• 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!

Supreme Court unanimously blocks Mexico’s lawsuit against U.S. gunmakers

Moon said:
I am. What does that have to do with anything?
Click to expand...

Are you being intentionally obtuse, or do I actually need to explain this to you?

I agree with you, blaming a company for creating a product that some criminals smuggle across a border illegally, and then use to engage in illegal activity is ridiculous.

But, based on your currently policy, according to you (America), it is not ridiculous to blame a country. In light of that, Mexico clearly made an error by going after the company, when they should have initiated punitive measures against your country. Correct?
 
OlNate said:
Based on America's strategy of dealing with this sort of thing, Mexico should have simply imposed massive tariffs on America across the board. That would have fixed this.
Click to expand...

Great plan which I’m sure would work. Never mind that tariffs are paid by the importer.
 
They could have chosen that route, I suppose, but that obviously wouldn’t have gotten them whatever it is they were after with this lawsuit. Probably money. Instituting a punitive tariff or other economic measure would have probably resulted in a likewise response they wouldn’t have seen as beneficial.
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Great plan which I’m sure would work. Never mind that tariffs are paid by the importer.
Click to expand...

Wait a minute. Are you guys telling me that this is a stupid idea??
 
Peter said:
Widget makers are held responsible all the time for public safety.
If they make a productthey know is unsafe they will get prosecuted.
Click to expand...
No, and here is why. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) of 2005 shields gun companies from liability for crimes committed with their products unless they knowingly violate specific laws. What laws did U.S. gun manufacturers specifically violate?
 
Not surprising given the premise of the lawsuit, which attempted to connect the cartel violence to the weapons manufacturers. There's certainly an argument to be made about the trafficking of weapons from the US, but that's not on the manufacturers either.
 

To be honest, I'm surprised that law was even necessary, as it's ludicrous to blame anyone other than the criminals when criminal acts are committed.
 
OlNate said:
Well, to be fair, it's not really my idea, its yours.

Thanks for admitting it, my work here is done... lol
Click to expand...
Sorry, it’s not my idea, so your floating is a tad premature.
 
Moon said:
Sorry, it’s not my idea, so your floating is a tad premature.
Click to expand...

Are you not American? I was talking about America. You seem a little overly defensive, there, bud... Relax, we're just chatting.
 

My point was that widget makes are held accountable all the time and the claim was they weren't.

A gun is a tool is it not?
 
OlNate said:
Are you not American? I was talking about America. You seem a little overly defensive, there, bud... Relax, we're just chatting.
Click to expand...
So your continuing stupid idea is that all Americans are responsible for something the government decides, is that right? It would be awesome if you could actually discuss the thread topic rather than your weird notions of how our country works.
 
Peter said:
My point was that widget makes are held accountable all the time and the claim was they weren't.

A gun is a tool is it not?
Click to expand...
Can you point out any examples of “widgets” where the manufacturer was held accountable for the criminal actions of others who used their products illegally?
 
Moon said:
So your continuing stupid idea is that all Americans are responsible for something the government decides, is that right? It would be awesome if you could actually discuss the thread topic rather than your weird notions of how our country works.
Click to expand...

Oh dear, now you seem to be getting upset.

But, of course you're (America) responsible, you (America) voted for them.

And it would be awesome if Trump pulled up to my door and gave me the Qatar plane and a fruit basket, but sometimes we all face disappointment.
 
OlNate said:
To be honest, I'm surprised that law was even necessary, as it's ludicrous to blame anyone other than the criminals when criminal acts are committed.
Click to expand...

Hmm… there seems to be an exception when a nation’s government (de facto) allows criminal (or terrorist) organizations to operate with impunity within their borders - see ‘war on terror’.
 
Moon said:
Can you point out any examples of “widgets” where the manufacturer was held accountable for the criminal actions of others who used their products illegally?
Click to expand...

Purdue Pharma (makers of OxyContin) reached settlements totaling over $6 billion for its aggressive and misleading marketing, despite the criminal acts (drug trafficking, overdose deaths) being committed by others down the line.

Remington Arms - Sandy Hook shooting - again, due to irresponsible marketing.

Ford - Pintos exploding due to rear end collisions. Ford was found liable for wrongful deaths due to failing to fix a known design defect, even though the drivers misused the vehicles (e.g. speeding).
 
Peter said:
My point was that widget makers are held accountable all the time and the claim was they weren't.

A gun is a tool is it not?
Click to expand...

Yep, as are knives and hammers. When knives or hammers are criminally abused is that the fault of (all?) knife or hammer makers?
 
ttwtt78640 said:
Hmm… there seems to be an exception when a nation’s government (de facto) allows criminal (or terrorist) organizations to operate with impunity within their borders - see ‘war on terror’.
Click to expand...

Do you really want me to look that up, bud? Because if the mere existence of cross border crime translates to a government "allowing criminal or terrorist organizations to operate with impunity within their borders", well.... You might end up wearing more than I will...
 
Noodlegawd said:
Mexico has more than 4 times the murder rate of the US, but somehow guns from the US are the problem....Makes perfect sense.
Click to expand...
Imagine how low the US murder numbers would be if you removed the devastated majority minority communities in the democrat run cities across the country......
 
The United States Government should file a law suit in the Mexican Court system against the Mexican Cartels for the drug problems in the US. See how far that goes.
 
OlNate said:
Based on America's strategy of dealing with this sort of thing, Mexico should have simply imposed massive tariffs on America across the board. That would have fixed this.
Click to expand...
Would this have been more or less effective than what they tried and failed to do?
 
Was it the country's policy to flood Mexico with firearms?

I do agree however...it was OBAMAS policy to dump illegal firearms into Mexico with disastrous results. SO...sue Obama...and maybe the DNC...but mostly...Obama.
 
crazyyank said:
The United States Government should file a law suit in the Mexican Court system against the Mexican Cartels for the drug problems in the US. See how far that goes.
Click to expand...

Prohibition (of anything) isn’t apt to be successful without adequate demand side (simple possession) enforcement.

BTW, before being tempted to say that ‘street drug’ possession is a nonviolent (victimless?) crime - so is gun possession.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.