Discussion for article #246992
ooohhhh … That can’t be good news, the NRA is feelin’ the Bern?
15 Likes
I like Bernie, but this disappointed me last night.
3 Likes
Oy. Is that what they mean when they say Sen. Sanders has cross-over appeal? Not good if you’re a loyal Democratic voter who hates gun violence and believes the gun industry’s lobby, the NRA, has made it impossible to go after anything to do with the proliferation of guns by that industry in society.
13 Likes
Sanders is right.Same thing could be said about a person buying a car and intentionally mowing down people with it. Would that make it the automotive manufacturer’s fault? no.
8 Likes
Ouch. That one’s going to leave a mark.
10 Likes
I am not normally a one issue voter, but this is the one issue that keeps pushing me away from Bernie.
8 Likes
If I understand it and correct me if I’m wrong, if you go to a gun store and you legally purchase a gun, and three days later you go out and start killing people, is the point to hold the gun shop owner or the manufacturer of that gun liable? If that is the point, I disagree," Sanders said. "If they are selling a product and the person who buys it legally, what you are talking about is ending gun manufacturing in America. I don’t agree with that."
-
Sanders comes from a rural state.
-
Self-protection has some validity when the average time for the Sheriff to get to your house is 20 minutes.
-
There is also a strong tradition of hunting in the rural states.
-
He represents Vermont. It is, after all, his job to represent them.
.
At this time he has made it clear he would like to:
-
Attack firearm manufacturers for improper and illegal use by any individual.
-
Protect shops that sell to individuals that are restricted individuals and/or use
firearms in an improper or illegal way. -
Reinstate the sporting rifle ban.
-
Limit the kinds of firearms that can be legally owned to “traditional hunting guns”.
-
Expand the broken background check system.
-
Deal with the “straw man purchasing issue”.
-
Create an “incremental gun control” system.
28 Likes
First LaPierre goes off on Hillary because of her gun control proposals and now they are shaking Bernie’s hand for being pro-gun.
What is all that again about “politics as usual” being a Hillary problem? This is a huge problem for Bernie as far as I’m concerned.
16 Likes
…and that’s pretty much the big problem I have with Sanders.
That, and being Jewish, there’s no way in hell he’ll win in the general. Way too many people who would never vote for a Jew.
He’s right. If it’s legal to sell and it is sold as a deadly weapon, then how can you hold them liable? Seriously, explain how that holds up in court. And I’m not a gun fan in any way.
5 Likes
Here is an article about three lawsuits:
It’s a strawman to think this is just about holding the company liable any time a gun is misused.
The line drawing problems involved as in other civil litigation is debatable and I understand a senator from Vermont might vote in a certain way, but let’s not sound like children here.
8 Likes
The NRA really hates Bernie, don’t they…
But seriously, of course they should be liable. It is insane that after 10, 20, 30 people get shot in one go, there is no one liable. In America.
5 Likes
Seems to me you can go after the manufacturer of cars if they create a faulty vehicle. You can’t do that in any way, shape or form with a firearm. Also, you can turn a semi-automatic into a fully automatic with a kit as I understand it…and the gun companies have known this for some time and have no problem with changing the design features to prevent this from happening. That means that if its a product can be altered…oh well.
Also, the 2005 law, sponsored by Sen. Wide-stance and bathroom aficionado, Larry Craig, prevents anyone from suing a gun manufacturer from lacking safety features that would prevent anyone from going after them in court. So its not just people intent in using guns explicitly in a crime…its anyone that uses a gun and is involved in the numerous boneheaded “accidents” we hear about constantly on a daily basis.
Sen. Sanders using the example of the explicit use of firearms to commit a crime is misdirection. His vote against going after gun manufacturers affects far more than he’s willing to admit.
12 Likes
There is a fundamental difference between a gun and a car. Cars are manufactured and sold as transportation. Guns are manufactured and sold as weapons to kill people with. As long as cars aren’t made and sold as weapons, you made a gigantic false equivalency.
7 Likes
It’s not about any single case you can hypothesize about. It’s about blanket protection to an industry. Like HRC said last night, there’s no other industry that gets blanket protection like that. (summarizing)
Nothing can be judged on its merits on a case-by-case basis.
10 Likes
You do realize that that same kind of reasoning excuses a certain New York senator’s ties to Wall Street and vote for the AUMFAI, don’t you?
17 Likes
The “faulty” vehicle reference seems wrong – if something is wrong with a gas tank, you might be able to sue … if a company sells you a deficient gun, they don’t have total immunity.
The safety feature point does suggest to me that the laws give special exemptions but it isn’t total. But, Sen. Sanders from the quotes cited doesn’t seem to be helping complete nuance either.
How very “progressive” of him.
3 Likes
It doesn’t work to compare guns to cars because cars require the user to be licensed and insured, which is not the responsibility of the car dealer.
With guns, regulation has to be placed at the level of the seller.
5 Likes