I don’t care how much a civil case can ruin your life, if it was a replacement for prison time, we wouldn’t have prisons. I have a feeling most folks doing 5-10 in prison would happily trade in their sentence for a civil suit.
You are largely correct. There is a reason for this.
Guns are designed to be weapons, where something like a brick or a car is not. A gun, when placed in the hands of a 3 year old, makes that kid powerful enough to kill the baddest, toughest man on the planet in an instant.
If you decide you want to own one of those things, you are responsible for it. If your negligence causes someone’s death, in my book a civil suit alone doesn’t cut the mustard.
Lethality is lethality, though. And dead is dead. Certainly you can replace “gun” with “car” in your 3-yr-old example.
Sure, except I’d apply that to both guns and cars…and swimming pools. And anything else that’s lethal when misused and/or improperly secured.
At some point we’d have to discuss what “improperly secured” means in each of those contexts. Interestingly, we have in most places specific laws or at least ICC standards about how to secure the second-most accidentally-deadly of those things (swimming pools) but not the top accidental killer (cars) or the one everyone’s afraid of despite the dearth of negligence-related deaths involved (guns).
Hush!!! He just put the gun in the hand of a 3 year old. Out here, more toddlers/babies die because they get left in hot cars or because their parents don’t watch them around water than guns.
Lets just let this idiotic thread die the death of not being worth reading.