Less Lethal, More Expensive

The problem is that to sue the manufaturer of a product, you have to show that the product is defective in some way or is unreasonably dangerous. Bostonist is of the firm opinion that regular guns, for example, are unreasonably dangerous, but the courts have generally disagreed (on the theory that guns are meant to kill people). Of course, the Herstal FN 303 that killed Victoria Snelgrove isn't, strictly speaking, meant to kill. After all, the company that makes it stresses that it is "less lethal" (although we've found that even a little bit lethal is enough). But courts have also held that even purportedly non-lethal weapons like BB guns are not unreasonably dangerous when they hit someone in the eye and kill them. And remember, the pellet gun that killed Snelgrove is meant to hit people hard enough to stop them in their tracks. The manufacturer's website says that the pellets pack a force of 15 joules when they hit someone from 50 meters (164 feet) away; internet research tells us that 10 joules feels like laying your hand on the table and dropping a two-pound bag of sugar on it from three feet up, so it doesn't surprise us that 15 joules to the eye could kill a person.

Of course, Bostonist seldom sheds a tear for weapons manufacturers, so if Snelgrove's family devises a way to squeeze some money out of them, we won't mind. But we're more than a little wary of the city's instinct to pass the blame. The BPD had its officers firing projectiles at people's heads, and even the manufacturer's website warns would-be users (in very small type, but still), "For safety reasons, never aim towards face, throat or neck." We don't doubt that the mayor and the police commissioner are genuinely sorry for what happened, but we can't help but find qualified apologies tacky.

Jon Petitt and Josh Michtom collaborated on this posting.