NotMe wrote:

I'll play the game. To what end do you see better law to account
for gun ownership?

- new law that allows gun victims, surviving family, etc, to be able to
sue gun makers and gun owners for "wrongful death" or for dammages
(health-care costs) caused by gun injuries, gun-shot deaths,
malfunctions, etc. If gun manufacturers don't want to be sued, then
they can alter the functionality of their products to make them more
secure / safer as any consumer product should be. If gun owners don't
want to be sued if a gun they owned was used (accidentally or
intentionally) to injure/kill someone, then they can choose to NOT own a
gun in the first place, or they can rely on their gun insurance (which
would or could be mandated that they have) to cover them for any
court-determined financially-liable compensation claim.

This law would only apply to death or injury caused by a gun sold after
a certain date - not for any guns in current circulation. Gun makers
can also respond to this law by withdrawing certain guns from their
product line for which they make the determination that the risk/reward
is not in their favor. Gun makers could also respond by incorporating
electronic biometrics into their products to better insure that the
product is not functional in the hands of un-registered persons.

The ability to sue for death or injury would not apply if a court
determines the claimant was performing an illegal or criminal act at the
time of injury / death.


- new law that requires that permits or licences to own firearms must be
renewed on some basis (anually, once every 2 years, etc - unless this
already exists now) AND that a license can only be renewed if the holder
can show proof of insurance (insurance against causing bodily harm or
injury , dammage to property, etc) that can be traced back to any guns
owned by the license holder regardless when the gun was acquired. Same
insurance idea as currently exists for motor vehicles, boats and other
liesure craft, etc.