Crimninal Justice Essay, Research Paper

Should Gun Makers be Liable for Shootings?Should gun makers be liable for shootings? A courtroom in California believed so, there was a case against a gun manufacturer for shooting that involved their product. Eventually though, at the end of the trial the charges against them were dropped. I believe that gun manufacturers should take responsibility because they have a duty to cleanse the street instead of influencing people o buy and inevitably use their product. In a way they have the duty to make the streets safer, because it is their product that has made the streets a dangerous place. Our laws also contribute to the unnecessary abuse of weapons because our laws against guns and gun purchases aren t reinforced as often as they should be. The California First District Court of Appeal became the first appellate court ever to rule that a gun manufacturer, Navegar Inc, can be held liable for a criminal misuse of a weapon. Navegar Inc. was set to stand trial for the 1993 violent death committed by Gian Luigi Ferri. In the article it reads, Gunmaker may be liable for San Francisco shooting, court rules. Justice J. Anthony Kline states, that a gun maker who sells a legal gun nonetheless has the duty to increase the likelihood that it will not be used criminally. Navegar Inc. is found responsible for making their weapon seem appealing to criminals by advertising their guns like they re trying to sell a toy instead of deadly weapons. For example, they described their gun, TEC-DC9, by saying it has a flash suppressor, a threaded barrel that accommodates a silencer, and a finish that has an excellent resistance to fingerprints. Gun makers need to realize that they influence society to take a step backwards and resort to violence by making their product so amazing and appealing. Navegar Inc. knew that their weapon was popular among criminals, but they did not seem to care because their products ere hot items and they were making their intended profit. As a result, they didn t really take into consideration the consequences. Navegar Inc. unfortunately was not charged with being liable for the criminal misuse but their line of weapons have been banned from California. Innocent people are being harmed everyday due to the negligence of others in possession of weapon. You could be walking down the same street you have walked down every day for the past thirty years, and still get shot for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. A friend of mine s uncle was walking to his car from work in Baltimore city. He had been working at UMAB for the last ten or fifteen years. Thinking he was safe, out of nowhere he was approached by someone with a gun. He was held at gunpoint until he gave all his money which was simply only ten dollars and jewelry on his body which didn t amount to much. It s sad to know that it s becoming dangerous to even walk down the street and that you have to cautious wherever you go.

For America to become a safer place the government needs to pass more efficient laws dealing with guns and the purchase of guns. There is always the option of making an effort to completely ban guns. I believe that would be the most sensible thing to do. It may take a couple of years to get crime levels down, but the future of our children would be safer. By not having guns so readily available to almost anyone, it makes it harder for criminal to commit violent acts involving weapons. It may mean that gun manufactures have to shut down their business and thousands of people may lose their jobs, but it also means that just has many people are going to live. Only law enforcement officers should be allowed to carry and use guns. To police officers, guns are a necessity because they are put in life or death situations quite frequently. In conclusion, gunmakers and the government need to become tougher on allowing people to have guns. Navegar wasn t completely at fault in this case, Ferri was a man on a mission, he wanted to go into the office building and fill it with bullets, it was his motive. He had bought the guns in a different state and presented a fake I.D. The guns he purchased was illegal to carry in the state of California under the Control Act of 1989 (AWCA), but it was still easily brought into the state. Navegar and other gun manufactures should make efforts or not selling products that appeal to the criminal mind. Their needs to be something done to secure the safety of the public.