Are Bull’s Eye and Bushmaster morally responsible for the Washington, D. C. victims’ death? Qouting from Manuel Velasquez’s statement, “a person or an agent or a party is morally responsible for an injury if
- they caused it,
- they knew what they were doing, and
- they could have prevented it.
“Therefore, besides the two assassinator, I believe both Bull’s Eye and Bushmaster are morally responsible for the Washington, D. C victims’ death. However, the company and store are failed to prevent the homicide since they sell the product to the persons that already been prohibited by general laws for buying guns.
Are gun Manufactures or gun dealers ever morally responsible for deaths caused for deaths caused by the use of their guns? First of all, generally guns do not kill people, people kill people with guns. If they had no guns they would use other weapons, or even their bare hands. Moreover, gun manufacturers or dealer not morally responsible if it was legal sale However, different situation happen in this case. This is an obviously ilegal sell since the federal laws prohibited Muhammad and Malvo for buying guns. Thus, I believe the concept of morality also applies to corporations as well.
Companies been held morally responsible for injuries which they inflict on somebody else, injuries in which their product was defective, and also injuries in which one of their customers used one of their products to inflict an injury on a third party. They should ensure the distiburment of their product to proper party which will not misuse it.
Unfortunately, in this case, Bushmaster Firearms, Inc failed to held that responsibility. They continue to sell their product to Bull’s Eye Shooter Supply eventhough the store has various suspective transaction. It is company responsibilty to control, monitor, and supervise their dealer especially for weapon company that have high possiblity in harming other people.
Are manufacturers ever morally responsible for deaths caused by the use of their product? Yes, like I have already mention before, it also the liability of companies if it was ilegal sell. There are several cases proving my statement, one of them is the Barry Grunow’s death in 2002. Jury ordered Valor Corporation of Sunrise, Fla, a gun distributor to pay $1. 2 million to the widow of a teacher killed by a 13-year-old student, largely sparing the company from blame in a landmark case about inexpensive handguns. The companies take 5 percent of the responsiblities while the remaining 95 percent owned by the gun owner and school board.