Canadian Court Rules Gun Maker Smith & Wesson Can Be Liable for 2018 Shooting

Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jan 27, 2015
Messages
4,562
Likes
4,053
Location
Merrimack Valley
RCMP and many other Canadian LE agencies use Glocks. Wonder if Glock will make the Canadian government sign a waiver of liability?
Bringing up liability reminds me of some netflix show I once saw about policing in Austrailia. The show made a big point about the officers signing out handguns for the day- Literally had to go to an armory, an armorer took the gun off the wall, recorded the serial number down, and the cop had to do the same deal in reverse when it was signed back in like some sort of holy grail.
 
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
411
Likes
370
Location
Boston, MA
Unless I'm mistaken (which as a non-lawyer I easily could be), this ruling just puts the gun industry in line with just about every other one. Which is to say, manufactures have a duty to ensure to the best of their ability that their products are used as intended. It doesn't imply liability or guilt, just allows for that liability to be determined.
 

cjbenway

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Jul 23, 2016
Messages
112
Likes
148
Unless I'm mistaken (which as a non-lawyer I easily could be), this ruling just puts the gun industry in line with just about every other one. Which is to say, manufactures have a duty to ensure to the best of their ability that their products are used as intended. It doesn't imply liability or guilt, just allows for that liability to be determined.
flame much?
 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 31, 2020
Messages
408
Likes
325
Bringing up liability reminds me of some netflix show I once saw about policing in Austrailia. The show made a big point about the officers signing out handguns for the day- Literally had to go to an armory, an armorer took the gun off the wall, recorded the serial number down, and the cop had to do the same deal in reverse when it was signed back in like some sort of holy grail.
Friend in U.S. Navy went through the same thing. Check out shotgun or handgun for topside watch. When watch ended, arms and ammo were returned to the small-arms locker, which was under the control of the Master-At-Arms or his/her delegate. European cops do not take their guns home, either. They are considered to be shift equipment and are turned in after each shift. LEOSA nationwide 24/7 carry is a uniquely American LEO privilege.
 

watchman

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Nov 10, 2013
Messages
2,774
Likes
3,162
If liability can be found on one manufacturer any and every lawyer out there could prove it on others. This would mean it would be too costly to build and sell anything at all so....
 

The5thDentist

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
13,296
Likes
33,610
Location
The Karenwealth of Assachusetts
Does Canada make any firearms?
If not soon they won’t have any because we won’t be shipping to them.

According to wikipedia, there are only two companies that currently make firearms in Canada.
First is Savage, which exports most of their factory's production to the U.S.
Second is Colt, which never met a government contract it didn't like.

F Colt.

 
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 31, 2020
Messages
408
Likes
325
According to wikipedia, there are only two companies that currently make firearms in Canada.
First is Savage, which exports most of their factory's production to the U.S.
Second is Colt, which never met a government contract it didn't like.

F Colt.

My wife and I own 3 small-caliber Savage bolt action rifles. I thought they were made in Massachusetts?
 

DPR

Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
1,431
Likes
1,710
Location
South Shore
Unless I'm mistaken (which as a non-lawyer I easily could be), this ruling just puts the gun industry in line with just about every other one. Which is to say, manufactures have a duty to ensure to the best of their ability that their products are used as intended. It doesn't imply liability or guilt, just allows for that liability to be determined.
Nonsense. So now we’ll require vehicle manufactures to put breathalyzers in their cars? What about knife manufacturers? How would Stihl be liable if I chop up my neighbor with a chainsaw?

Unless a gun was designed, manufactured and marketed to the mentally ill so they could steal that gun and murder innocent people then no way should they be held liable. Your post is nonsense.
 
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
411
Likes
370
Location
Boston, MA
Nonsense. So now we’ll require vehicle manufactures to put breathalyzers in their cars? What about knife manufacturers? How would Stihl be liable if I chop up my neighbor with a chainsaw?

Unless a gun was designed, manufactured and marketed to the mentally ill so they could steal that gun and murder innocent people then no way should they be held liable. Your post is nonsense.
I think you need to read a bit more carefully. Again, no one is saying gum manufactures are liable, they're just saying that they have the possibility to be liable. It's the same reason why electronic dusters contain bitters to deter inhaling, etc.
 

DPR

Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
1,431
Likes
1,710
Location
South Shore
I think you need to read a bit more carefully. Again, no one is saying gum manufactures are liable, they're just saying that they have the possibility to be liable. It's the same reason why electronic dusters contain bitters to deter inhaling, etc.
So what is Ford doing to ensure that their products are being used as intended? Anyone or any company is potentially liable for anything that happens near, in or around them. Saying a firearm manufacture is possibly negligent for it being stolen and used to murder people is no different than Ford being liable for a drunk stealing one of their vehicles and killing people with it.
 
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Jan 19, 2011
Messages
411
Likes
370
Location
Boston, MA
So what is Ford doing to ensure that their products are being used as intended? Anyone or any company is potentially liable for anything that happens near, in or around them. Saying a firearm manufacture is possibly negligent for it being stolen and used to murder people is no different than Ford being liable for a drunk stealing one of their vehicles and killing people with it.
It seems like you're thinking about this in the wrong context. Sig isn't responsible for making their firearms harder to be used in a murder. That isn't possible. They are responsible however (hypothetically) for making the serial number not rub off with one pass of sandpaper in the event it is stolen, or if they provide a case that locks, making sure that case isn't easily opened from the other side. This ruling doesn't say that Sig is now responsible for every death caused by a stolen firearm, just that if Sig knowingly put out a gun with an easily destroyed serial number, that lead to people purchasing them with the intent of trafficking them, that they can potentially be responsible for damages caused by that.
 
Last edited:

TheGreekFreak

NES Member
Rating - 100%
34   0   0
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
1,569
Likes
1,241
Ultra liberal activist judge in Canada.....why is anyone suprised 😂 anytime someone over the age of 24 tells me "had a great time in Montreal this weekend", I throw up in my mouth a little. You had a great time with a bunch of passive aggressive asshats jamming french down your throat 24/7?

Goofy ass country, S&W should make the slides of all the guns they sell to those pussys shaped like a nice phallus, so every time the user racks the slide they pleasure an American firearm.
 

DPR

Rating - 100%
4   0   0
Joined
Apr 15, 2016
Messages
1,431
Likes
1,710
Location
South Shore
It seems like you're thinking about this in the wrong context. Sig isn't responsible for making their firearms harder to be used in a murder. That isn't possible. They are responsible however (hypothetically) for making the serial number not rub off with one pass of sandpaper in the event it is stolen, or if they provide a case that locks, making sure that case isn't easily opened from the other side. This ruling doesn't say that Sig is now responsible for every death caused by a stolen firearm, just that if Sig knowingly put out a gun with an easily destroyed serial number, that lead to people purchasing them with the intent of trafficking them, that they can potentially be responsible for damages caused by that.
I don’t think you realize that with this case a gun manufacturer is being held liable for not making their guns harder to be used in a murder. Otherwise Sig and serial numbers having nothing at all to do with this case.
 
Top Bottom