Posted on 06/02/2008 11:10:33 AM PDT by Blue Neon
Do guns kill people or do people kill people?
This is the question that will be kicked around Queen's Park for the next few weeks as the provincial government debates a Private Member's Bill, introduced by Oakville MPP Kevin Flynn, which would attempt to make firearm manufacturers and importers more responsible for the actions of their products.
If passed, the Handgun Manufacturers' and Importers' Liability Act 2008 proposed by Flynn would allow the victims of handgun shootings, or their families, to bring legal action against the handgun's manufacturer or importer in cases where negligence could be proven on their part.
While not blaming any particular firearm company for gun violence in the GTA,
Flynn noted a code of conduct appears to be needed for this industry.
"The proliferation of guns is something we need to deal with in a systematic way, and the one way that I think we've approached some of these types of problems in the past is to bring in the concept of product stewardship," said Flynn.
"If you're producing a product and you're earning a profit from that product, you should be responsible for that product for its entire lifecycle. It seems to me that the gun industry can't help but know that, either inadvertently or not, they are supplying the criminal element in our country and in the United States with firearms."
Flynn noted that the act would be applicable to any firearm manufacturer or importer who does business in Ontario, and that it would provide an alternate source of financial restitution to shooting victims.
The provincial government was severely criticized in 2006 when the criminals, who shot and paralyzed Louise Russo, a mother of three and innocent bystander, were permitted to pay her $2 million cash in exchange for reduced jail sentences.
"That had to be done because this lady had no right of recourse against anybody. She was going to live the rest of her life in a wheelchair and had nobody there to fund her," said Flynn.
"What I'm saying is that this act would allow the Province of Ontario to recover the cost of the health care that has to be provided to that woman, and if she was able to prove negligence on the part of the (firearm) importer, the distributor or the manufacturer she would be able to make a claim."
Oakville and District Rod and Gun Club member Jim Etherington does not see any logic in this proposed act.
"If I crash my car and kill someone, does that make Chrysler liable," he asked.
"They should punish the person responsible for the shooting right away. Incarcerate him or her with no parole, no plea-bargain and, if and when the person is found guilty, they get a good hefty minimum sentence with no time off for time served. That way, you're doing something to the person who commits the crime. That might make people think twice."
Besides having a problem with who the liability act is aimed at, Etherington also believes the act would be completely ineffective in combating gun violence since the vast majority of handguns that are used in crimes in Ontario are stolen.
Flynn feels this fact proves his point.
"These guns are being stolen and replaced by the handgun manufacturers. As long as these guns are being stolen, there's a great market there for these handgun manufacturers to fill that void of stolen guns," said Flynn.
"If I was a handgun manufacturer, for example, and I was selling 20,000 units a year to some place and the police kept finding that those guns were being used in crimes, I would think that I might not want to sell to that place anymore. Whether they were being broken into or whether they were selling the guns to people who were reselling them, something there is allowing handguns to fall into the wrong hands."
The Handgun Manufacturers' and Importers' Liability Act 2008 will be debated at Queen's Park on June 12.
Thank goodness we have legislation in the US to stop this nonsense. I am also pleased that the courts, so far, have upheld it, too.
Heck of a good way to make some tort lawyers rich, that’s about it. You see Johnny Edwards packing his bags for Ontario, run.
The only person should be held accountable is the SHOOTER, PERIOD, UNLESS
the “new” gun has a malfunction.
This is attempted quarterly in the USA and always fails. Lawsuits also fail regularly.
No, no, no! The real question to these folks is:
Do murderers have deep pockets or do gun manufacturer's have deep pockets?
They just want to sue the one with deep pockets!
Car manufacturers know that drunk drivers will kill with their product.
Bucket manufacturers know that toddlers will drown in their product.
Syringe manufacturers know that some people will use their product to overdose.
But I guess equal treatment under the law is no longer in fashion.
I agree that handgun manufacturers need to be held accountable!
Stovepipe jams, magazines with feed lips that are easily dinged out of allignment, and sights that won’t hold zero are all manufacturing defects.
As for holding handgun manufacturers accountable for every use of that hadgun after it is sold, I’ll agree to that when they hold automobile manufacturers accountable for every drunk driving death.
They can’t ban handguns outright (yet). They want to accomplish the same thing by roundabout means. If we aren’t careful, they’ll succeed.
Do me a favor? Call the nutcakes office and ask this jerk if he is liable if someone steals his car then uses it in a crime. Or is the car manufacturer guilty of a crime?
I have owned various guns my entire life. I served in the militray and was a Police and Corrections officer for some periods.
In all that time around all those guns I never saw or heard of a gun doing anything on its own let alone killing someone. It is an inanimate object, a tool.
If a human being does not point it and pull the trigger it is not going to harm anyone.
Not a bumper sticker not a slogan but a FACT. Guns don;t kill people, People kill people.
But then we are talking about Politicians in this article so common sense and basic intelligence is obvoiusly out of the question.....
” Playboy caused me to have Carpal Tunnel syndrome and pencils and pens caused my spelling errors”. Quote of Larry the Cable Guy
Doesn’t Canada follow the “English Rule” on liability? Wouldn’t that cut down on these kinds of lawsuits?
You are correct. This has nothing to do with alleged safety against the use of hand guns in crimes and everything to do with ensuring there to be a deep pocket to indemnify for the negligence of an uninsured perpetrator. This was along the same lines of holding leasing auto companies vicariously liable for the negligent actions of a renter/lessor in the operation of a motor vehicle...again, opening up deep pockets where insurance may be minimal. Thank God the Graves amendment took care of stopping that nonsense...The trial lawyers bar as strong as ever.
“The Oakville Beaver”,....hmmmmmm.
No comment. Another feline name comes to mind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.