English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

30 answers

Only if we pay them every time someone uses a gun to stop unjust violence.

Think about this for a moment - should knife makers have to pay for abuse of knives? How about car makers - should they have to pay for every jerk who runs somebody over?

Before people carried guns around, violent crime in urban societies was far, far worse. That is because the strong prevailed and little old ladies had no protection. Now, violent crime is drastically reduced by the ability of good folks to defend themselves. I've studied medieval murder rates (before firearms) to figure this out.

2006-10-29 12:29:30 · answer #1 · answered by speakeasy 6 · 3 0

to quote an old saying "guns don't kill people people do". Should we make car makers pay every time one of their cars kills someone, how about airliners, how about knives. rocks, hands ropes, water. My vote would for everyone who wanted to to go publicly armed. IEDs in Iraq are not always made of ammunition, if you had the knowledge, things under the sink can make a powerful explosive. What about the Oklahoma City that was blown up with fertilizer and diesel, we going to make the producers of them accountable too?
GIVE ME A BREAK PUT THE BLAME WHERE IT BELONGS ON LIBERAL CRIMINAL TREATMENT.
Beyond the right to a fair and speedy trial is the right to a quick and adequate punishment. Executing a few child molesters, rapists and drug dealers might not discourage others from committing the same crime, but sure would stop these people from repeating.

2006-10-29 12:45:10 · answer #2 · answered by auhunter04 4 · 1 0

Guns are just tools.
Human beings could come up with a way to hurt who'ever they want, in all manner of ways.
If there were only bow and arrows, cleaning up the debris would be messier.
I like the saying, "God created man, Winchester made them equal".
I have carried guns before, and also been in the military.
I have never committed a crime with a gun.
I also remember a saying, "I would rather be in a situation, and have a gun, than be in a situation, and need one, and don't have one.
If human beings did not have evil minds, guns would only be used for hunting, and sport.

2006-10-29 12:49:53 · answer #3 · answered by theodore r 3 · 1 0

Should McDonald's pay for the gym fees for all the overweight persons. Should the auto makers pay for all the damage and loss of life their vehicles have caused (44,000 deaths last year) I have had a gun laying on a shelf for years and you know what.... It hasn't hurt anyone. In fact the thing hasn't even gone off.

2006-10-29 12:59:35 · answer #4 · answered by Ranger473 4 · 1 0

No.

It would open up a Pandora's box of implications and become a windfall for greedy litigation lawyers.

Should breweries and wine makers and liquor manufacturers pay for the price of people who can't use alcohol responsibly?

Should power companies pay for electrical fires caused by overloaded and over fused house circuits and for people who stick metal objects into their outlets?

In short, any manufacturer that produces a product that can potentially be harmful if used for purposes it wasn't intended for would be fair game. And that's everything from power tools to ladders to jack knives and everything in between.

Don't you really think it's time we took responsibility for our own actions instead of always looking for someone else to blame?

Obviously, this doesn't exclude any manufacturer from lawsuits which result from a defective or inherently dangerous design fault or materials defect in their products.

2006-10-29 12:45:53 · answer #5 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 1 0

No. Because that would be wrong. How about the manufacturers of alcohol. Should they be held responsible for the alcohol related deaths and accidents. Not to mention the treatment centers for alcoholics and broken families of alcoholics. Would you make the manufacturers of alcohol pay for all of that. Naw. Just hold people accountable for their actions.

2006-10-29 12:39:32 · answer #6 · answered by ally_oop_64 4 · 1 0

If I make a toy for kids, and it passes the safety inspectors, and then some kids get hurt using it in an unsafe manner, not watched by their own parents, should I have to pay for it? I don't think so. Responsibility lies with the user, no matter what the case. If someone comes up and hands you drugs, and you do them, should they be charged for it? I don't think so; you should be charged if you did the drugs, if you are a responsible adult.

2006-10-29 12:31:56 · answer #7 · answered by merlin_steele 6 · 5 0

a lot of good things come out of guns( like self protection, etc) but a lot of bad things come out of it too , just depends on the situation, if at that moment the guns are used for slef protection then no but if it used for gang violence than yes

2006-10-29 12:36:33 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Guns don't kill people. People kill people. What about wars. Governments get people to go kill people. What if someone put a baseball bat along side someones head and killed them. Do we bust the bat makers?...Let's get real here. I think you get the idea.

2006-10-29 12:36:20 · answer #9 · answered by flip4449 5 · 2 0

I don't see anyone asking the alcohol makers to pay because there are accidents caused by drinkers so no

2006-10-29 12:32:01 · answer #10 · answered by keoni_21 3 · 5 0

fedest.com, questions and answers