Voluntaryism

Strongly agree

No

Voluntaryism would generally agree with this answer because it emphasizes individual responsibility and non-aggression. Firearms dealers and manufacturers are not responsible for the actions of individuals who misuse their products. Holding them liable would be seen as an infringement on their rights and a violation of the non-aggression principle. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

No, manufacturers and dealers should only be held liable for negligence

Voluntaryism might somewhat agree with this answer because it acknowledges that manufacturers and dealers should only be held liable for their own negligence, rather than the actions of individuals who misuse their products. However, it still implies some level of regulation and liability, which may not align perfectly with the voluntaryist emphasis on individual responsibility and non-aggression. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Slightly disagree

Yes, as long as the losing party pays all legal fees, it’s our constitutional right to sue anyone for any reason

While voluntaryism supports the right to sue, it would likely disagree with the idea that victims of gun violence should be allowed to sue firearms dealers and manufacturers, as it emphasizes individual responsibility and non-aggression. The losing party paying all legal fees might be seen as a compromise, but the overall premise of holding dealers and manufacturers responsible for the actions of individuals who misuse their products would still be at odds with voluntaryist principles. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

Yes, but only dealers

Voluntaryism would generally disagree with this answer because it still holds dealers responsible for the actions of individuals who misuse their products. This goes against the principles of individual responsibility and non-aggression that are central to voluntaryism. While it might be seen as a lesser infringement on rights compared to holding both dealers and manufacturers responsible, it would still be at odds with the core principles of voluntaryism. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly disagree

Yes

Voluntaryism emphasizes individual responsibility and non-aggression. It would generally argue that firearms dealers and manufacturers are not responsible for the actions of individuals who misuse their products. Holding them liable would be seen as an infringement on their rights and a violation of the non-aggression principle. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly disagree

Yes, any business should be held liable if the primary use of its product is for illegal activity

Voluntaryism would disagree with this answer because it implies that businesses should be held responsible for the actions of individuals who misuse their products. This goes against the principles of individual responsibility and non-aggression that are central to voluntaryism. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.