Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by devnill 3003 days ago
Should gun manufacturers be liable for shootings? Car manufacturers for hit and runs? What about the USPS for when people ship drugs or other illegal contraband?

This seems like an awfully slippery slope where companies are are not only responsible for their own actions, but also for the actions of their customers as well.
2 comments
ocdtrekkie 3003 days ago
If gun owners are actively advertising to people they perceive to be likely mass shooters: Yes.

There's just so much here. They actively encouraged the practice, they made hundreds of millions of dollars on it, and the perverse incentive of a bidding war caused by all these scammers mean that despite knowing about the problem, Google had no desire to fix it.

link
adventured 3003 days ago
> If gun owners are actively advertising to people they perceive to be likely mass shooters

That's an extraordinarily absurd setup legally. How do you perceive someone to be a likely mass shooter exactly? What the hell is likely? Perceive what? Your entire concept is legally broken top to bottom, it would never stand up to a challenge.

And how do you define that they're specifically advertising to that person?

So: first, you have to magically perceive that someone is "likely" to be a mass shooter. Then the company has to be caught having identified someone as a likely mass shooter. Then the company has to intentionally advertise to them. Then it has to be shown that they intentionally advertised to them. Beyond being a non-functioning legal premise, in the best case scenario you just narrowed the risk for the gun maker down to zero.

link
ocdtrekkie 3003 days ago
That is my point, that the parent of my comment was not making a really comparable example to the one I was giving of Google's actions and how Section 230 absolves them of responsibility they truly should share in.
link
mrunkel 3003 days ago
Your analogy is not quite right. Google in this example isn't the gun manufacturer, they are simply the building owner that somebody else is selling guns out of.

The GP wants that building owner to be liable for the actions of the person that their tenant sells to.

link