What do you think about Clinton and Sanders' positions (and records) on guns and gun control?

[CreekDog]

[JonLeibowitz]

1. I think the PLCAA had some good provisions.

Bernie is right that the ultimate goal of the "interesting legal theory" Clinton mentioned was to end gun manufacturing in America. Congress acted to prevent that legal theory from being carried out which would have been an end-run around the 2nd amendment via attacking the supply side.

The Brady Bill had some good provisions and some really nasty ones too. Nobody talks much about how anti-LGBT the bill ended up being in practice.

[Gwhittey]

2. True. They way states are doing end run around Roe v wade

It is wrong not matter what side does it. I think that is why some are Alright with Hillary taking bribes from .01% and screwing over the middle and lower income people. They think oh she is (D) so it is alright because we have to beat the (R) even though they pass say crap every time.

[BainsBane]

21. Do you support civil immunity for Wall Street too?

Or is there some reason corporations that profit from killing should occupy a special, protected space in the capitalist economy?

[JonLeibowitz]

22. No I do not. Bye.

[BainsBane]

24. I take that as an acknowledgement

That you have no intention of considering the contradiction is promoting immunity for gun corporations alongside a campaign agenda that calls for supposed corporate accountability.

I think we can summarize this as whatever Bernie says goes regardless of the consequences.

I resent the fact that the corporate profits are routinely championed above the lives, safety, and rights of people in my community because some have decided the only thing that matters is one man's political prospects.

[JonLeibowitz]

31. No you should take it that I know your posting style

And have no interest in engaging you in what you consider discussion. You simply are not worth my time.

[lunamagica]

49. The Sanders camp keeps complaining that Clinton supporters don't talk issues

But when a Clinton supporter brings issues to be discussed, they don't want to "engage".

[RANGERMAN89]

87. Want to discuss it ok

Bernie has supported banning assault weapons since the 80's he has a d- from the NRA the bill about weapon manufacturer liability is ridiculous it would kill the industry basically nullifying the 2nd amendment I support his vote because unlike most senators when he makes a vote it isn't just what is politically expedient for him he weighs the pros and cons.....if only Hillary had that type of thinking during the Iraq war vote that cost me multiple friends.
How old are you? I remember when Hillary was a defender of gun rights and she was going to protect us from Obama.

[RANGERMAN89]

32. Sorry this is a false equivalent

For Hillary's extreme stance on gun control(trying to kill the whole industry) because that was the whole point of the bill. Bernie would have to advocate for the total shut down of wall street and for everyone who made trades to be subject to legal action. Bernie Sanders platform is to get rid of the banks that caused the crash and are now the biggest donors of Hillary Clinton.

[TheBlackAdder]

81. HRC bashed Obama on guns, now against them? Just political pandering.

.


I owned a small farm in NJ, in a medium density area. We had State Police coverage at night.

You know, at night, when most people fuck with your farm animals and equipment.


If we called in an emergency call, it would take from 20 minutes to 1 hour for the police to respond.

The perps know that, unless you are in a high-tier comunity, police response will be 5-10 minutes or more.


====


A lot of shit can happen in 20 minutes, and this is freakin Central New Jersey, not the pine barrens!


====


Out in PA, and VT, or when I was in NH for a year, it would take police just as long to arrive!


.

[RANGERMAN89]

88. It's all she knows

Pandering and if it doesn't work use scorched earth attacks that lack any real evidence or is just a total misrepresentation of the truth.

[Cheese Sandwich]

3. Hillary seems like a gun control extremist. Republicans will clobber her with that.

Especially because she made it the central issues of her campaign. It was almost like her "one issue".

Gun people vote. I think this could be big trouble.

[PowerToThePeople]

16. This is the one issue

That I am more on Hillary's side.

Not enough to get my vote, but it is something.

[AgingAmerican]

18. Her whole campaign is based on one or two votes Sanders made 30 years ago

On issues he now agrees with her on.

[So Far From Heaven]

4. I agree with Bernie for the most part.

Gun control won't stop gun violence. It makes sense to ban types that allow mass numbers of rounds fired so that should also mean banning hi cap mags.

I've thought about this for along time and the only thing that makes sense to me is it's our society that encourages violence.

Hard to stop that, and gun control advocates are on the wrong track.

Stop the violence and gun control is unnecessary.

I come from the wild west so my position is a bit different than most dems I guess.

What about you?

[CreekDog]

6. you're against gun control

what a total non-surprise.

