Alleged ISIS supporter commits murder with stolen gun; victims sue S&W for their “ultra-hazardous” product

Faisal Hussain: Not responsible because of a hazardous product.

In 2018, a “psychotic, depressed ” and “very disturbed” Faisal Hussain shot 16 people in Greektown (Toronto). Two people died. Hussain cowardly committed suicide.

Hussain used a .40-calibre Smith & Wesson that HE STOLE in Saskatchewan in 2016 during a break-and-enter at a gun store.

According to Heavy, the Pakistani Hussain may have expressed support for ISIS. Wikipedia says that to this day there is no evidence that there was any connection between the shooter and his support for ISIS.

In a class action lawsuit filed by the victims of this shooting, they claim that the gun manufacturer failed to implement “key safety features” that could have prevented the attack.

Those features would be smart-gun technologies to prevent “unauthorized” users from firing the gun.

Without the technology in place, the lawsuit claims it was “reasonably foreseeable” people such as Hussain could inflict widespread damage with a stolen weapon. Read the details about the class action lawsuit here.

Setting aside the unreliability of smart gun technology, wasn’t it “reasonably foreseeable” that people such as Hussain would not inflict such widespread damage due to Canadian laws?

I mean, I’m no lawyer and I do not have a thorough knowledge of Canada’s criminal laws yet have a few questions:

Isn’t stealing ILLEGAL?
Isn’t breaking and entering ILLEGAL?
Isn’t assault ILLEGAL?
Isn’t assault with a deadly weapon ILLEGAL?
Isn’t first-degree murder ILLEGAL?
Isn’t felony murder ILLEGAL?

I’d argue that the “ultra-hazardous” actions of this shooting originated with the CRIMINAL shooter.

Where do you draw the line with product manufacturers and CRIMINALS who are WILLING and INTENT on committing ILLEGAL behaviors?

Guess the Canadian courts will decide.

DCG

Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!

Please follow and like us:

Share and Enjoy !

0Shares
0 0
 
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
6 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Alma
Alma
7 months ago

Shush, what a coward, committed suicide, he should have been committed and then used for a guinea pig!

Dr. Eowyn
Admin
7 months ago

U.S. courts made the very wrong ruling that victims of gun-shooting can sue gun manufacturers. Looks like this will be the test case for Canada.

truckjunkie
truckjunkie
7 months ago
Reply to  Dr. Eowyn

If it doesn’t end up in the USSC first…..

Mark
Mark
7 months ago

F*** the courts. This is a great example of the multiple justice systems we have…not equal justice under the law, but ‘special justice’ depending on how commies feel on a particular day.

Tyranny is tyranny ESPECIALLY when it’s a black robe doing it. When there is no justice, revolution is the only remedy.

truckjunkie
truckjunkie
7 months ago
Reply to  Mark

Regardless of the faults of the Court system,it’s infinitely better than vigilante justice. Vigilante justice NEVER gets better results,only WORSE;The Courts can be improved by replacing Judges who rule with consistent unjust Rulings. President Trump has been working on this very issue throughout his first Term,and I’m sure will continue in his Second Term.

truckjunkie
truckjunkie
7 months ago

I’m sorry-I’m at a loss-there are no words to describe how utterly STUPID this lawsuit is. If someone is so brainless they don’t know who’s at fault for a shooting,that they think it’s the gun’s MANUFACTURER’S fault,it’s quite possible they should be committed to an enforced care facility until they can correctly answer that question. Obviously it isn’t the gun’s fault-it didn’t fire itself;the maker of the gun has NO control of who uses the gun or HOW it is used,so THEY’RE not at fault. That leaves TWO possibilities-the shooter or the victims. Either the shooter just fired the gun… Read more »