Make the Gun Companies Pay Blood Money

[RoadVirus]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/opinion/make-gun-companies-pay-blood-money.html?_r=0

But there is a simple and direct way to make them accountable for the harm their products cause. For every gun sold, those who manufacture or import it should pay a tax. The money should then be used to create a compensation fund for innocent victims of gun violence.

This proposal is based on a fundamentally conservative principle — that those who cause injury should be made to “internalize” the cost of their activity by paying for it. Now, gun manufacturers and sellers are mostly protected from lawsuits by federal law.

As it happens, a model for this approach already exists. Under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, those injured by vaccines are eligible for compensation from a fund financed by an excise tax on the sale of every dose of vaccine. In creating this no-fault system in the 1980s, Congress sought to provide care for those injured by vaccines while protecting manufacturers from undue litigation.

A sword never kills anybody; it is a tool in the killer's hand - Seneca

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Guns don't kill people, stupid.

People kill people.

Next...

Then access a tax on the weapons/ammo and let the "people" pay for the damage.

 

[squeeze berry]

Guns don't kill people, stupid.

People kill people.

Next...

Then access a tax on the weapons/ammo and let the "people" pay for the damage.

gun grabbers can put their money where their mouths are.

Special fund required by DNC, Brady foundation Acorn etc and all registered dems

 

[Katzndogz]

People kill people with guns. And in the US, the number is over 32,000 a year. And the number of gun deaths will soon exceed the number of auto deaths. But that is just fine with the fruitloops here.

So, since there are more auto deaths than gun deaths, how about we put the same restrictions on auto manufacturers?

We do. We require seat belts and air bags. We crash test their vehicles. We have laws that hold them accountable if they make bombs like the Pinto's.

Yet the gun manufactures are not held to any standard at all. In fact there are laws enacted by Congress that does not allow the CDC to look at how much havoc guns cause in our society.

Of course gun manufacturers are held to standards, very high standards. Guns that malfunction due to a manufacturing and/or design defect are already liable. It is not possible to make a gun that will only fire a bullet under predefined circumstances. It is not possible to make a bullet that deploys a safety barrier prior to impact.

It's like making hammer manufacturers liable for every injury caused by a hammer. Guns are inherently dangerous products that when used as intended cause death or injury.

 

[bripat9643]

There should be a tax on idiocy. You would owe a fortune.

How about we have a fund for all the people who were murdered because the police didn't show up in time? Every gun control moron like you would have to pay.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/opinion/make-gun-companies-pay-blood-money.html?_r=0

But there is a simple and direct way to make them accountable for the harm their products cause. For every gun sold, those who manufacture or import it should pay a tax. The money should then be used to create a compensation fund for innocent victims of gun violence.

This proposal is based on a fundamentally conservative principle — that those who cause injury should be made to “internalize” the cost of their activity by paying for it. Now, gun manufacturers and sellers are mostly protected from lawsuits by federal law.

As it happens, a model for this approach already exists. Under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, those injured by vaccines are eligible for compensation from a fund financed by an excise tax on the sale of every dose of vaccine. In creating this no-fault system in the 1980s, Congress sought to provide care for those injured by vaccines while protecting manufacturers from undue litigation.

 

[bripat9643]

Guns don't kill people, stupid.

People kill people.

Next...

Then access a tax on the weapons/ammo and let the "people" pay for the damage.

Your "then" doesn't fallow from your "if," moron.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Not a bad idea and it worked against tobacco companies.

I've actually been against settlements against tobacco companies because I believe the smoker should take responsibility for their own stupidity.

Except that the tobacco companies lied about the effects of tobacco and if it caused cancer. They said it absolutely did not. And had their scientists provide false information to that effect.

This worked until Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, Brown and Williamson's former research director, came forward and told the truth.

So the tobacco companies need to pay out their evil asses.

Good point. As far as I know, no gun maker has ever tried to say their product is not meant to kill.

And, that IS the only reason guns are made and only reason guns are purchased.

 

[martybegan]

Not a bad idea and it worked against tobacco companies.

I've actually been against settlements against tobacco companies because I believe the smoker should take responsibility for their own stupidity.

Except that the tobacco companies lied about the effects of tobacco and if it caused cancer. They said it absolutely did not. And had their scientists provide false information to that effect.

This worked until Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, Brown and Williamson's former research director, came forward and told the truth.

So the tobacco companies need to pay out their evil asses.

Good point. As far as I know, no gun maker has ever tried to say their product is not meant to kill.

And, that IS the only reason guns are made and only reason guns are purchased.

So there is no such thing as a target or skeet shooter?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

More goofy stuff from the OP. Of course it never occurs to him to hold the murderer responsible for his/her actions. Just blame someone else that has absolutely nothing to do with the murder.

 

[Roadrunner]

How about making the manufacturers of psychotropic drugs pay?

Drug zombies commit most of the mass murders, and most of the suicides.

Guns have far less to do with these deaths than mind altering drugs.

 

[Roadrunner]

Time to address the mind poisoning going on in the name of pyschiatry.

Hold doctors and drug companies accountable when their patients commit suicide or commit mass murder.

 

[TemplarKormac]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/opinion/make-gun-companies-pay-blood-money.html?_r=0

But there is a simple and direct way to make them accountable for the harm their products cause. For every gun sold, those who manufacture or import it should pay a tax. The money should then be used to create a compensation fund for innocent victims of gun violence.

This proposal is based on a fundamentally conservative principle — that those who cause injury should be made to “internalize” the cost of their activity by paying for it. Now, gun manufacturers and sellers are mostly protected from lawsuits by federal law.

