Manufacturer held liable for product-related death

Legion Troll

Legion Troll

A fine upstanding poster
Fotolia_70636183_S.jpg


The survivors of Jacqueline Fox were awarded $72 million by a St. Louis jury.

The company issued a statement expressing sympathy for Fox’s family but disagrees with the verdict. It also said it is exploring its post-trial options.

More cases may be filed soon, and lawyers at several plaintiffs’ firms who worked on the Fox case said they are investigating thousands of additional claims.


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-johnson-johnson-talc-cancer-idUSKCN0VZ05L
 
Legion Troll said:
Only gun makers have legal protection from lawsuits.
Click to expand...

Just when I thought you could not get any more dishonest and stupid at the same time. Gun makers can be sued just like this manufacturers. You're dishonestly trying to equate a faulty product with a product that is used improperly by someone, in which case, the manufacturer is not liable.
 
Konono said:
Just when I thought you could not get any more dishonest and stupid at the same time. Gun makers can be sued just like this manufacturers. You're dishonestly trying to equate a faulty product with a product that is used improperly by someone, in which case, the manufacturer is not liable.
Click to expand...

Phoenix has had several incidents as of late, of people driving on the freeways in the wrong direction.
Maybe the proper thing to do, is to sue the car manufacturer. :palm:
 
christiefan915 said:
Are you being deliberately obtuse?
Click to expand...

You said: "Crickets chirping, no surprise."

This is normally said when people feel that the subject is being ignored due some partisan reason. I'll understand if you can't explain why you said this after I proved this has nothing to do with the gun manufacturer issue.
 
Right said:
Just when I thought you could not get any more dishonest and stupid at the same time. Gun makers can be sued just like this manufacturers. You're dishonestly trying to equate a faulty product with a product that is used improperly by someone, in which case, the manufacturer is not liable.
Click to expand...

I am?

Cite.
 
Konono said:
Just when I thought you could not get any more dishonest and stupid at the same time. Gun makers can be sued just like this manufacturers. You're dishonestly trying to equate a faulty product with a product that is used improperly by someone, in which case, the manufacturer is not liable.
Click to expand...

So people who sell weapons to warlords and terrorists shouldn't be held liable? That's just improper use of the product, after all, it's not the manufacturers fault that the terrorist they sold it to used it to commit terrorism.
 
Konono said:
Just when I thought you could not get any more dishonest and stupid at the same time. Gun makers can be sued just like this manufacturers. You're dishonestly trying to equate a faulty product with a product that is used improperly by someone, in which case, the manufacturer is not liable.
Click to expand...

Killing somebody with a gun specifically designed to kill is not ' improper use '. Of course, the manufacturer should be liable- and when the Act is overturned he will be held to account. He will have to adapt and make guns which do not kill people. What would be the fun in that ? - some might say.
 
Last edited:
Konono said:
You said: "Crickets chirping, no surprise."

This is normally said when people feel that the subject is being ignored due some partisan reason. I'll understand if you can't explain why you said this after I proved this has nothing to do with the gun manufacturer issue.
Click to expand...

You of all people should understand. You stated "You're dishonestly trying to equate a faulty product with a product that is used improperly by someone, in which case, the manufacturer is not liable."

Since when was baby powder ever deemed a "faulty product"? And how about the McDonald's hot coffee lawsuit, the product wasn't "faulty" but the woman still got an award.
 
Were cigarettes "faulty" in the Phillip Morris case?

Was asbestos "faulty"?

Good thing the gun lobby got Congress to pass a special measure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top