Gun Control & RKBA

Obviously, any gun can do any gun-related activity, but there is optimization for specific purposes. I could defend myself with a sporting shotgun and I could hunt birds with a tactical shotgun, but they're optimized for different purposes.

The issue that seems to be driving the issue is that "tactical" features are for the most part also useful features to have for "sporting" guns. Matte-black finishes instead of shinier blueing, because glare sucks regardless of ultimate purpose. But now, they're associated with tactical & military guns.

Pistol-grip stocks are often more comfortable and ergonomic than more traditional straight stocks. The traditional straight stock was a function of the ability to carve a single piece of wood into a gunstock. A hundred years ago, we began shifting away from that. Not so much bolt-action and lever-action guns, but semiautomatics. Nowadays, we have bolt-action and pump-action guns with pistol grips as well. But... these are "assault weapon" features on semiautomatic rifles. And a gun having TWO pistol grips? Fetch me my fainting couch!

Quick-adjustable buttstocks are just common sense. Being able to adjust the length of pull and the comb height for different people, different clothing levels, and different shooting positions is wonderful. But... these are "assault weapon" features on semiautomatic rifles.

Attaching flashlights and lasers to guns. Again, a reasonably obvious idea that modern technology has made compact, light, durable, and cheap. And for some types of hunting and sport shooting it's a perfectly acceptable feature to have. But now, they're associated with tactical & military guns.

Improving the ergonomics to reduce recoil and muzzle climb? That's really really useful for tactical purposes because it enables faster shooting times, but it's also a good idea in general. Many sporting-optimized guns include muzzle brakes simply because... guess what? Nobody likes having their shoulders punished unnecessarily.

Reducing muzzle flash? Also useful for tactical purposes because it doesn't blind the shooter... but it's also useful for sporting guns because.... it doesn't blind the shooter! But... these are "assault weapon" features on semiautomatic rifles.

And so on...

I own several handguns guns that are optimized for "tactical use". In my case, as a regular person, that means being used to confront people in self-defense. They are "house" handguns (full-size guns with laser/flashlight combos mounted on them) and concealed-carry guns, smaller, slimmer, and lighter. I bought them specifically with the intention of using them to kill humans, and they are optimized for that purpose, including premium hollowpoint ammunition.

That doesn't mean that if I decided to go shoot up a McDonald's because the lizard people told me to do that through the Bill Gates microchip implanted in my arm with the covid vaccine, that Springfield Armory or Mossberg should be able to be sued.

Now, obviously, the only reason I would even point any of those guns at a human, much less squeeze the trigger, would be in some sort of confrontation with a high potential for violence. But the decision to shoot will be mine, not the gun's.

Guns are tools. Period, full stop. People that make tools should not be held liable for their deliberate misuse.

Bad design? Yes. Bad manufacturing? Yes. Being promoted for use it's not suited for? Yes.

Deliberate misuse? No.

If a poorly-designed or poorly-made gun malfunctioned during normal use and injured or killed somebody, then yes, sue them for injuries or deaths. Recall the guns for repairs, replacement, or refund at the manufacturer's expense. And this actually happens on a regular basis. Not that common, but it happens.

But a psychotic idiot committing crimes? No. Obviously, you can only use a tool for killing WHEN killing is legal, and pretty much universally the only time a regular civilian can legally kill somebody is "imminent and inescapable threat of severe bodily harm or death". Definitions vary by state, and by specific situation (castle doctrine, stand-your-ground, etc.) but that's the general gist of it.