Sanders reverses course on gun immunity vote

[Beacool]

1/16/16

CHARLESTON, South Carolina – On the eve of the final Democratic presidential debate here, Sen. Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign announced he would support a bill to strip legal immunity from gun manufactures, a status they gained from a 2005 bill for which Sanders voted.

Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton has made a major issue of Sanders’ vote, arguing that he did the bidding of the National Rifle Association and the gun lobby. Sanders has said he was open to reconsidering the law, but said last week his vote was “not a mistake.”

But in a statement Saturday night, Sanders said he would support legislation recently introduced by Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal and California Rep. Adam Schiff to repeal key parts of the 2005 law, which shielded gun manufacturers and sellers from lawsuits relating to damage caused by guns they make or sell.

“I’m pleased that this legislation is being introduced,” Sanders said in a statement. “As I have said for many months now, we need to look at the underlying law and tighten it up.”

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sanders-reverses-course-gun-immunity-vote

I guess that he evolved on this issue.

[ram2008]

1. I'll take a small evolution on a non-sensical issue anyday

Over the daily flip-flops on every major issue from camp weatherwave, aka Hillary.

[Beacool]

10. Yeah, whatever floats your boat.

[Dawson Leery]

14. Gun control is now "non-sensical".

Strange how the progressives are throwing one of their pet causes (gun control) under the bus for
their flavor of month.

[JonLeibowitz]

18. I am a progressive and I fully agree with the PLCAA.

Will I still vote and advocate for Sanders? Absolutely.

This reads more like a tweak to the law from his perspective, because it keeps the protections for small gun sellers.

[Duckhunter935]

20. I agree with you on this

[ram2008]

19. Gun control is not, the gun manufacturing issue mostly is

That would stop zero acts of gun violence

Unless you think that if you drive into someone with your Corolla, Toyota should be the one sued and not you.

[mythology]

22. I disagree

The law doesn't just protect gun manufacturers. It also protects gun shops who sell guns to straw buyers. Those guns go into criminal activities, including gun violence. Being able to sue gun shops that regularly sell to straw purchasers, would in fact offer a deterrent to gun violence by limiting supply

But even if it only protected gun manufacturers, we have the example of the lawsuits against car makers for unsafe cars that fed into the Ralph Nader movement where car manufacturers were eventually legally obligated to adopt better safety standards such as seat belts and safety glass. There are no lawsuits to pressure gun manufacturers to include biometric safety mechanisms which would prevent somebody's kid from either accidentally firing the gun or committing suicide. So this would also lower gun deaths.

[Mark Grable]

29. It's a fedral crime

to sell to a straw buyer, and to buy as a straw buyer. The seller losses it's FFL permanently, and is fined, and maybe goes to prison.

Manufacturing defects are not protected. Make a New Years resolution to use only primary sources for your facts, thank you.

I'm a lifetime NRA member, former service member (USMC) a Vermonter, and a supporter of Bernie Sanders.

If you really want to save lives? Drive 55mph. I do, that's me you people are passing

[Hoyt]

33. Are you proud of belonging to a right wing racist gun lobby?

[JonLeibowitz]

40. Certainly not the friendliest welcome to DU I've seen.

[Duckhunter935]

30. And there are 6 exceptions

When they are not covered. Badger guns was just found guilty in a lawsuit, they did not have immunity.

[Amimnoch]

44. It's not one of the issues they want to discuss.

nothing to see here.. move along. School shootings and all that stuff is too "nonsensical" for a presidential primary season. Let's go back to talking about Hillary's pantsuits.

[Dawson Leery]

15. Gun control is now "non-sensical".

Strange how the progressives are throwing one of their pet causes (gun control) under the bus for
their flavor of month.

[cosmicone]

2. flip-flop .. weathervane .... focus groups

Sanders is just another politician ... which is crystal clear now.

[Beacool]

11. Of course he's just another politician.

A far Left politician, but a politician nonetheless. I don't understand why some people act as if their candidate of choice is above playing politics. They ALL do it. It's naïve to think that Sanders would play the game any less than the rest of them when he's been in politics since the 70s.

[Vattel]

41. Sanders is much more honest than the average politician.

[leftofcool]

3. So, he is a flip flopper after all!

[PowerToThePeople]

4. Don't think it will lose him any votes

Personally, I did not care either way on how he voted before.

I should sue Ford for the damage their vehicle did to the trunk of my car by a reckless driver. Oh wait, it wasn't the fault of the manufacturer. Never mind.

[ejbr]

13. +1

[Dawson Leery]

5. Senator Weather Vane.

[cherokeeprogressive]

24. O-fucking-riginal.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

6. Nice to hear. Guns are an area with which I have the least agreement with Sanders.

He's not bad on guns, but I'm a little more strident than he is on the matter.

[TDale313]

26. Same here. N/T

[last1standing]

7. LOL! Please hang your hat on this. Please!

[litlbilly]

8. That's one issue. How many has Hillary done a 180 on? Too many to count

[Beacool]

12. I would like to think that, like the rest of us, candidates do evolve.

[litlbilly]

16. true, but most people dont evolve on something simply because of politics, Bernie has always been

a straight shooter, Hillary adjusts to whatever the weathervane tells her. It's just too obvious. She's also proven to go back on evolving and screw the American people, like with the bankruptcy bill. Bill Clinton vetoed it after Hillary's meeting with Elizabeth Warren on the bill, then when she became a senator, that was the first bill she voted for. That by itself should scare the hell out of everyone. She can't be trusted to do anything of value for the people, and she will do what her big money people tell her to do. There is no way around that fact.

