• Mac
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Yes, tho

    • doctortofu@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Really? I’m very much for strict gun control, but do you really think if a person kills someone with a hammer (or a knife, or a spoon), the manufacturer of the murder weapon should be liable for that?

      • Mac
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        I think it would be funny, if that’s what you’re asking.

      • RvTV95XBeo@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 hours ago

        I mean… Guns are made to kill shit… Its only function is kill or gravely mame. You’re not rebuilding your house using bullets, or carving your Thanksgiving turkey with an extended magazine.

        Not saying gun manufacturers should be liable, but you understand the difference between “product designed to kill quickly and effectively, end masse, used to kill” and “product designed to perform useful life function used to awkwardly, and inefficiently kill” right?.. Right?

        Just because you hold gun manufacturers liable for how their product is used, doesn’t mean you have to hold apple orchards liable if someone grinds to thousands of apple seeds to poison someone with arsenic. We are allowed to make distinctions based on reasonable intent. You get that right?

        Like, we can ban butterfly knives and switch blades but not chefs knives, because while both are just sharp angled pieces of metal, one is designed for kitchen utility and one is designed for concealment and stabbing.