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