The comments section is interesting
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/05/opinion/the-right-to-sue-the-gun-industry.html?_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/05/opinion/the-right-to-sue-the-gun-industry.html?_r=0
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Here is the problem, what is "military-style assault weapons " really? The brain washed is deep
Why the gun industry is less liable than any other industry is a puzzle to me. I am certain that BP had no interest in flooding the Gulf with crude oil, yet persons harmed by that oil were allowed to bring suit and win damages against the company. The same is true of chemical companies that pollute our streams, or asbestos mining companies that place their mineral in products that harm our environment. None of these industries rightly mean to sell or produce harm, yet all have been and will be sued for the harm they have created. That is one of the things our legal system is built to resolve.
Why then do we allow arms manufactures off the legal hook? Our legal system is created to solve issues just like the suit proposed by the Sandy Hook parents. It should be allowed to go forward. We are a society based on laws,
Will not click
I'm amazed this clown can write being that f**king stupid.
From the comments section
Beyond seeking damages, the Sandy Hook parents aim to force the AR-15 off the market. “The AR-15 is the weapon of choice for shooters looking to inflict maximum casualties, and American schools are on the forefront of such violence,”
Hey genius, if that happens, there will simply be something else to take its place as the "weapon of choice".
It's interesting how Antis have given up on the term "assault weapon" in favor of "assault rifle"