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.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Next they should hold automobile manufacturers liable for those who die in wrecks.

And cigarette companies, and alcohol companies, and knife companies, and fast food restaurants, and utensil companies (gotta use something to eat food with), etc...

I think those kind of people are a little detached from reality.

Quote »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."[/quote]Luckily the manufacturers and distributors would likely never face this issue. There are currently enough regulations that it is difficult to send the gun to the wrong person unless the company is simply running an illegal practice in the first place. I'm sure there are probably some that do... but most, likely not.

If I were to get into that issue (being shot or family person getting shot ), I'd probably sue the state for making it too difficult to get a gun to protect myself/family/etc.

Guns dont kill people. people do. Wtf hippy Bull-****e is this? The car reference is a perfect example of how this refuses to translate in any sane way. why cant people learn to be accountable for there actions in this country? Why is it always "oh, im from a broken home, or a bad neighborhood, im a product of my environment I cant help that I killed that family of four after I robbed them, poor me" Funk that. If prison was more about rehabilitation and less about shanking, butt sechs, and revenge maybe we would have less repeat and violent offenders.

It is in England, but some of the crap we would be dealing with in our legislature should they pass it.

England has always been a good predictor of future american legislation. Citing this potential precedent I hear some people are sueing nissan for facilitating me handing them their *** at the stoplight.

themadscientist wrote:I hear some people are sueing nissan for facilitating me handing them their @$$ at the stoplight.

ROTFL def going in teh sig, ty Madscientist, or is it like a tribe called quest and you have to say the whole thing: TheMadScientist? I am def going to quote you on this, you deserve the credit. I heard God is suing me for copyright infingement for my GF's repeated use of her name while in bed with me. We will see how it pans out, but it doesnt look good.

people call me TMS for short. Not sure who started it but it's catchy.

Just so people know where I stand on this issue, I think it's unbelievably silly.

Just what our already overly-litigious society needs.....another excuse to sue someone.

How about STRONGER PENALTIES for criminals convicted of using firearms??? It works in Virginia, and they have more guns per capita than almost anyone else in the United States.

If someone commits a crime with a firearm, whether the firearm is actually USED in the crime or not, they need automatic and extended jailtime. Period.

The City of Gary Indiana is exploring this issue. They want to sue the firearms manufactures to recoup the money their municipal Hospitals spend to treat gun shot wounds. The State of Indiana was on the lawsuit with the Tobacco companies and it was structured the same way. The only problem is that they never used the settlement money for recouping the cost of treating people for smoking related illnesses and deaths. They instead ran no smoking ads and expanded the state run Children Health Insurance Program. So if Gary goes through with this, I bet you the money will go to other programs than for the expressed stated damages they are suing for.

I would love these Manufactures to band together and bar selling handguns/rifles to the Police Departments of cities that sue them for this crap. Imagine a activist Mayor or Prosectuor that has their Law Enforcement departments up in arms when they can't get new firearms or their existing firearms fixed.

As much as I'd like to see better gun control, this is not a good solution. In fact, its downright rediculous.

Weren't we promised a ruling from the Supreme Court on the DC gun ban case this June. (this month). That should settle many things.

HashiriyaS14 wrote:Just so people know where I stand on this issue, I think it's unbelievably silly.

Just what our already overly-litigious society needs.....another excuse to sue someone.

How about STRONGER PENALTIES for criminals convicted of using firearms??? It works in Virginia, and they have more guns per capita than almost anyone else in the United States.

If someone commits a crime with a firearm, whether the firearm is actually USED in the crime or not, they need automatic and extended jailtime. Period.

I don't think Virginia is a good example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V...sacre

Telcoman