Stuff I don't understand, and maybe never will.

[Chris BeHanna]

On Jun 30, 2016, at 15:56, Ronald F. Guilmette <rfg at tristatelogic.com> wrote:
> In essentially every other industry, crappy dangerous products, sold
> to the public en mass (and generally with no warnings) can be taken
> to task in a U.S. court of law.  But not software.  In this way,
> software is in rare and elite good company with other marvelous
> products which are also and likewise immune from product liability
> actions, in particular tobacco and firearms.

Groan.  I just love FUD, don't you?

Firearms are most definitely NOT "immune from product liability actions."  If one fails to function in the manner it was designed, and someone is injured as a result, the manufacturer most certainly is NOT immune from liability.  If it fires out of battery and the user gets a faceful of burning powder and brass, yup, liability.  If the firearm catastrophically fails and it's not user error, the manufacturer is most certainly NOT immune from liability.   If the weapon fires while the safety is engaged, or when dropped muzzle-first, the manufacturer is most certainly NOT immune from liability. 

Now, if the nonsense you're peddling is that you're upset that manufacturers aren't liable for the blatant, deliberate, criminal misuse of their products, that's quite a different thing.  We don't, for example, hold an auto manufacturer responsible if a crazed soccer mom or a loser twenty-something mows down a sidewalk full of people, nor should we, nor do we hold the FreeBSD Foundation liable if someone uses FreeBSD to craft a worm or virus, or to commit some other cybercrime. 

-- 
Chris BeHanna
chris at behanna.org