|
Twisted logic from the justice system
I am catching up on my Charlie Rose. I just saw a show about the VW
debacle. Something came out that was interesting. They were comparing this to the Takata air bag and the GM ignition switch. It was pointed out that safety defects that kill people can only draw civil suits and maybe some government fines. OTOH if they can get a conviction on a "clean air act" violation (like VW) people can go to jail and have. There is something wrong here. |
Twisted logic from the justice system
|
Twisted logic from the justice system
|
Twisted logic from the justice system
On 12/1/2015 4:31 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 13:07:47 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 12/1/15 1:27 AM, wrote: I am catching up on my Charlie Rose. I just saw a show about the VW debacle. Something came out that was interesting. They were comparing this to the Takata air bag and the GM ignition switch. It was pointed out that safety defects that kill people can only draw civil suits and maybe some government fines. OTOH if they can get a conviction on a "clean air act" violation (like VW) people can go to jail and have. There is something wrong here. Corporatus uber alles, to mix languages. You know about the federal law that exempts gun manufacturers from lawsuits filed against them to pay for damages caused by defects in their own product, but I don't know if that law also protects them from criminal prosecutions. The "defect" the people who are against guns cite is the fact that bullets come out the end of the barrel. They want to sue manufacturers for the crimes people commit. It is like suing GM because cars running over pedestrians might actually hurt them. I don't think Harry is correct in stating that gun manufacturers are immune from lawsuits for damages caused by defects. They are immune from lawsuits for death or injury when the gun is used and performs as designed and intended. In other words, they can't be held liable if someone shoots someone with one of their products. However, if the gun "blows up" or otherwise malfunctions and causes injury or death due to a design fault or manufacturing flaw, they certainly *can* be sued. |
Twisted logic from the justice system
On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 16:42:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 12/1/2015 4:31 PM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 13:07:47 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 12/1/15 1:27 AM, wrote: I am catching up on my Charlie Rose. I just saw a show about the VW debacle. Something came out that was interesting. They were comparing this to the Takata air bag and the GM ignition switch. It was pointed out that safety defects that kill people can only draw civil suits and maybe some government fines. OTOH if they can get a conviction on a "clean air act" violation (like VW) people can go to jail and have. There is something wrong here. Corporatus uber alles, to mix languages. You know about the federal law that exempts gun manufacturers from lawsuits filed against them to pay for damages caused by defects in their own product, but I don't know if that law also protects them from criminal prosecutions. The "defect" the people who are against guns cite is the fact that bullets come out the end of the barrel. They want to sue manufacturers for the crimes people commit. It is like suing GM because cars running over pedestrians might actually hurt them. I don't think Harry is correct in stating that gun manufacturers are immune from lawsuits for damages caused by defects. They are immune from lawsuits for death or injury when the gun is used and performs as designed and intended. In other words, they can't be held liable if someone shoots someone with one of their products. However, if the gun "blows up" or otherwise malfunctions and causes injury or death due to a design fault or manufacturing flaw, they certainly *can* be sued. Yup, Remington got sued and agreed to a class action settlement for the M700 trigger problem although you needed to be doing something unsafe to be hurt. |
Twisted logic from the justice system
On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 16:42:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:
On 12/1/2015 4:31 PM, wrote: On Tue, 1 Dec 2015 13:07:47 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote: On 12/1/15 1:27 AM, wrote: I am catching up on my Charlie Rose. I just saw a show about the VW debacle. Something came out that was interesting. They were comparing this to the Takata air bag and the GM ignition switch. It was pointed out that safety defects that kill people can only draw civil suits and maybe some government fines. OTOH if they can get a conviction on a "clean air act" violation (like VW) people can go to jail and have. There is something wrong here. Corporatus uber alles, to mix languages. You know about the federal law that exempts gun manufacturers from lawsuits filed against them to pay for damages caused by defects in their own product, but I don't know if that law also protects them from criminal prosecutions. The "defect" the people who are against guns cite is the fact that bullets come out the end of the barrel. They want to sue manufacturers for the crimes people commit. It is like suing GM because cars running over pedestrians might actually hurt them. I don't think Harry is correct in stating that gun manufacturers are immune from lawsuits for damages caused by defects. They are immune from lawsuits for death or injury when the gun is used and performs as designed and intended. In other words, they can't be held liable if someone shoots someone with one of their products. However, if the gun "blows up" or otherwise malfunctions and causes injury or death due to a design fault or manufacturing flaw, they certainly *can* be sued. Sometimes, in a very few cases, omniscience is faulty. -- Ban idiots, not guns! |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:34 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com