Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Suing The Gun Manufacturer. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
4 pages in length. Police officer Whiteman was shot with a Heckler & Kosh semi automatic assault rifle, which – after being purchased legally - had been unlawfully modified to allow fully automatic firing. Officer Whiteman, who was shot during a shootout with bank robbers, wants to sue the gun manufacturer. In light of the ever-shifting weight of responsibility when it comes to gun crimes, legal theories and likely defenses advanced by the gun manufacturer are those that call for a stricter "enforcement of criminal laws to hold armed criminals directly responsible for their actions" (Nagata, 2000, p. PG) instead of blaming firearms makers for their products ending up in the wrong hands. Bibliography lists 1 source.
Page Count:
4 pages (~225 words per page)
File: LM1_TLCSueGun.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
automatic firing. Officer Whiteman, who was shot during a shootout with bank robbers, wants to sue the gun manufacturer. In light of the ever-shifting weight of responsibility when
it comes to gun crimes, legal theories and likely defenses advanced by the gun manufacturer are those that call for a stricter "enforcement of criminal laws to hold armed criminals
directly responsible for their actions" (Nagata, 2000, p. PG) instead of blaming firearms makers for their products ending up in the wrong hands. At issue is determining who is actually
at fault for Officer Whiteman being shot with a modified Heckler & Kosh semi automatic assault rifle. Past precedent results from existing tort law that allows for an individual
who has sustained sustaining personal injury due to "the proper use of an unsafe or defective product" (Nagata, 2000, p. PG) to seek compensation from "the persons who designed, manufactured,
sold, or furnished that product" (Nagata, 2000, p. PG). However, in this particular case, the Heckler & Kosh semi automatic assault rifle was not used in the manner intended
due to it having been modified. Allegations claim this firearm is designed and marketed to appeal to the criminal element rather than the general public; however, such a charge
has no bearing in this instance since the manufacturer had no control over what the individual did with the rifle once in his possession. The fundamental defense this gun manufacturer
has to a liability lawsuit is the firm foundation of existing tort law that states "manufacturers are not responsible for the criminal misuse or negligent use of non defective products"
(Nagata, 2000, p. PG). This legal safeguard provides a wave of protection throughout virtually all aspects of equitable commerce by way of preventing such industries as firearms, tobacco, automobile
...