[mythology]

28. If he's a straight shooter

where is his actual specific health care plan? Why didn't he have a specific tax rate when asked in a debate? Why did he vote to protect gun manufacturers and gun shops? Why did he at one point say it wasn't the time for same sex marriage even in liberal Vermont?

All politicians change. It would be stupid both professionally and personally to not do so. Politicians make choices based on what they think they can accomplish and what will push their goals. Yes even Bernie Sanders. There's no record of him supporting same sex marriage until 2009. In 2006, he said same sex marriage wasn't right for Vermont after a fight for civil unions. Do I think Sanders was fine with same sex marriage before 2009? Yes. Do I understand why he didn't say so? Yes.

Being 100% honest in everything you do is silly. Because sometimes the honest answer is just unnecessarily mean, or doesn't serve the larger interest.

[Duckhunter935]

31. Don't worry

She will soon evolve back to Annie Oakley.

[Cali_Democrat]

9. Weathervane. nt

[JonLeibowitz]

17. I'm not sure I see this as a flip-flop.

The Sanders campaign said it would also introduce an amendment to Blumenthal and Schiff legislation aimed at protecting small gun sellers. The amendment would instruct the Department of Commerce to monitor the impact of the repeal on rural stories. “As I have said, I do want to make sure that this legislation does not negatively impact small gun stores in rural America that serve the hunting community,” Sanders said.

Seems it is consistent with the reason he originally voted for the bill.

[TCJ70]

21. Hasn't he always said he'd be willing to review the issue and...

...see what comes of it?

[Eric J in MN]

38. He's shifted towards more gun control since the debates began.

In the first two debates, he argued that his mixed record on gun control makes him the most qualified to build a consensus for moderate gun control.

In the third debate, he said he's open to revisiting the immunity law and narrowing its immunity.

Now he's saying that he's willing to repeal the immunity bill, as long as the Commerce Dept is required to issue reports on whether the legislation hurts the availability of hunting supplies at rural gun stores.

[mikehiggins]

39. Heh. If Sanders' view on that law evolves with each debate

how sad for HRC that there are so few debates.

This may prove to be another example of the Law of Unforeseen Consequences.

[bigtree]

23. good

[R B Garr]

25. Flip-Flop pandering! Evolving! Weathervaner!

Who would have thought that a lifelong politician would act like ---- a politician, LOL.

Wait 'til the other bait and switch gimmicks start. Just a matter of time.

[thesquanderer]

27. Luckily, there is something between being a weather vane and being stubbornly rigid.

No one ever gets everything 100% right every time. Regardless of whether his original vote was a mistake or a matter of the bill being a mix of things he wanted and things he didn't with no way to cast a "perfect" vote, good for Sanders for finally actually making a move toward fixing this. Thanks for posting.

[99th_Monkey]

32. Good! That's the one issue Bernie & I disagree about, now we're 100% in solid agreement

on all issues. I applaud him for rethinking his position on guns, in preparation for being
a president of ALL citizens of the entire USA, and not just Vermonters.

[tularetom]

34. Has the issue of immunity for dealers been tested in court?

Personally I wish Sanders was a bit more liberal on the issue of gun control anyway, and by "liberal", I mean I would like to see him take a stronger position in defense of the constitutionally guaranteed right to keep and bear arms.

That said, Annie Oakley Clinton has no standing to criticize him or anybody else on the issue of gun related hypocrisy.

[sadoldgirl]

35. Keep up this issue of gun control

and you will lose not only the West, but also
other states like Ohio and even states in the
Northeastern region.

Keep it up,keep it up, and the dems will lose
for an idiotic issue to bring up during the
presidential campaign.

I want to repeat myself here: I want to hear
HRC make this issue the most important one
in many other states. Will she? Hell no, but
now it is just politics for her as usual.

What weaseling! Does she not realize that
the internet keeps her statements alive???

[Motown_Johnny]

36. Another dishonest post from a Clinton supporter, why am I not shocked?

He has always supported that part of the bill. It is the part where a gun shop owner could be sued for selling a gun legally and then having that gun used in a crime.

It really is sad that you can't make an honest argument to support your case. Sad, and very telling.

[JI7]

37. GOOD, that was probably my biggest disagreement with him

[Vattel]

42. His vote for PLCAA was a bad one. I am glad he is supporting efforts to improve the legislation.

[shiriu]

43. Sanders never really reversed his decision

He has always said that there were some parts of the 2005 bill that he supported and parts that he hated, and he voted NO because overall the bill shouldn't be passed that time.

He's explained that the old bill, if passed, would allow gun manufacturers and sellers to be punished for crimes that couldn't have been anticipated.

An example: A gun seller from a quiet part of town with low crime rate, legally sells a gun to a business man (with appropriate background checks). The businessman kills his family the next day. Should the seller be punished? The old bill would ensure the seller would, despite being an innocent party.

Sanders has always said that, though, in places where crime rate is high, and the seller suspects the gun wold be used in a crime, that he should be punished. Which is why he supports a new legislation.