Sure, they can try, but it's still as ridiculous as the smokers suing tobacco companies and the vegs suing the fast food companies. However, the difference between the examples is that tobacco companies are the ones with full knowledge of the intended effects on HUMANS, versus gun manufacturers selling weapons intended for safe and legit use. It's the difference between selling poison intended for humans, and selling poison intended for rats that ends up being used on humans.

Yes, it is possible and hopefully it will happen. If it is true that people know that tobacco is harmful, what is the same for the manufacturers of guns? Guns do not make the world a safer place, I am surprised some people still believe it. The difference between guns and cigarettes is that usually cigarettes damage mostly the users while guns more frequently kill the people around the gun owner. Excellent question, thank you!

I don't think that either should be happening. Smokers know the risk that they are taking, it's all over the pack, internet, television, radio, etc. If you are living in the year 2007 and still don't have a clue about the harmful effects of smoking, you may want to pull your head out from under the sand. Secondly, Gun manufacturers do not kill people. It's the people using the guns improperly, or in a malicious way. If Guns are used properly, and someone with proper training and without malicious intent is the one using the Gun, there would be no issue. The fact remains that it's not the company's fault that some idiot didn't know that smoking led to lung cancer, or that some evil person got their hands on a gun illegally and shot someone.

They should be legally able to.Both products cause pain destruction and death.That would cut down the common use of guns for there would be none to buy.

people die in car accidents too, should we sue the car manufacturers? Nothing in life is guaranteed except for death and suing somebody will never affect that, our "sue happy" culture is pathetic

I'm gonna sue the porn industry. Stupid tennis elbow . . .

No you cannot sue gun makers for something someone does with their product. Guns are a legal product and the maker cannot control how others (criminals) will use them. New Federal Laws and good judges have thrown out all the lawsuits that were filed by almost all the large cities, with strict gun control laws, in the U.S. The cigarette makers are a different story. Comparing sueing these companies and gun makers is comparing apples to oranges. Cigarette makers colluded to cover up the proof that cigarettes are harmful. The constantly lied in advertising, Congressional hearings etc. to make their customers believe smoking was not harmful to humans. They also colluded in adding higher amounts of nicotine and over 400 chemicals that only served one purpose, to ADDICT their customers and keep them addicted. Just for the above reasons, cigarette makers deserved to be sued. Angle1974 is wrong with her statement saying that guns don't make the world a safer place. This bogus "Anti-Gun" claim has be proven to be completely wrong. The fact and figures are available on the Internet and in books. States that have eased 'conceal carry' and other 'self protection' laws have drastically reduced crime in their States and especially in the larger cities. I am not talking crime reduction by a few percentage points, but reduction in crime by 50% or more. Every day in the U.S. there are several cases where people save their own lives by using their guns to stop criminals in the commission of a crime. Amazingly we never hear about these cases on the news. We only hear about criminals that kill others, accidental shootings, and/or where children played with daddy's gun and shot their friend (tragic, but very rare). No, gun control, by any method, will not make you safer.

No. smoking is voluntary. Any weapon, can sit on a desk for 10,000 years and never hurt a human. humans hurt humans. It takes the pull of a human finger to make a weapon fire. In contrast, it take the strike of a match, to voluntarily light a cigarette. Big difference.

So many answers you can tell are from non smokers. The real question should be should gun owners be able to sue gun makers if the gun makers are known to be adding explosive chemicals to the weapons that causes some of them to explode in the users faces or are known to use chemicals that are harmfull and deadly to inhale that are released when the gun is fired. It is exactly this that the tobacco companys have been doing and lieing to the public about. There has been found over 1001 chemicals added to tobacco. Tobacco in normal form dousn't contain these chemicals that seem to cause a wide variety of health related issues including acid reflux and other types of deadly desieses that were not around just a hundred years ago, even though there was plenty of smokers around for thousands of years. So the questioned asked above is kind of useless. Someone thought they had a logical question when they know that over half the population will not be aware of what is going on and whats added to tobacco. The gun question makes no sense, if that was the case then the tobacco question should be should the tobacco companys be able to be sued by someone if they was kidnapped, tied up and forced to smoke cigarettes by there kidnappers and developed cancer. The answer would be no, but the kidnappers would be able to be prosecuted. So this shows how useless the question asked is. If food places started adding arsenic or gasoline to your food without telling you the truth, would you have a right to sue?

I hate Philip Morris. They had first hand empirical evidence that supported the correlation between lung cancer and the consumption of cigarettes, and lied about it. They actually stated that there was no correlation between the two, and they had the paperwork in their possession. HOWEVER... Every box is stamped with a warning from the Surgeon General, informing of the risks associated with smoking, which include DEATH. The idiots still smoke to be "cool." No, they don't deserve to sue. (No, gunshot victims shouldn't sue the manufacturers. They should sue the assholes who shoot them).

They can, and they have, but as far as I can tell, they never win. The only one who comes out ahead is the lawyer.

If you live in the USA you can sue anybody, isn't that the big advantage of living in the land of the free?

No, bad analogy.

Of course. But in all lawsuits you have to actually have a legal cause of action. A tobacco company is not necessary liable just because you were harmed by cigarettes, and a gun manufacturer is not liable just because you were shot. Rather, in both cases the manufacturer has to aactually do something wrong.

Fribulous lawsuits runs rampant in this country. Smokers choose to smoke. Maybe those who are forced to breathe second-hand smoke should sue the smoker, and gunshot vitims should sue the one who shot them. Manufacturers only sell what people will buy. Lawsuits are not the answer...taking responsibility for your action is.

yes they should

Why can't auto accident victims sue car manufacturers? Why can't fat slobs sue the television manufacturers or the cable companies? Why can't morons sue the inteligent for making them look so stupid by comparison?

Good question, but tobacco companies have lied and tried to suppress the dangers of cigarettes; whereas, the dangers of guns are pretty blatant...

No, completely different principle but tobacco companies shouldn't be sued anyway. How samrt do you have to be to know that inhaling smoke that makes you cough and hack is not good for you? Stupid victim playing bastards!

I see the humor and intended sarcasm but, they can and have(not to say they've won). It happens more frequently than you'd think. When there is a wrongful death and a firearm is involved, sometimes the gun manufacturer is listed in the suit to cover the suers butt, because in the end they want someone to pay for the loss of a loved one. If a weapon can be proven as defective in any way the gun manufacturer sometimes pays just to save face.

Lol.

If that is the case ,they yes they should be able to sue the gun manufacturers for they are selling a product that is made to create death.Many products that are not good for society are not good for society and until they find that selling these products are not worth it,by being sued,they product will die out.

it will be easier in the coming years. I think the times have finally dictated it. 700 killed in Chicago this year. guns don't kill,bullets do..Tax the hell out of bullets. use the money to rebuild inner cities.