• SupraMario@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    This entire thread chain is in place to suggest that only guns which are designed to kill, should have their manufacturs liable for what other people do with the product. No other industry was brought up, just guns. Why? Because at the end of the day, you’re all for complete bans, and no amount of “nuh uh, we’re fine with hunting rifles” or whatever else bullshit, that’s the end goal…you just try and sugar coat it so you can try and gain some support for the idea.

    • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      It was a single example as a thought exercise.

      All the rest are words you’re putting on other people’s mouths.

        • SpaceNoodle@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          There you go again, putting words in even more people’s mouths.

          Anyway, what would that have to do with the fact that guns are tools.designed specifically for killing?

          • SupraMario@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            Naa that’s literally the end goal. It’s pointless to sugar coat it.

            Because I’m not the one suggesting that companies be liable for what people do with their products. Way more people a year die from alcohol than guns (it’s like a 3xs as many) and alcohol has no other purpose but a vice, yet you’re probably not going to suggest that companies be liable for drunk drivers who kill people, nor are you going to suggest that they cover all the alcohol related health issues…are you.