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

mikeyp

NES Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2012
Messages
14,499
Likes
29,486
Location
Plymouth
Feedback: 1 / 0 / 0

TORONTO—A Canadian court ruled Friday that victims of a 2018 shooting in Toronto have a viable legal claim of negligence against gun maker Smith & Wesson Corp. for failing provide safeguards on the gun used by the shooter.

Judge Paul Perell of the Superior Court of Ontario said in the ruling that a stolen Smith & Wesson handgun used by the shooter didn’t include available smart gun technology that restricts use to authorized individuals. Such a lapse, he said, is sufficient grounds for the families to proceed with their class action.
 
Judge Paul Perell of the Superior Court of Ontario said in the ruling that a stolen Smith & Wesson handgun used by the shooter didn’t include available smart gun technology that restricts use to authorized individuals.
Judge Paul Perrell didn't include smart brain technology that restricts stupidity. He should be disbarred
 
Judge Paul Perell of the Superior Court of Ontario said in the ruling that a stolen Smith & Wesson handgun used by the shooter didn’t include available smart gun technology that restricts use to authorized individuals. Such a lapse, he said, is sufficient grounds for the families to proceed with their class action.
Paul Perell opened up a big can of worms...
 
Canada has been working it's way to ban guns all together,so this judge is setting everything up just for that.
The gun companies will pull out in fear of getting sued,thus making it harder for the people to find guns for purchase.
 
This is great news. I got blacked out on Canadian Club and Molsen XXX one night in Montreal, and someone drew a huge penis on my forehead. I still have emotional trauma. I'm suing Canada.

Seriously.. People will just sue anybody. Remember the nightclub fire? Everybody, even the companies that advertised on the coasters got sued. They all settled.

Along those lines, if I'm injured this winter in a car accident.... I'll sue Honda for not having the best available AWD system in my truck, I'll sue Michelin because my all season tires weren't effective enough in winter (a season) I'll sue the town it happens in for not doing a good enough job clearing snow, only using salt, not a more effective ice melter, and for having roads that didn't provide enought traction, the asphalt company that made the asphalt, and the contractor that laid down the asphalt. Am I forgetting anybody? Oh yes... all the subcontractors that Honda uses for wheels, brakes, sub assemblies, etc.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't this be an easy case for S&W to win? All they have to do is take a firearm with "smart gun technology" then break it and make it functional.
 
If I ever get rear ended by a drunk driver I'm suing the driver, the dealer he/she bought the car from, the manufacturer, their mechanic, and the last gas station they got gas at. All those people should have been able to see the future.
 
Of course, this crazy logic only applies to the firearms industry. What happens if someone steals a car and uses it to kill someone, can Ford or Honda be sued for that? No, they can't. Why? Because they are not trying to put the auto industry out of business.
 
Judge Paul Perell is not only Left but crazy Left. He has had several cases overturned by higher courts who stated he was way over the line. One was he was forcing Lawyers to donate some of their Legal Fees to Charity which is bat shit crazy stuff.

Let's see how the appeal goes.
 
This argument will gain traction in the US soon. The only thing that prevents it is the bar on liability for gun manufacturers which is on the chopping block now.
 
Back
Top Bottom