunk driver.
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate! |
|
04-21-2003, 03:26 PM | #11 (permalink) |
I'm not a blonde! I'm knot! I'm knot! I'm knot!
Location: Upper Michigan
|
At one point I worked at a clerk selling guns and ammunition. We had many police, security officers and other completely ligitimate people who came in to purchase firearms. There were women buying small guns to put in their purses for protection. Men buying handguns or rifles to put in their homes after a breakin scared the whole family. I saw young boys coming in with their Dad's to buy their first hunting rifle and then sign up for the hunter's safety class. I saw only 2 or so men come in who once the handgun check was run through the system wre turned down for purchasing a gun because of minor law infractions they had committed. The majority of crimes are NOT done by these people who would be affected most by any more laws. The guns these people bought were for healthy purposes - ie. protecting their families, providing food for their families (hunting) or simple sport. Personally I would not carry a gun for protection (I have learned other methods) because whatever weapon that you carry including pepperspray can be turned against you. If you carry a weapon for protection you MUST be prepared to use it. There was a retired policeman who use to come in just to shoot the breeze with us. Two things he said that I will never forget were 1. If you shoot a man who is robbing you make sure he isn't in the process of leaving because then you are considered the attacker (I think this is so screwed up but I can see where they'd get it) 2. If you have to shoot someone who is attacking you shoot to kill or they can sue you for their injury. I've seen that happen and it's so pathetic. Guns shouldn't be getting this bad rap - It's the criminals that buy them on the street that are the problem. Gun control? Use Both hands.
__________________
"Always learn the rules so that you can break them properly." Dalai Lama My Karma just ran over your Dogma. |
04-21-2003, 04:04 PM | #14 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Connecticut
|
Marketing always could be a problem -- like the "Joe Camel is a cartoon" argument -- but that isn't the case today
I think the best way to refine existing laws is through the Appelate and Supreme Courts. Once those judges speak, everybody basically knows what it tolerated and what isn't. Frivolous lawsuits, actually quite rare, ought to be judged frivolous or not one by one on the merits of the case by a small panel of judges -- not perfect, but at least smart.
__________________
less I say, smarter I am |
04-21-2003, 04:14 PM | #15 (permalink) | |
Cracking the Whip
Location: Sexymama's arms...
|
Quote:
It is not the Judical's duty to 'refine' laws. Ultimately, they are there to apply them and to decide if they are constitutional. Second, frivolous lawsuits are NOT rare against the gun industry. The Violence Policy Center (formerly Handgun Control Inc.) and the Brady Center have been bankrolling several with the NAACP with the stated purpose of driving gun manufacturers out of business, since they can't seem to get their agendas passed legally. I'll look up some references for you if you like, but it will have to be Wednesday. (->back to coding...)
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate! |
|
04-21-2003, 04:18 PM | #16 (permalink) |
ClerkMan!
Location: Tulsa, Ok.
|
And if you are serious about wanting to stop gun violence then you need to change more then just gun laws. Namely we need to change drug laws. But that is a whole differn't thread
__________________
Meridae'n once played "death" at a game of chess that lasted for over two years. He finally beat death in a best 34 out of 67 match. At that time he could ask for any one thing and he could wish for the hope of all mankind... he looked death right in the eye and said ... "I would like about three fiddy" |
04-21-2003, 05:33 PM | #18 (permalink) | |
I aim to misbehave!
Location: SW Oklahoma
|
Re: Re: Gun Control
Quote:
__________________
Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American G. I. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom |
|
04-21-2003, 06:22 PM | #20 (permalink) |
ClerkMan!
Location: Tulsa, Ok.
|
The only stupid dangerous things are men. (and by "men" I mean all humans)
__________________
Meridae'n once played "death" at a game of chess that lasted for over two years. He finally beat death in a best 34 out of 67 match. At that time he could ask for any one thing and he could wish for the hope of all mankind... he looked death right in the eye and said ... "I would like about three fiddy" |
04-21-2003, 07:45 PM | #21 (permalink) | |
Cracking the Whip
Location: Sexymama's arms...
|
Quote:
Molon Labe
__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate! |
|
04-21-2003, 07:56 PM | #22 (permalink) | |
Upright
|
Quote:
What a wonderful world that'll be. Point is, you don't need guns, but they're fun to shoot. You don't need cars, but they're fun to drive. etc etc etc OK, so there is no point.
