• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

K. Harris is what we need to stop gun violence.

People can modify a semi-auto to an auto. That is completely on the gun manufacturers for creating a faulty product easily manipulated.

Design a weapon that cannot be altered otherwise let's sue the hell out of them for creating an illegal product.

Only in a very small handful of guns. In most cases, your average joe with a real neat set of tools has neither the tools, nor the equipment to make those modification. "Changing a spring" and "filing a pin" are gun myths.
 
People can modify a semi-auto to an auto. That is completely on the gun manufacturers for creating a faulty product easily manipulated.

Design a weapon that cannot be altered otherwise let's sue the hell out of them for creating an illegal product.

How many people have been killed because someone illegally modified a semiautomatic weapon to be automatic?

Someone can also fabricate a machine gun out of sheet metal. Should we allow people to sue sheet metal suppliers?
 
Following your reasoning, we should sue all car makers for the deaths caused by drunk drivers.

What Harris is suggesting is that we should penalize car makers because someone in the future might use a car in the future in the commission of a crime.
 
How many people have been killed because someone illegally modified a semiautomatic weapon to be automatic?

Someone can also fabricate a machine gun out of sheet metal. Should we allow people to sue sheet metal suppliers?

You do know the Supreme Court disagrees with you???
 
You do know the Supreme Court disagrees with you???

About what, that it's possible to make a machine gun out of sheet metal?
 
About what, that it's possible to make a machine gun out of sheet metal?

February 2020 — The 10 families streamline their case into a single claim: That Remington violated the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act by marketing the AR-15-style rifle used in the Sandy Hook shooting to civilians for criminal purposes, and that the marketing motivated Lanza to commit his crimes

Timeline: Legal fight between Sandy Hook families and gunmaker prep for trial - NewsTimes

That was just the first shoe to drop. We will have more shootings, but hopefully more lawsuits.
 
Yes, the CT Supreme Court let stand a single claim based on the supposed improper marketing of the rifle in question, a claim that is completely batspit crazy and could only succeed because of our completely broken jury system and/or massive politicization of our judiciary.

Oh, apparently now our jury system is broken?

The gun lobby has been doing everything in there power to turn the United States in the Wild Wild West. The gun lobby claims they are pro cop. Given how they want to literally arm everyone with a firearm, they are more pro criminal.
 
People can modify a semi-auto to an auto. That is completely on the gun manufacturers for creating a faulty product easily manipulated.

Design a weapon that cannot be altered otherwise let's sue the hell out of them for creating an illegal product.


Ok I see you would rather troll that have a reasonable debate.
 
Ok I see you would rather troll that have a reasonable debate.

Not trolling, but think about it. The United States bans kinder eggs because it has a non-nutritive object which can be a potential choking hazard.

Banning toys in chocolate fine but not a gun that can be modified? Ridiculous.
 
=Bucky;1072437741]We the people should be able to sue gun manufacturers, particularly victims of gun violence. Just like in 1999 when the government, yes the government sued Tobacco companies on behalf of sick smokers.

As a former smoker I would no more sue a tobacco company then I would you. It's simple. I knew what I was putting in me. Nothing good.
Or just like there was a lawsuit against J&J regarding Talcum powder and baby powder which causes ovarian cancer.

Or maybe J&J should have done more research? I do kinda remember something about that. But was it something only J&J had in theirs alone? Since I'm not going off into the weeds hunting it up, why don't you show something about it?
The gun industry needs to be held liable.

If it were an obvious defect in the firearm then okay. But to go after the manufacturer just because? Then absolutely not.
 
By that logic, people that get lung cancer from cigs, it is there fault completely right?

Well Bucky, take it from someone that had stage 1 lung cancer from smoking, (nothing a little rads and chemo didn't fix right up)YES it's their fault.
 
Oh, apparently now our jury system is broken?

The gun lobby has been doing everything in there power to turn the United States in the Wild Wild West. The gun lobby claims they are pro cop. Given how they want to literally arm everyone with a firearm, they are more pro criminal.

Complete nonsense. Literally nothing you wrote there is accurate, except perhaps the pro-cop part. By the way, most cops, except the authoritarian jerks, have no problem with civilians lawfully carrying firearms.
 
