[SpicyLemonZest]

The comparison would be the CEO of Smith & Wesson setting up a smart contract which mails a pistol to anyone who deposits 0.5 ETH. I definitely expect he'd go to jail if he did that, even if he explained that actually he just put the pistol in a box and the mail system autonomously caused that box to be delivered.

[woodruffw]

Right. Regardless of any personal position I have about guns, it's clear that one actually had to go out of their way to possess one. Smith and Wesson doesn't make people purchase their guns and so, at least naively, it doesn't make sense to hold them responsible for every murder that happens with their guns.

On the other hand, if someone could demonstrate that S&W intentionally sells guns to markets where they know people will go and murder with them, you could draw a connection. And that is something someone could possibly demonstrate!

[soco]

Hmm, people in the US market do commit murder using S&W. How is this known fact helping? I think it needs more meat before being used as an argument.

[ARandumGuy]

Making comparisons with guns in the US isn't a great comparison, because the US has a lot of explicit protection for guns, gun owners, and gun manufacturers. These same protections do not exist for other industries, including banking.