Try the political quiz

8,720 Replies

@4Y2P2HDConstitutionfrom Washington  answered…1mo

Absolutely not. This is asinine and comparable to suing a hammer maker because you smashed your thumb. Even if someone smashed someone elses thumb, on purpose. It is not the fault of the tool maker. It is the responsibility of each person to handle those tools appropriately. Decisions come with consequences. Use a tool for harm, and that person should deal with those consequences, not a company who made it.

Firearms dealers should only be dealt with legally if they sold someone a gun without going through the proper process.

@4XZR6RYDemocratfrom Massachusetts  answered…1mo

No, but original owners should have some stake in allowing their firearm to go missing

@4XY6N5GLibertarianfrom Utah  answered…1mo

Yes, the constitution gives us the right to sue for any reason. It does not mean that the case should win in court but I would not prevent any one from suing for any reason.

@4Y2FWH8Democratfrom Montana  answered…1mo

Gun owners should be required to carry insurance for each weapon that they own to cover the liability resulting from loss of life or serious injury.

@4XM5SWCConstitutionfrom Utah  answered…1mo

No, firearms manufacturers have NO control over how gun owners use firearm - and should not be held liable for things outside of their control. (Just like a car manufacturer cannot stop those who buy their cars from driving drunk.)

Gun dealers should only be held liable if they illegally sell a firearm to someone who uses that firearm to commit a crime.

@696WVWJDemocratfrom Pennsylvania  answered…1mo

NO. Guns don't kill people; people kill people. If we start suing legally acting gun manufacturers and dealers, then we should also start suing knife makers and car makers, because people are routinely killed by those items also. Let's get reasonable, people; reserve your lawsuits for the entities who actually deserve them: the people who committed the violent act in the first place.

@4XLCXXRConstitutionfrom North Carolina  answered…1mo

No, the business that sold the firearm and manufacturer that produced the firearm did not use the firearm to harm the victim. The victim cannot hold the manufacturer accountable for the actions of a customer. That would be like a homeowner holding their contractor accountable for their child tripping down the stairs. It's ridiculous and wouldn't happen.

@4XK8TJTDemocratfrom Massachusetts  answered…1mo

No, but gun violence victims should be allowed to sue the NRA for blocking enforcement of our gun laws.

@9QQCJ3FAmerican Solidarity from California answered…2hrs

@9QPRKWFIndependent from Montana answered…1 day

Yes, but only if they had required background checks and failed to look into them.

@9QPRDJFDemocrat from North Carolina answered…1 day

If they have given them the product but did not check there back ground.

@9QNSXM4Independent from South Carolina answered…3 days

Yes and no, if they knew that person was crazy then it shouldnt have been given in the first place. But beside that, I believe mor regulations should be put in place to pruchase a firearm.

@9QNR9DXDemocrat from Georgia answered…3 days

@9QNM8HNDemocrat from California answered…3 days

@9P73RGTAmerican Solidarity from Utah answered…1mo

@9P6XNZGProgressive from Michigan answered…1mo

Yes because it may be the dealer's fault because they should check really well about who they are selling a gun to

@9P6W2HPDemocrat from Utah answered…1mo

If acted on gun violence then yes, however if you broke into someones property then you shouldn't be allowed to sue

@9P6T99MWorking Family from North Carolina answered…1mo

No, because gun dealers and manufacturers did nothing the gun dealer might have sold that gun years before when the person was not mentally ill or when they where showing no signs of being mentally ill

@9P6NBX3Socialist from Texas answered…1mo

@9P5XZG4Women’s Equality from Kansas answered…1mo

do these dealers have a license and do they have a criminal record?

@9P5R3ZDConstitution from Michigan answered…1mo

yes only, only if sold illegal or did not use proper background check

@9P5QRHJDemocrat from Pennsylvania answered…1mo

If they sold the gun to a bad person or a person who is not able to control and have a gun safely.

@9P5PCDGTranshumanist from Ohio answered…1mo

Yes, if the dealers didn't follow the background check or standard distribution protocol

@9P5JSDTPeace and Freedom from Michigan answered…1mo

If the dealer didn’t follow laws regarding background checks/etc.

@9P5J8TWDemocrat from New York answered…1mo

No because the dealers are not responsible for how the people who buy them use the firearms.

@9P5BSWRDemocrat from North Carolina answered…1mo

I think it would depend because not everyone that buys a gun will be reckless with it, but the person who is selling the gun needs to perform a full background check on the person buying it.

@9P55TQSTranshumanist from Arizona answered…1mo

@9P4QTD6Independent from Florida answered…1mo

No unless there is evidence supporting they did not do a good background check.

@9P4PQKJWomen’s Equality from New York answered…1mo

it depends because if the person that sold the gun didn't have any restrictions when someone was buying it than maybe they can sue

@9P4PBKCLibertarian from Nebraska answered…1mo

Yes, If gun laws are reformed and dealers fail to ensure the buyer has met the requirements to purchase a fire arm

@9P4BW5FDemocrat from Florida answered…1mo

Yes, I think they should start running a background check before they let them buy anything for those stores.

@9P46LTNWomen’s Equality from Minnesota answered…1mo

Yes and No. It's the business's fault for doing illegal activity, and the kid is also at fault for getting the gun and shooting people down.

@9P43RFXTranshumanist from New York answered…1mo

No, they should not be liable for how their products are utilized exept under truely exeptional cases but be liable for faulty products that endanger the user and should be regulated like how the goverment regulates the food industry

@9P437VTWomen’s Equality from Ohio answered…1mo

Depending on if they have laws preventing people under 18 to buy firearms should decide whether or not they are sueable.

@9P365CNGreen from Massachusetts answered…1mo

Yes, but only if the person who purchase the firearm didn't have a thorough background check.

@9P35RQCVeteran from West Virginia answered…1mo

@9P2NZZKLibertarian from Indiana answered…1mo

No, but the individual who used the fire arm in a crime should be convicted AND sued.

@9NZZWCWSocialist from Kentucky answered…1mo

Only dealers, but this must come with an appropriate vetting process applied by dealers. They cannot be held liable in the current system.

@9NZ2B5NDemocrat from New Jersey answered…1mo

No because of the law: defense to negligence. In this law, it talks about the "assumption of the risk" which basically means that people know what they are getting into when they do something major such as buying a gun.

@9NYNZ56Women’s Equality from Alabama answered…1mo

Yes, bars are held responsible for (over)serving people who are caught driving under the influence. If a business isn't digging enough into the background of the people buying it's (deadly) product, it's being negligent.

@9NXWD88Women’s Equality from New Jersey answered…1mo

@9NXGMNQDemocrat from Washington answered…1mo

No, unless manufacturers or firearms dealers are doing this illegally(because mistakes etc. aren't necessarily followed to the letter) or if they were contributing to the crime in any way except selling the firearm(again, unless illegal).

@9NX5HVJPeace and Freedom from Virginia answered…1mo

Dealers should be held accountable if the background check wasn’t extensive enough/red flags seen were enough to prevent an attack. Manufacturers don’t exactly have a fault.

@9NWV76WDemocrat from Georgia answered…1mo

No, the family of the one who abused the weapon should pay, not the company making it

Engagement

The historical activity of users engaging with this question.

Loading data...

Loading chart...