Cuomo signs law to allow lawsuits against GUNMAKERS for violence. What about cars???

T

Text Drivers are Killers

Joe Biden - "Time to put Trump in the bullseye."
Let's do the same with the car makers. Why are they allowed to sell products DESIGNED to break the law like cars that do 3 times the legal speed limit.? They are way more irresponsible than the gun companies.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/07/new-york-will-allow-people-sue-gun-manufacturers-violence/

july 8 2021 New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Tuesday signed a law passed by the Democrat-controlled state Legislature that allows guns to be considered a public nuisance and opens the floodgates for lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

“The only industry in the United States of America immune from lawsuits are the gun manufacturers, but we will not stand for that any longer, Cuomo said in a news release.

According to NBC News, the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005 carved out immunity for gun manufacturers if individuals misuse their products in a criminal manner. Cuomo’s news release claims that New York is changing all of that.

“Under this new legislation, gun manufacturers cannot endanger the safety and health of the public through the sale, manufacturing, importing or marketing of the products they sell. The products can be considered a public nuisance even if the gun manufacturer did not purposely cause harm to the public,” the release said.
Click to expand...
 
42,000 americans killed every year in easily prevented car crashes. Far more than are killed by guns, but the politicians never say boo about that!!!
 
Or slippery soap. You could be killed taking a shower! Or, trampolines, especially when used for criminal activity...
 
Letting victims sue the manufacturer for misuse of a legal product is a bad idea. Of course if the product is DESIGNED to be used illegally that's another story and that is the situation with cars but not guns.
 
Although I can't read the idiot TDAK's posts anymore,

I must admit that holding firearms manufacturers liable for firearm crimes is absolutely absurd.

It's a clear but clumsy attempt to circumvent the 2nd Amendment by shutting down legitimate firearms manufacturers,

Here is one area where I, a hard left progressive liberal by any standard, SERIOUSLY part ways with the mainstream Democratic opinion.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
Although I can't read the idiot TDAK's posts anymore,

I must admit that holding firearms manufacturers liable for firearm crimes is absolutely absurd.

It's a clear but clumsy attempt to circumvent the 2nd Amendment by shutting down legitimate firearms manufacturers,

Here is one area where I, a hard left progressive liberal by any standard, SERIOUSLY part ways with the mainstream Democratic opinion.
Click to expand...

I can’t see his posts either … and here is one area where you and I agree. Wait, guess that makes two. ;)
 
I think people have more basis to sue over airbags in cars... These kill about 24 people a year and seriously injure thousands. They come with a raft of safety warnings about this safety product. How many safety products are so unsafe that they require numerous warnings about how dangerous they are? Since the government mandates this unsafe safety device be put in your car, they are clearly responsible and libel for all injuries and deaths caused by airbags.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I think people have more basis to sue over airbags in cars... These kill about 24 people a year and seriously injure thousands. They come with a raft of safety warnings about this safety product. How many safety products are so unsafe that they require numerous warnings about how dangerous they are? Since the government mandates this unsafe safety device be put in your car, they are clearly responsible and libel for all injuries and deaths caused by airbags.
Click to expand...

The speeds that cars are capable of is what the companies should be sued for. When someone is killed by a driver doing 95 on the freeway the car company should have to pay.
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
The speeds that cars are capable of is what the companies should be sued for. When someone is killed by a driver doing 95 on the freeway the car company should have to pay.
Click to expand...

This is clearly wrong. A vehicle might be able to exceed posted speed limits, but those vary by state. So, for example, Nevada and Montana have laws in place that allow for going as fast as you want for conditions.

http://hwysafety.com/hwy_montana.htm

Montana's law on speed is "reasonable and prudent."

So, a vehicle capable of 150 mph could go that if it was reasonable and prudent. It puts the onus of decision making on the driver to be safe.

On the other hand, the government mandates by law that cars have to have airbags. There are a whole bunch of warning signs that are mandated by law that have to be in the vehicle. An unsafe safety device--which is what an airbag is--is something that is clearly litigable on the face of it. Who would force a manufacturer to put something unsafe in a product and not expect to get sued for it?
 
T. A. Gardner said:
This is clearly wrong. A vehicle might be able to exceed posted speed limits, but those vary by state. So, for example, Nevada and Montana have laws in place that allow for going as fast as you want for conditions.
Click to expand...

WTF kind of argument is that you idiot.? What about the other 48 states?. Montana's laws don't apply there you simpleton!!! THINK
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
WTF kind of argument is that you idiot.? What about the other 48 states?. Montana's laws don't apply there you simpleton!!! THINK
Click to expand...

Vehicles are designed for all sorts of locations. One shouldn't expect them to be specially designed for some specific smaller market any more than firearms are designed differently for different markets.

I suppose some state could mandate governors on the engine and speed, but that would probably go over like a lead balloon with the public.

Then there are states like Arizona and Texas where the posted speed limit is something of a suggestion as both use a standard of "reasonable and prudent" for the driver to judge their speed. In AZ speed limits are supposedly set at the 80% speed capacity of the road as determined by traffic engineering design studies while there is a state mandated maximum speed limit of 85 mph that isn't to be exceeded.
 
T. A. Gardner said:
I suppose some state could mandate governors on the engine and speed, but that would probably go over like a lead balloon with the public.
Click to expand...

If people won lawsuits against the car makers for injuries caused by speeders, the states would not have to mandate speed governors. The companies would do it on their own.
 
so when anti gun racists and tyrants file a lawsuit, with no proof to their claims, I hope the courts do their job and smack the plaintiffs with frivolous lawsuit charges and bankrupt them.........for life.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
so you're really a liberal in sheeps clothing because you want the big nanny state government to restrict peoples rights to make you feel safer........got it
Click to expand...

HAHAHAHA. You stupid ignorant moron . There is no RIGHT to speed or DWI or DWT. Only a criminal coddling liberal like you would say there is.
 
Text Drivers are Killers said:
What about cars???
Click to expand...

The case of MacPherson v. Buick Motors gives you the right to sue the car manufacturer. It has been in place for over a hundred years.

Text Drivers are Killers said:
42,000 americans killed every year in easily prevented car crashes. Far more than are killed by guns, but the politicians never say boo about that!!!
Click to expand...

Try again. In 2019, there were 37,595 car deaths, but 39,707 gun deaths. So rather than there being far more car deaths, there are slightly more gun deaths. Car deaths have been dropping, because car makers are constantly trying to make their use safer. Gun manufacturers really do not care.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/injury.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top