Back-door gun control
Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2001 10:06:30 -0700 (PDT)
From: robert n lyman <rlyman@u.washington.edu>
To: editpage@seattle-pi.com
Subject: "Hold gun makers liable for safety"
To the editor, Seattle PI
In your Aug. 14 editorial, you quite reasonably
conclude that gun makers, much like knife makers and car makers, cannot be held
liable for the criminal use of non-defective products. You back up this conclusion
with sound logic and helpful analogies.
Then, at the tail end of your commentary, you
turn a full 180 degrees and declare that while gun makers aren't responsible
for criminal misuse, they ARE somehow liable when children find their parent's
gun, supposedly because the industry has not moved quickly enough to develop
"safety" technology. This makes absolutely no sense.
The most cursory glance through any gun magazine
will reveal a myriad of products designed prevent unauthorized use of firearms,
ranging from the downright dangerous $10 trigger lock to the nearly impenetrable
$3000 hardened steel safe. For a price which is usually a fraction of the price
of their gun collections, parents can easily secure their firearms out of reach.
The only people responsible for failing to do so are the parents themselves,
and certainly not the manufacturers.
As for "accidental" discharges, very few gun
safety experts will acknowledge that there is such a thing. The proper term
is "negligent discharge," and it results, again, not from defective design,
but from the failure of the person holding the gun to obey safe handling rules.
Guns are SUPPOSED to go bang when you pull the trigger; if you pull it when
you aren't supposed to, that is entirely your fault. No safety device can correct
for stupidity.
Modern firearms, even without the meddling of
ignorant liberal nanny-statists, are among the safest, best designed consumer
products on the market. Death and injury due to defects are extraordinarily
rare. It is frankly difficult for this gun owner to believe that the government
can improve on the record of quality which reputable manufacturers enjoy. I
have no objection to lawsuits over defective products, but that would mean none
against the gun industry. Nor is their any justification for the Consumer Product
Safety Commission to begin harassing gun makers and their customers.
Your editorial looks to me like a call for back-door
gun control.
Robert Lyman
Seattle
P.S. By the way, the claim that "gun violence"
"costs" $100 billion annually is a fraud. Educate yourselves by reading:
https://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBViewItem.asp?id=2010
or else just pick up the book Gun Violence: The Real Costs by Ludwig and Cook
and see if you think their methodology makes sense.
To Get Your Letters Printed Here
Click here and read submission guidelines.
