Forum Thread

Bernie Sanders: Sandy Hook

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 4 Posts
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    In response to the flak Bernie is taking for his stand on the issue of firearm manufactures responsibility for tragedies such as Sandy Hook I submit the following for all to consider.

    I submit tragedies such as Sandy Hook happen because of the irresponsible use (misuse) of firearms by a person or persons. Should the manufactures of firearms be held legally responsible because someone chooses to use the firearm in an irresponsible manner? Before you answer, consider the following.

    According to the MADD website, approximately 27 people die each day as the result of drunk drivers in motor vehicles. That is the approximate number of people that died as a result of the Sandy Hook tragedy. Don’t get me wrong as Sandy Hook was a terrible tragedy, but approximately the same number of people die EACH DAY as a result of the irresponsible use (misuse) of a motor vehicle. Should motor vehicle manufactures be held legally responsible because a person or persons misused their product? I personally don’t think so, just like I don’t think firearm manufactures should be held legally responsible for the misuse of their products. What about you? I don’t see people calling for motor vehicle manufactures being held legally responsible for the misuse of their products by drunk drivers.

    Firearms are a potentially dangerous and deadly product if not used in a responsible manner. Motor vehicles are a potentially dangerous and deadly product if not used in a responsible manner. Why should the legal responsibility of the firearm manufactures (as a result of the misuse of their product by a certain number of people) be any different than the legal responsibility of the motor vehicle manufactures (of a different but still potentially as dangerous and deadly) product as a result of the misuse of its product by a certain number of people?

  • Strongly Liberal Democrat
    Democrat
    Portland, OR
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    AJ525 Wrote: I submit tragedies such as Sandy Hook happen because of the irresponsible use (misuse) of firearms by a person or persons. Should the manufactures of firearms be held legally responsible because someone chooses to use the firearm in an irresponsible manner?

    Yes, the manufactures of firearms should be held legally responsible. They are the people who make these weapons of war that these nut jobs use to slaughter thousands of innocent people each year.

    AJ525 Wrote: Before you answer, consider the following.

    According to the MADD website, approximately 27 people die each day as the result of drunk drivers in motor vehicles. That is the approximate number of people that died as a result of the Sandy Hook tragedy. Don’t get me wrong as Sandy Hook was a terrible tragedy, but approximately the same number of people die EACH DAY as a result of the irresponsible use (misuse) of a motor vehicle. Should motor vehicle manufactures be held legally responsible because a person or persons misused their product? I personally don’t think so, just like I don’t think firearm manufactures should be held legally responsible for the misuse of their products. What about you? I don’t see people calling for motor vehicle manufactures being held legally responsible for the misuse of their products by drunk drivers.

    This is a red herring. There are strict laws against drunk driving and the vast majority of people who die as a result of drunk driving are the person behind the wheel and his or her companions riding with them.

    On the other hand, mass shooters deliberately slaughter as many innocent people as they possibly can. The manufactures who make these weapons know they are not for hunting or any other purpose other than shooting human beings.

    I have many family members who hunt. Using a high powered semi-automatic weapon to shoot a deer would obliterate the deer and render its meat useless. These weapons are used to kill people and when people are killed then yes, the manufactures should be held accountable.

    AJ525 Wrote: Firearms are a potentially dangerous and deadly product if not used in a responsible manner. Motor vehicles are a potentially dangerous and deadly product if not used in a responsible manner. Why should the legal responsibility of the firearm manufactures (as a result of the misuse of their product by a certain number of people) be any different than the legal responsibility of the motor vehicle manufactures (of a different but still potentially as dangerous and deadly) product as a result of the misuse of its product by a certain number of people?

    As I explained earlier, this is a red herring.

  • Independent
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        

    fire arms have one purpose and one purpose only: to shoot something. if that something is a human being the firearm has not changed its purpose in any manner nor actually been used in an incorrect manner. that a human being shouldn't be the target is an ethical and moral question and has nothing to do with the base purpose for the existence of the firearm.

    the purpose of motor vehicles is to transport people. driven by an impaired driver it is being used incorrectly.

  • Independent
    Ft.myers, FL
    Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    lonely bird Wrote:

    fire arms have one purpose and one purpose only: to shoot something. if that something is a human being the firearm has not changed its purpose in any manner nor actually been used in an incorrect manner. that a human being shouldn't be the target is an ethical and moral question and has nothing to do with the base purpose for the existence of the firearm.

    the purpose of motor vehicles is to transport people. driven by an impaired driver it is being used incorrectly.

    AJ525; pls. go back to school! A gun is made to kill, a car is made to go from A to B. What is the difference????? A modern car has all the features not to kill. Even a 4 year old can pull a trigger, but drive a car? I doubt that. Where are the brains?????