[Lizzie Poppet]

9. R.I.F.

It makes sense to ban types that allow mass numbers of rounds fired so that should also mean banning hi cap mags.

How's that foot taste?

[CreekDog]

11. That was a concern troll post about gun control

wait a while and you'll see them pile up as the days go by...

[Lizzie Poppet]

12. That's nice.

Irrelevant, but nice...

Gun control is toxic to Democrats on Election Day. If Hillary is actually stupid enough not to pivot away from it the moment she locks up the nomination, I'll be very surprised.

Hell, I'll be impressed, for all that I find her gun control positions too extreme. For her to stand on principle in the face of political disadvantage would be basically unprecedented.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

15. I'm expecting her to do a photo shoot,

Hillary in hunter-orange vest, elmer fudd hat, shouldering an antique, highly carved and inlaid side-by-side shotgun.

To show she's one of the people.

[kcr]

29. Gun control is toxic only because dems have always rolled over

Gun control is a fight worth having. Bernie is wrong on this. He IS wrong on some things.

[RANGERMAN89]

89. Not really

Sure we all believe in common sense gun control but manufacturer liability for weapons is insane! It would kill the industry overnight basically nullifying the 2nd amendment. Bernie is right were the America people are on gun control while Hillary is using that ridiculous bill to paint someone with a D- from the NRA as some pawn for the gun industry.

[So Far From Heaven]

46. Of course, that explains it.

No skin in the game, just rude comments. If someone disagrees with you they're obviously a troll.

[CreekDog]

70. I've argued with tons of people that aren't trolls

most here aren't, they just don't agree on everything.

as for you, you say, practically in a footnote or parenthetical that you support gun control, but you spend almost all your breath saying those favoring gun control have it wrong (even though they support what you claim to support).

which gives you a chance to bandy the "gun grabber" argument around while seeming to put yourself in agreement with the very people you are criticizing.

eventually it will out more obviously. the Clinton stuff you posted combined with this novel (you think) approach to discussing gun control is betraying you.

[So Far From Heaven]

14. Have you gotten your venom out of your system yet?

If you would use critical thought instead of knee jerk reaction you might be able to discern the truth about this issue.

Even Michael Moore acknowledges it isn't the guns, if you would actually watch 'Bowling for Columbine' and pay attention to his example of our northern neighbors.

Bernie has it right. Canadians have plenty of guns, as many as we do per person. But they never advocate for stupid brain dead ideas like open carry to one extreme or strict gun laws on the other.

I wonder why?

Yes, they limit some types of weapons civilians can own without proper licenses like the ones I mentioned above.

[Lizzie Poppet]

17. Um...

You realize I was responding to Creek Dog's false statement, right? Not to you in any way?

FYI: second-amendment supporter and active competition shooter here. And fairly good at critical thought...or at least that Philosophy doctorate says so.

[So Far From Heaven]

34. Sorry....

I'm not a competition shooter, but my father was probably the best hunter I've ever seen, and I have some very sophisticated hunting firearms. He was from the depression days and the family didn't eat if he didn't get the meat. Now we either butcher a cow (have a small family ranch and raise the things) or purchase it and I haven't hunted in decades.

I personally don't think firearm restrictions will ever work. It's not the guns, it's the society. We've got to change our concept of 'might is right'.

[Lizzie Poppet]

35. Agree wholeheartedly, re: the need to change society and it's too-easy resort to violence.

While I think certain regulations do help a bit, severely restricting guns is never going to put a real dent in the problem (and would cause far more harm than would be prevented). That can't happen until root causes are addressed.

FWIW, I don't hunt either...not my thing.

[So Far From Heaven]

40. Some states have legislated violence.

Look at Trevon Martin. (I sure hope I spelled his name correctly.) Afraid? Kill it. Worried? Kill it.

It HAS to stop. It isn't the guns, it's the 'might is right' zombies. (Sorry for comparing zombies to something as horrible as these freaks.)

[CreekDog]

69. if it's the violence, then you oppose hunting for sport?

meaning you oppose hunting which is not done for food?

[So Far From Heaven]

84. Can you think anything less moral than killing for sport alone? (nt)

[Ghost Dog]

27. Your position on this issue looks reasonable to my eye,

though I'm really not qualified to opine.

It's part of your culture, and, in parts, you have a lot of potentially dangerous wilderness over there, right?

Limit & control the more military types of weapons, obviously, and open carry.

