Should shooting victims be able to sue gun makers for negligence?
(published 18-Apr-2005, Appleton Post-Crescent)
For negligence?!?! As in, "Hey, Smith & Wesson! You neglected to tell me that a 158 grain .357 magnum slug traveling at 1450 feet per second can lay 737 foot-pounds of hurt on a guy?" [Figures courtesy of www.firearmexpertwitness.com.] As in, "Whoa! You mean you didn't tell that criminal that he shouldn't steal that gun to shoot me with?" What's next? Sue auto manufacturers for making their cars out of metal instead of something soft like, say, cheese curds? Sue liquor manufacturers for making whiskey with – gasp! – alcohol in it? Those barking moonbats who claimed that Bush would have staged a coup d'etat if he had lost back in November are the same people who pooh-pooh the idea that the right to bear arms is the right to resist overweening government – that is to say, fascist government. For you Bush-equals-Hitler fanatics, wouldn't you want as many guns as possible?
2 comments:
It's also why I keep a big dog -- and a puppy in training. :) When Bush decides to take over, I want to be ready to help.
snicker
Just wait for the signal, Susan!
Post a Comment