this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2026
251 points (99.6% liked)

Boycott US

2720 readers
54 users here now

Overview:

The community dedicated to boycotting the US until they stop fascism, restore full democracy and start following international law.

Americans have a moral obligation to resist Donald Trump and project 2025 at every turn.

America is a flawed democracy currently being ruled by oligarchs. Stop the backslide! Dont let America become the next Hungary.

America needs to challenge the court rulings of citizens united v. fec and shelby county v. holder, protect the media, implement independent district drawing, and the single transferable vote so they don't end up having people stay home in life-changing elections because they cannot vote for their favourite candidate.

Join 50501.chat to fight back!


Related communities:

Boycott:!buycanadian@lemmy.ca

!buyeuropean@feddit.uk

!boycott@lemmy.sdf.org

!boycottchina@sopuli.xyz

Activism:!antitrumpalliance@lemmy.world

!petitions@lemmy.ca

!palestine@lemmy.dbzer0.com

!protest@lemmy.world

!israelicrimes@lemmy.world

!patriotsforprogress@lemmy.ca

!goodsuniteus@lemmy.ca


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] stoy@lemmy.zip 17 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Nothing wrong with that, they are still responsible for the movement of rhe car.

However, Tesla still needs to be responsiblw for false advertising

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Sure, and gun companies are responsible for gun deaths.

[–] calcopiritus@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago

Gun companies sell weapons. The main purpose of a weapon is to kill. You hold a gun company responsible because their weapon has killed. That only means they did their job correctly.

A car company makes cars. Cars' main purpose is to transport its owner. You can hold a car company responsible for a killing.

That's in a sensible country though. In the US murder is legal as long as you do it with a car.

[–] Delphia@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (3 children)

False analogy.

If there was a gun on the market that sometimes malfunctioned and discharged without anyone touching it we wouldnt hold the person who loaded it responsible. We would demand a recall or outright ban them.

[–] supersquirrel@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

The Sig Sauer P320 entered the chat...

###BANG###

Oh no everyone I am SO SO sorry I messed up again didn't I - SigP320

[–] mildseason@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

We definitely would hold the owner responsible. Why the fuck have they left a loaded gun unattended? Sure do a recall as well but the owner of the stall is defintely responsible for ensuring the guns on display are not a danger.

[–] Delphia@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] mildseason@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

You did.

discharged without anyone touching it

That would mean a loaded gun was left unattended. The owner/operator would be held liable. They have ignored core gun safety rules.

Yes the manufacturer could be held liable as well but the primary respinsiblility lies with the owner.

The same is true for the driver of the tesla.

[–] Delphia@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So a holstered or shouldered weapon without a finger on the trigger and the safety active is unattended?

[–] mildseason@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

Shouldered you have full control of the gun. If it was to go off while pointed at someone, even with the saftey on, you would be responsible.

Holstered, bit of both, typically it would be pointed at the ground which minimises danger but of it goes off and hits your foot it's still your fault for choosing to carry a loaded gun.

[–] ieGod@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Not touching is not unattended, where do you jump to that? The analogy presented could literally have you be next to it, have it secured, and then it going off alone through some defect you weren't expecting. Sounds far fetched unless we're talking about some kind of weapon system and not just a handgun.

The real takeaway here is this is a bad example and you shouldn't have brought it up because guns aren't cars.

[–] mildseason@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Both are capable of killing people if used improperly.

If the gun was to go off and kill someone, you would be held responsible. One of the most basic rules of gun safety is don't point it at anything you don't intend to shoot.

If you lie a loaded gun on a table and it discharges and hits someone it's your fault for being so careless.

You must always expect a gun to go off if it's loaded. I cannot stress this enough. This is basic gun safety.

Now for cars, yes tesla could be done for false advertising and reckless endangerment. But the driver still retains fault. They could not control the vehicle properly and killed someone.

[–] ieGod@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You've got blinders on at this point lol. Peace.

[–] mildseason@sopuli.xyz 1 points 1 day ago

Maybe we both do ;)

[–] KeithD@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 day ago

we wouldnt hold the person who loaded it responsible

Depends on the jurisdiction. If there are local laws against leaving a weapon loaded, we might.

[–] axus@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act shields federally licensed firearm manufacturers, distributors, and dealers from civil liability lawsuits when crimes are committed by third parties using their lawfully sold products.

Tesla hasn't bought a law like that yet.