For the rest, to quote José Mujica: education, education, education.

[So Far From Heaven]

36. Define dangerous wilderness.

Are we talking about New York or Los Angeles? Our 'wilderness' is actually pretty tame except for Alaska which is on another planet. We get cougars on the ranch occasionally, but we just leave them alone. They have to make a living, too. Cows we got, cougars not so much anymore.

You're as qualified as anyone else on this. It's an issue that doesn't have a real answer as far as I can tell. the more input to solutions, the better.

[Ghost Dog]

37. Heh heh. Good first point.

Sure, no reason normally why big predators should endanger people unless provoked, leaving aside the likes of Alaska (and large parts of Canada, perhaps), and maybe some Southern swamps? And I'm happy to hear of big cats and others in their home ranges being left in peace.

Education. Invest in good quality free-at-the-point-of-use (as healthcare should be) education

[So Far From Heaven]

44. My avatar is the Mexican Grey Wolf, which says it all.

[Ghost Dog]

48. Cool. Exactly.

(I'm on the Android phone small screen, so I'm not seeing avatars).

I've always felt very protective of mountain lions... without ever having been anywhere near their territory.

No threats where I grew up (British Isles), except the viper (and some humans). Wild boar can be problematic in mainland Spain (and European wolves have been succesfully reintroduced there!).

I've never been anywhere where guns are common, except Switzerland.

[So Far From Heaven]

58. I walked right into one as a kid.

I was walking home up a valley and heard a noise beside me.

Female puma (mountain lion or cougar) was RIGHT there, not three feet away.

We just looked at each other and walked off. Well, I must admit I was scared shitless, but I managed not to panic.

If you get posted pictures:

[Ghost Dog]

82. "We just looked at each other and walked off."

A magic moment. That mutual look in the eyes. Equipoise.

Thanks.

And a fine animal, the wolf. Thanks again for the food for thought.

[Blue_In_AK]

54. Another planet?

LOL. Another country maybe, but not another planet.

[So Far From Heaven]

59. There are small towns

in Northern New Mexico and Southern Colorado that are on another planet.

Like Alamosa and Chama. Their weather is similar to Mars.

[Blue_In_AK]

61. LOL.

[scscholar]

5. Niether have done enough to take those things

[NCTraveler]

7. Better than an overwhelming majority of politicians.

I'm a bit on the outside as I have evolved into a flat out "gun grabber" the last couple of years.

[Lizzie Poppet]

8. Virtually identical, save for Sanders' (correct) vote on PLCAA.

A strongly pro-gun-control voter who nevertheless recognizes the anti-democratic stupidity of nuisance lawsuits as an end-around being unable to get legislation enacted would logically prefer Bernie.

[hack89]

10. Both will be good for gun owners once in office. I call it a wash. nt

[SwampG8r]

13. Which position is hillarys today? I lost sight of it.

Im sure it will change as focus groups advise.

[MoonRiver]

19. Bernie sucks. Hillary rocks. n/t

[pinebox]

20. That's cute

What's it like to support the corrupt candidate?

[Vinca]

23. The only difference in their positions is the manufacturer/gun shop liability thing.

I don't see how a manufacturer or gun shop owner can be held liable for a legally purchased, nondefective gun used in a crime. You don't sue Toyota if a Corolla is used as a getaway car. My preference would be no guns at all anywhere, but since the Heller decision is law that will never happen so people might as well face the reality of the situation.

[BainsBane]

25. Car makers don't have blanket immunity

In those cases, liability is determined by courts. Clearly the calculus for the corporate immunity for gun makers and sellers is that their profits are too important to be encumbered by the rights of mere citizens to petition the courts. The law has also been used to protect gun corporations from a wide range of activity that the NRA interpretation that is now repeated constantly by "progressives" does not acknowledge, like knowingly providing weapons to illegal arms dealers.

Additionally, that isn't the only different. He voted multiple times against the Brady Bill, always votes for any waiting period for background checks (hence his emphasis on instant background checks), and voted to allow loaded guns in state parks, on Amtrack, and in cockpits.

Additionally, he has voted to prohibit federal funds being used to conduct research on firearms. That is a key point for the gun lobby because research has a tendency of showing that guns kill.

Their voting records are available for any citizen who decides they want to inform themselves on issues. http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/27110/bernie-sanders/37/guns#.VvAYXfkrI2w
http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/55463/hillary-clinton/37/guns#.VvAYkfkrI2w

The difference is one candidate stands for gun control and the other stands with the gun lobby. Their voting records make that abundantly clear.

