Should manufacturers be responsible for products used in violation of the law?

Decades ago cigarette manufacturers reached an enormous settlement for damages related to smoking. Cigarettes are a legal product and the manufacturers admitted to promoting an addictive product with known health risks. The damages went to the states for medical costs, not the smokers themselves.

President Biden has proposed changes to federal law to make it easier to sue gun makers. Gun manufacturers say the real objective is to force them out of business through unfair lawsuits.

“The gun industry absolutely can be sued,” said Oliva, of the trade industry group. “You just can’t sue a gun-maker because someone criminally misused a gun. That would be like suing Ford because a drunk driver killed someone."

Here is the text of the 2005 law mentioned in the article. The law requires child safety locks be provided with new guns and mandates their use among other things.

Text of S. 397 (109th): Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (Passed Congress version) - GovTrack.us

Opioid manufactures are being sued for deaths and damages related to opioid addiction. While some of the sales were through legitimate prescription use, much of that is fueled by illegal prescriptions and sales of the drugs. An argument is that the drug companies knew that their sales were being fueled by illegal use and sales of opioids so they were complicit.
Purdue Pharma Opioid Settlement For $8.3 Billion Approved By Judge : NPR

Should manufacturers be responsible for illegal use of their products?

Should it matter if they are complicit is promoting illegal use of the product?

Guns and opioids are far from the only recent examples. Should soft drink manufacturers be liable for medical costs and damages associated with obesity and diabetes associated with use of their products?

Obesity and diabetes greatly increase the risk catching and spreading COVID in addition to their direct risks. Should soft drink manufacturers be responsible for damages caused by spreading of COVID to people who do not use their product?

Oliva is right. This isn’t product liability.

2 Likes

Yes, baseball bat manufacturers should not be responsible if you use their product to murder your neighbor.

It will be interesting to see what happens to the marijuana industry 20 or 30 years from know for cancer and other diseases associated with smoking their product.

With roughly 90% of the world’s lawyers suing for anything and everything is the American way.

Prius sued because their car was used as a getaway in a robbery.

Gun manufacturers do not sell to the public

Not in the earlier days they didn’t. Not a good analogy. The drunk driver one is much more accurate

The alcohol or the vehicle?

Huh? Both. You can’t hold Ford responsible for drunk drivers.

1 Like

Nope.

Hoplophobia.

2 Likes

Could be if the product is only made to kill things.

No, it couldn’t. Silly doesn’t become you.

Anything that can kill a deer can kill a person.

Pesticides are designed to kill things and can be used as poisons.

Kitchen knifes are designed to cut through flesh.

The list goes on . . .

Anything that can punch a hole in a cardboard box can kill a person.

2 Likes

Ban ball point pens.

1 Like

Or at least require BGC and mental evaluations.

1 Like

If the left really cared about saving lives they would be demanding cell phones turn off automatically when driving instead.

7 Likes

Young lives. Think of the children.

Winning a lawsuit (as well as hitting the lottery) has replaced the traditional American Dream.

2 Likes