For every victim of gun violence, there should 1 lawsuit against a gun manufacturer. Again, drown them into litigation, force them to file bankruptcy.

You didn't answer the question. Sue them for what?
 
more politics, politricks, by the gun lobby.

It seems they have brainwashed you good eh?

The fact is in 2005, the gun lobby pressured congress to pass a controversial law to give unprecedented legal immunity to gun manufacturers. It is called blanket immunity. Not even pharmaceuticals or tobacco industries have this type of immunity.

What we need is gun manufacturers to create a weapon that isn't so easy to modify. A weapon that can be easily modified to become an automatic weapon, is no longer by definition a semi-automatic weapon. By definition and law thus, those semi-automatic weapons need to be classified as an automatic weapon and be banned like other automatic weapons.

What we need is mountains and mountains of lawsuits and litigation against gun manufacturers. Bury them in paperwork until they cannot breathe. The more documents unearthed will immobilize the gun lobby and finally turn the tide.

Well opinions vary. Point taken.

Next you will be wanting to sue the manufacturers of knives, axes, baseball bats and chain saws.

How about bicycles. 50,000 a year seriously injured or killed

Manufacturers are not responsible for misuse of their product. You can easy kill yourself or others with Tylenol. Certainly with rat poison.

Let's get real
 
Well opinions vary. Point taken.

Next you will be wanting to sue the manufacturers of knives, axes, baseball bats and chain saws.

How about bicycles. 50,000 a year seriously injured or killed

Manufacturers are not responsible for misuse of their product. You can easy kill yourself or others with Tylenol. Certainly with rat poison.

Let's get real

The irony is you can sue those companies. They don't have the immunity the gun manufacturers already have.

A jury awarded a $750 million settlement against Johnson and Johnson because four people claimed they suffered due to exposure to asbestos in talc products.
 
The irony is you can sue those companies. They don't have the immunity the gun manufacturers already have.

A jury awarded a $750 million settlement against Johnson and Johnson because four people claimed they suffered due to exposure to asbestos in talc products.
It's been explained to you over and over that like J&J you can sue gun manufacturers for defective products. Are you still not understanding that, or are you simply refusing to acknowledge that?
 
The irony is you can sue those companies. They don't have the immunity the gun manufacturers already have.

A jury awarded a $750 million settlement against Johnson and Johnson because four people claimed they suffered due to exposure to asbestos in talc products.

Yeah...:roll:

And that you do not recognize the significant difference between the two products is rather telling.
 
It's been explained to you over and over that like J&J you can sue gun manufacturers for defective products. Are you still not understanding that, or are you simply refusing to acknowledge that?

It sounds like you are a bit thick-headed.

I'd suggest you review CITY OF GARY V. SMITH & WESSON.
 
Last edited:
Yeah...:roll:

And that you do not recognize the significant difference between the two products is rather telling.

What I do know is that the majority of people buying guns are using them dangerously and improperly. The majority of gun owners do not even own a basic lockbox.
 
What I do know is that the majority of people buying guns are using them dangerously and improperly. The majority of gun owners do not even own a basic lockbox.

Link.

Or, admit its simply your opinion or you made it up.....but I find it interesting that you admit is people misusing firearms, and not the manufacturer.
 
Last edited:
Following your reasoning, we should sue all car makers for the deaths caused by drunk drivers.

And sue phone manufacturers for texting and driving deaths.
 
What I do know is that the majority of people buying guns are using them dangerously and improperly. The majority of gun owners do not even own a basic lockbox.

Really

How many guns do you own?

How often do you go to a gun range?

Ever been to any of the myriad of gun competitions?

I believe your perception of guns and gun owners is quite warped.
 
Really

How many guns do you own?

How often do you go to a gun range?

Ever been to any of the myriad of gun competitions?

I believe your perception of guns and gun owners is quite warped.

Perhaps because I am more cultured. I don't partake in shooting tin cans.

The people that shoot guns probably find enjoyment in watching bugs get zapped in the zapper.
 
Perhaps because I am more cultured. I don't partake in shooting tin cans.

The people that shoot guns probably find enjoyment in watching bugs get zapped in the zapper.

So reality is you have nothing to base your biased opinion on.
 
Back
Top Bottom