As it happens, a model for this approach already exists. Under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, those injured by vaccines are eligible for compensation from a fund financed by an excise tax on the sale of every dose of vaccine. In creating this no-fault system in the 1980s, Congress sought to provide care for those injured by vaccines while protecting manufacturers from undue litigation.

Okay, if you want to play that game, make all the women who ever aborted a child for mere convenience pay blood money. Make all the doctors who aborted those children pay blood money. Somehow one form of killing is seen as acceptable over another. The logic behind this reasoning is flawed. Should we make car manufacturers pay blood money for people who died in accidents that happened in their cars?

Things like guns and cars need a controlling influence. These objects do not simply act under their own power. So, as far as a gun goes, a person is needed to fire it. For a car, a person is needed to drive it.

 

[Roadrunner]

Do clay pigeons feel pain when shot?

Guns don't kill people, people kill people, usually in the case of suicide or mass murder, heavy drugs, legal and illegal, are involved.

I think we should hold pyschiatrists accountable for the actions of their patients if the patient commits mass murder or suicide.

Makes more sense than blaming inanimate objects.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/opinion/make-gun-companies-pay-blood-money.html?_r=0

But there is a simple and direct way to make them accountable for the harm their products cause. For every gun sold, those who manufacture or import it should pay a tax. The money should then be used to create a compensation fund for innocent victims of gun violence.

This proposal is based on a fundamentally conservative principle — that those who cause injury should be made to “internalize” the cost of their activity by paying for it. Now, gun manufacturers and sellers are mostly protected from lawsuits by federal law.

As it happens, a model for this approach already exists. Under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, those injured by vaccines are eligible for compensation from a fund financed by an excise tax on the sale of every dose of vaccine. In creating this no-fault system in the 1980s, Congress sought to provide care for those injured by vaccines while protecting manufacturers from undue litigation.

The 2nd Amendment is clear, the right shall not be infringed. If a poll tax infringes a right to vote then a punitive tax on firearms infringes the right to keep and bear arms.

 

[Harry Dresden]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/opinion/make-gun-companies-pay-blood-money.html?_r=0

But there is a simple and direct way to make them accountable for the harm their products cause. For every gun sold, those who manufacture or import it should pay a tax. The money should then be used to create a compensation fund for innocent victims of gun violence.

This proposal is based on a fundamentally conservative principle — that those who cause injury should be made to “internalize” the cost of their activity by paying for it. Now, gun manufacturers and sellers are mostly protected from lawsuits by federal law.

As it happens, a model for this approach already exists. Under the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, those injured by vaccines are eligible for compensation from a fund financed by an excise tax on the sale of every dose of vaccine. In creating this no-fault system in the 1980s, Congress sought to provide care for those injured by vaccines while protecting manufacturers from undue litigation.

ok Joe....lets also make the Breakfast food companies pay for the shit that little kids eat every morning....like that bowl of sugar....they are helping to make little kids fat and are leading them towards Diabetes.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

Guns make it easier to kill people.

Next.

so do knives and Bats, Razor Blades and peoples fists....

 

[Rozman]

Manufacturers of the following should pay into a fund for fat people.

Makers of Gummi bears and worms.
Makers of potato chips.
Makers of all sugary cereals...

More to come....

I like this game.

 

[Harry Dresden]

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/24/opinion/make-gun-companies-pay-blood-money.html?_r=0

The reason for the vaccine fund is that no manufacturer was going to make vaccines anymore without some protection from lawsuits that were based on know adverse reactions caused by introducing live/attenuated/dead versions of pathonegenic materials.

If the vaccines were found to be made incorrectly, or the effect was from some manufacturing error, the fund doesnt cover that. The fund covers the vaccine working as intended, but because the state mandates vaccination via school requirements, it covers any losses.

The object of your proposal, is to again make guns too expensive for people to own. The purpose of the vaccine fund was never to end vaccines, but to keep them under manufacture.

Well it isn't my proposal. I wouldn't be that generous.

I would outright ban firearms, and only allow NON-Lethal weapons for home protection, which will get the job done and not kill household members.

But the problem with the gun manufacturers is that they are reckless in their marketting.

Most of us would say Nancy Lanza buying 12 guns because she expects the collapse of civilziation to be nuts.

The gun manufacturers see her as a prime market, and that's the problem.

I would outright ban firearms,

which is why the 2nd half of the 2nd Amendment was put in.....for people with your mindset....

 

[DiamondDave]

Not a bad idea and it worked against tobacco companies.

I've actually been against settlements against tobacco companies because I believe the smoker should take responsibility for their own stupidity.

Except that the tobacco companies lied about the effects of tobacco and if it caused cancer. They said it absolutely did not. And had their scientists provide false information to that effect.

This worked until Dr. Jeffrey Wigand, Brown and Williamson's former research director, came forward and told the truth.

So the tobacco companies need to pay out their evil asses.

Good point. As far as I know, no gun maker has ever tried to say their product is not meant to kill.

And, that IS the only reason guns are made and only reason guns are purchased.

No.. you are adding intent of the USER to the PURPOSE.. which is WRONG

The TOOL of a firearm has a purpose.. that purpose is nothing more than to launch a projectile or a designed caliber, at a designed velocity, at a designed degree of accuracy, over a designed distance, at a designed rate....

Idiot

 

[Roadrunner]

USDA should be fined for creating such a huge class of foodstamp dependent fatasses.

Why should anyone get to buy junk food on the public's dime?

Food assistance should be whole grain natural commodities like beans and rice, whole grain breads, and very few fats other than milk and butter.

Fatasses broke the health system in this country, and most fatasses are USDA fed.

We need to go back to basic assistance for the needy, not freedom to buy junk food.

If beans and rice is good enough for low budget seniors who do not get food stamps, it should be sufficient for the "needy".