__________________
bleh |
|
04-21-2003, 07:59 PM | #23 (permalink) |
another passenger
Location: Youngstown, Ohio
|
guns are as dangerous as the people who carry them. Although I havent taken jobs as an armed guard just because if you have the gun, then you do face the possiblity of having to use it
__________________
Never try to teach a pig to whistle it wastes your time, and annoys the pig..... |
04-21-2003, 10:04 PM | #24 (permalink) | |
ClerkMan!
Location: Tulsa, Ok.
|
Quote:
|
|
04-21-2003, 10:19 PM | #26 (permalink) |
Psycho
Location: lost
|
This is a bit off topic, but I'm curious... JohnS72 posted earlier how many people are killed by accidental deaths by gun discharges. What I want to know is how many people have actually stopped a robbery or assault because they had a gun. On one level I understand the desire to protect one's family, but then I wonder whether it is more likely for someone to be accidentally hurt by the gun than it is for it to be used for protection. I suspect there aren't any really good statistics for this, but its just what I tend to ponder when this issue comes up.
__________________
I'd rather be climbing... I approach college much like a recovering alcoholic--one day at a time... |
04-22-2003, 01:08 AM | #27 (permalink) |
Insane
Location: Arizona
|
Since they can't control the guns why not control the ammo.
__________________
"The radio business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." |
04-22-2003, 01:48 AM | #28 (permalink) | |
Crazy
Location: blah
|
Quote:
-- Heinrich Himmler At the risk of sounding like a militia type, one of the original intents of the founding fathers giving us the right to bear arms was to protect ourselves from the government itself. If we give up all of our guns, we have no recourse against an out-of-control government. I know it may sound silly, but an armed populace is another part of the checks and balances in American democracy. Do I think that there is a need for the guns now? Other than protecting the home (or yourself on the street if your state has a concealed carry law) and hunting, no. But I am not willing to give up my right to own firearms, simply because they are not necessary at this time. You may now proceed call me paranoid and crazy, but if the government ever flips out and goes insane, or WWIII breaks out and there's a massive land war in North America, you know which basement you can take refuge in. That's right, the dead guy upstairs holding the deer rifle with M16 rounds in him. But at least I went down fighting, choosing not to be conquered. |
|
04-22-2003, 04:31 AM | #30 (permalink) | |
Right Now
Location: Home
|
Quote:
|
|
04-22-2003, 06:47 AM | #31 (permalink) |
Invisible
Location: tentative, at best
|
Guns don't kill people - bullets do.
__________________
If you want to avoid 95% of internet spelling errors: "If your ridiculous pants are too loose, you're definitely going to lose them. Tell your two loser friends over there that they're going to lose theirs, too." It won't hurt your fashion sense, either. |
04-22-2003, 08:34 AM | #32 (permalink) |
I aim to misbehave!
Location: SW Oklahoma
|
Anyone ever notice that this thread always has the same arguments no matter what version?
Some of you can wait on the police to come take your statement, find out what was stolen or who was killed. Lament your loss, file your claims, plan your funerals, etc. Some of us will wait on the police to come take our statement and then haul off the offender that invaded our personal space, threatened our loved ones, etc and lock him up or bury him as needed. It won't matter in my case if I use a gun or a nine iron. The outcome will be the same. A gun is just a slightly handier tool than a nine iron and has a little better reach but is as incapable as the nine iron of doing anything of its own accord. Possibly we should look at banning golf clubs.
__________________
Only two defining forces have ever offered to die for you, Jesus Christ and the American G. I. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom Last edited by rockogre; 04-22-2003 at 08:37 AM.. |
04-22-2003, 08:50 AM | #33 (permalink) |
Junkie
Location: Solaris III
|
Let me ask this:
Would you rob a place that you knew had guns? I'm not talking like a bank; I mean a gas station, or a 7-11, things that happen all the time. Would you rob someone on the street if you knew that person had a gun? In most cases, if a criminal knew you were armed, it wouldn't be worth there while. We need more guns, and proper training.
__________________
I believe in the inner beauty of a woman: When you’re in’er – beauty. |
04-22-2003, 11:24 AM | #34 (permalink) | ||
ClerkMan!
Location: Tulsa, Ok.
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
Tags |
control, gun |
Thread Tools | |
|
|