S&W makes pistols. S&W sells some of those pistols to Joe's Gun Shop. Six months later, Ziggy goes to Joe's store, passes a background check, and buys a S&W 9mm pistol. A year later, Ziggy gets irate at his neighbor for letting his dog defecate on Ziggy's lawn. Ziggy fires said S&W 9mm pistol in the direction of the neighbor's house, taking out a bird feeder in the process.
Should S&W have known months, if not years, in advance that hot-tempered Ziggy - specifically - might purchase one of its weapons and eventually use it in a way that might post a risk of harm to someone? I don't quite understand what sort of mind reading the state is expecting of a gun manufacturer.
Okay Paul Harvey time...p.2:
Ziggy, mortified at his loss of control, sells the pistol to Jose, who lives in a rough part of town and does landscaping work for Ziggy.
While Jose is out one day trimming hedges and clipping roses, some people break into Jose's house and steal, among other things, the pistol Jose bought from Ziggy.
That pistol and other stuff is sold on the sly to parties unknown until one of them uses the pistol, with malice aforethought, to remove from this earthly existence a person who represents a competing concern who is not just infringing on a 'claimed service area', but making overtures toward the unknown buyer's sister/girlfriend/mother/grandma.
TPFOBZ (The Pistol Formerly Owned by Ziggy) is recovered and tied to the crime despite attempts to remove serial numbers, etc.
Of course it makes sense for S&W to be sued by not only the Government, but all the family, friends. and associates of the person perforated by the still unknown wielder of TPFOBZ.
Naturally, the chain of custody should have been anticipated in full by the folks at S&W, just as John Deere should have known that the tractor they made would be used to pull the plow that was used to plant the grain that would be sold to the distillery and made into whiskey and consumed by the person who got drunk and ran their F-150 (yeah, Ford is on the hook, too) into another vehicle and killed some people.
The premise is ridiculous.
The question is one of whether Massachusetts really is that stupid.
The onus for misuse of any product belongs with the person using it unless the product malfunctioned.
