Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Does Hillary respect Bill of Rights when she wants underhanded nullification of 2nd Amendment by trial lawyers?

US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton wants to nullify the Second Amendment in an unscrupulous fashion by allowing trial lawyers representing murder victims to sue the gun industry out of existence. She would thereby deprive law-abiding citizens of the right to defend ourselves against criminals.We don't allow that because it is an absolute affront to justice. The responsibility for a murderer lies with the murderer himself. We don't have lawsuits against the auto industry or the alcohol industry for drunk driver fatalities. We don't have lawsuits against knife-makers when people are stabbed to death. We don't have lawsuits against chemical industries when wives poison their husbands.If you want to advocate a constitutional amendment to repeal the Second Amendment, you have a right to do that. But what Hillary proposes is unjust and unethical.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

imgreywlf

How does wanting to require safe, responsible gun ownership equal repealing the 2ed amendment. your just an extremest.
You can not equate chem deaths, knife deaths, to those caused by firearms. I can not kill people form 100 yrds with a knife or the chems that have been used by a spouse to kill their mate.
We do allow lawsuits for the auto industry, as well as those who sell alcohol to a person to the point where it has caused accidents.
As for why the gun industry has not been sued in the past they have been and got lucky. And now have spent so much money bribing legislators with money from lobiests to write protective legislation . Thus allowing them to be sued would just make it more likely they would put more thought into their designs. Making it harder to convert them to full auto.
If they want to protect them-self's they simply need to stop fighting guns being chipped. Chipping is almost the ultimate in gun safety. It makes it harder if not impossible to use a stolen firearm. Or to sell it illegally.

conceptualclarity · M

Individual automaker firms have been sued for making unsafe cars. You can't sue them for a relative being hit by a drunk driver.
Suits against bartenders who sell more booze to somebody already hopelessly drunk is not the same as suing the alcohol industries themselves.
I am not personally a gun enthusiast, nor am I an "extremest." I am unfamiliar with chipping so I will reserve comment on it aside from agreeing that it would be desirable for thieves and their customers not to be able to fire other people's guns.

imgreywlf

you sue the one reasonable for the accident. When they have been caused by defects in the making yes they get sued. And the Auto maker loses the case.