By John Velisek USN (Ret), staff writer
“During the October 11 airing of Meet the Press, host Chuck Todd asked Democrat presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) where he stands on allowing shooting victims to sue gun manufacturers. Sanders made it clear that he is opposed to holding gun store owners liable, but he believes there is room to hold
manufacturers liable to some degree.
Todd’s question was based on the fact that Sanders voted for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which President George W. Bush signed into law in 2005.”
Holding gun manufacturers liable because a crime has been committed with a weapon made at their place of business? Thankfully, the PLCAA was written and passed to protect manufacturers and retail sellers of firearms from lawsuits anticipated by liberal politicians for the obvious purpose of ending the sale of guns and ammunition throughout the nation.
Bernie Sanders, the only admitted Marxist in the 2016 race for the White House, has decided that filing suit against the little guy–owners of small gun stores–isn’t “fair.” Interesting how Bernie and other members of the far left have come to decide what the American people may do, say, believe and even how they should be permitted to earn a living based upon the definition these celestial beings apply to the word “fair!”
In any event, it appears that gun manufacturers should bear the cost and responsibility connected with any misuse of their products. It’s only fair. But Bernie failed to mention whether Sears may be sued because one of its hammers has been used to bludgeon someone.
And Hillary Clinton is even more determined than Sanders to pursue the backdoor decimation of 2nd Amendment rights via the “legal” liability lawsuit. She would encourage victims of gun crime to sue everybody and anybody, including the owner, the seller, the guy who provides the bullets, the manufacturer and the importer of these evil weapons. “What is wrong with us that we can’t stand up to the NRA and the gun lobby and the gun manufacturers they represent,” screeched Hillary.
When it comes to the liability of those who actually do the shooting, Mrs. Clinton was silent. It would undoubtedly depend upon the shooter’s race, religion, sexual orientation, political persuasion and whether they have contributed to the Clinton Foundation.
Longtime writer, firearm enthusiast and 2nd Amendment supporter AWR Hawkins observed that Clinton “…did not mention any support of suing the politicians, municipal leaders and school boards that render Americans of all walks of life defenseless via gun free zones.” It’s possible that Ms. Clinton missed an important email on the subject.
Will this particular approach succeed in ending 2nd Amendment rights? Well liberals will have judges that are “progressive” enough to permit this unconstitutional nonsense; leftist members of the Supreme Court will eagerly follow the same, socialist line and remember there is always Obama’s pen. He has ignored the law and the Constitution so far; why would he change now!
Lock and load.