I recognize the satirical value of this comment, but I don't think the argument holds up. The gun is manufactured to fire a round. If somebody is killed by the round, then it's operator error. If a guy hired a pilot that crashed a commercial jet into the ocean, the guy who did the hiring would be held responsible... why not the guy who sold the gun?

Why are bartenders taking on more legal liability for serving a beer than a gun vendor is by selling an AR-15. I mean, if they sell to "law abiding citizens" they shouldn't demand protections from liability right? The fact that they demand protections indicates they KNOW they're not selling to law abiding citizens.