[Libertarianize the GOP]

Should the fact that the government regulates a business excuse the manufacturer from any oversight of those it chooses to let sell its product? I like less government and more personal responsibility.

[coloradan]

I like less government too, but I also like government responsibility. It is not Bushmaster's job to inspect every gun store that would sell its firearms. Under present law, if the place has an FFL, they have been checked by the BATFE and approved. If it later turns out that Bullseye is negligent, that means the licensing authority failed in its duty. I would be all for abolishing the BATFE entirely as an utter failure, but given that it exists, checking up on negligent dealers is its problem, not Bushmaster's. Holding Bushmaster responsble for a government-approved gun dealer's negligence is wrong, unless you can prove collusion or conspiracy between Bushmaster and Bullseye.

[Badray]

"Should the fact that the government regulates a business excuse the manufacturer from any oversight of those it chooses to let sell its product?"

Do I have this right? If someone steals a car from a new car dealer's lot and kills someone, the manufacturer is responsible?

Are you nuts?

How can you write your last sentence if you believe your first one?

You don't sound like a libertarian to me.

[Destro]

Should the fact that the government regulates a business excuse the manufacturer from any oversight of those it chooses to let sell its product?

So was that the basis of the settlement? I mean the manufacturer was only liable because they sold to a dealer that had poor security for their weapons? So if a gun maker only sells to dealers that meet some sort of screening for safety they would not be liable?