Should You Pay Gun Companies When You Save Your Life?

You practiced with your gun when you took your concealed carry class. Now, you carry your gun legally. You needed your gun last night when night three men walked toward your family in the dark parking lot. You pushed your family behind the parked cars and shouted “STOP!” The robbers ran even though you never fired a shot. So here is the question- Do you owe a special payment to the gun manufacturer because your family is safe? That idea isn’t as crazy as it sounds.

We’ve heard a similar argument in court time after time. The criminal was shot with a gun. Now the criminal’s lawyer sues the gun company and the ammunition manufacturer. Is this justice for an injured party, or is this another plaintiff’s lawyer searching for deep pockets? If gun companies should pay when criminals use guns, then should gun companies be paid when defenders use their gun to save lives?

 

Gun companies get dragged into court. Like a fire extinguisher manufacturer, firearms and ammunition manufacturers produce a product that can drag them in front of a judge years after the product was made. Unlike a fire extinguisher, there is no “use by” date, or a “product good for three years after purchase” label on a firearm. The manufacturer can be sued no matter how old the gun is and no matter who worked on it last.

If you are like the rest of us, your gun operates as intended. You rented the gun and you tried it. It fit you and shot well, so you bought it. You took the gun to class and trained with it. The gun will continue to fit and to function for decades. Maybe you stored your guns and gear for years at a time, and yet they worked every time you took them to the range. Is it your gun and ammo, or are they really the property and the responsibility of the gun company. Do you own them, or do you only possess them temporarily?

We’ve seen honest citizens dragged into court when they shot someone robbing their home. We fixed those laws..sort of. In many states today, you’re immune from criminal and civil prosecution if you can show with a preponderance of evidence that you acted in self-defense. That protects the defender, but who protects the gun company from civil lawsuits after you defend yourself? Maybe the gun company should sue the honest citizen who defended themselves. After all, it was the defenders actions that caused the lawsuit brought by criminals or their surviving family members. That makes sense..or not.

Claiming that a gun caused the robber’s injuries is a miss-assumption of the law. Robbing people is inherently dangerous, and the robber brought those injuries upon himself by his own actions. Blaming the gun manufacturer or the victim who defended his family turns tort law on its head. There are exceptions, but we have existing law for that.

I report on armed citizens who protected themselves. I’m reminded every week how grateful we should be for the lives saved by honest citizens who protect themselves and their family.

Thank god they had a gun.

~_~_

I gave you 500 words. Please leave a comment. RM