[Vinca]

60. The point of the law was to protect small gun shop owners.

Given the amount of gun violence in the country, none of them could stay in business if they were constantly defending themselves from lawsuits. The immunity isn't "blanket." If there is anything illegal in the transaction or any defect in the product, they can still be sued. You really shouldn't lump votes for bills all together and say because someone voted for or against a bill it was for or against whatever your current cause is. These aren't "stand alone" bills. There could be other issues like human trafficking or aid to flood victims or a million other things stuffed into the bill that deserves to be passed.

[So Far From Heaven]

38. I think the liability is on the owner or purchaser.

I may be wrong, but I think the idea is to make the gun owner liable for damages, not the manufacturers. In that case, it is exactly like liability on your car. Run over someone or cause damage or injuries in a wreck, and you're liable both civil and criminal.

I've got mixed feelings about this idea. How would this help anything in one of those dumb shit 'stand your ground' states? They've legislated permission for use.

[KPN]

26. Got to be honest. This is the one place

where I side with Hillary over Bernie.

I understand Bernie's concern and position, but things have gotten so bad, we need to take a really hard line against the industry and NRA. If they won't hold themselves accountable, we have no other option in my mind. I frankly don't think removing their immunity will spell the end of gun manufacturing. It hasn't done that in the case of cigarettes, alcohol, or prescription drugs.

[Ghost Dog]

30. But, hang on, if someone uses prescription drugs,

an automobile, or whatever manufactured item to do harm to another person, manufacturers can be succesfully sued?

Surely not.

Now, supplying with knowledge or reason to believe the item will be so used: that's different.

[uponit7771]

39. Neither of thise are trying to make thier items more dangerous or ignoring calls to make them

More safer cause they're immunized from lawsuits to any degree

[Ghost Dog]

41. Ah, I see.

Make that a requirement, especially to avoid accidents, for sure.

[uponit7771]

42. And suicides... Must US companies bend towards making thier products safer

... Most, not all

[Lizzie Poppet]

43. How, specifically, do you propose gunmakers do that?

[uponit7771]

45. Allow them to be sued like everyone else and they'll come to with a practical way quickly

[Lizzie Poppet]

47. They already can be sued for defects/failures.

The only suits prohibited are "nuisance suits" where the suit somehow expects* the manufacturer to have influence over what happens to the product multiple steps removed from them in the distribution chain.

*There is, of course, no such actual expectation...it's just the basis for filing a suit intended to be no more than a way around the fact that the folk filing it can't win via the democratic process.

[djean111]

28. In the bigger picture, Hillary seems quite enthusiastic about Americans using guns to kill

people in other countries.

So - bottom line for me - Hillary is a hypocrite about whatever position on gun control she is taking, at any point in her campaign.

[Orsino]

33. If you mean civilIan guns, their positions are similar.

Sanders seems much more serious about restricting our military's guns.

[lumberjack_jeff]

50. Indifference, mostly. n/t

[Blue_In_AK]

51. I don't believe gun manufacturers should be held liable

for crimes committed with their product. If a gun malfunctions, then, yes, the manufacturer can be sued, just like any other product.

I do believe there should be a moratorium on the sale of certain types of weapons to the general public. And I believe that there should be strict background checks before any gun is purchased by anyone.

I personally don't have a gun in the house and never felt the need for one, but I'm probably in the minority in my state where many people have guns for hunting or for protection from wild animals.

[Trajan]

52. I worry very little about either

I worry about kids getting the food they need, and the clothing and shelter their families need ..

I worry about a generation of kids falling through the cracks because they cannot afford to attend college (like most all ALL students who could not afford college over the last 3 decades)

I worry about working families being unable to sustain a basic existence, thanks to the very effective wage suppression tactics that have the GOP right wingers and Third Way Democrats laughing all the way to the bank ...

Guns are a huge problem ... But, we have a huge problem with poor and middle class families unable to survive under the current system ... THAT needs to change quickly ...

[Rebkeh]

53. The differences aren't stark enough to matter

The only place it matters is in red states like mine. Even dems are pro gun here, Bernie has a distinct advantage.

[Thinkingabout]

55. His votes against the Brady Bill five times says to me he did not think he made a mistake the first

four times. Voting to give immunity to one industry, why should one industry get immunity not afforded to other industries, these are two examples, there are more issues related to the gun industry.

[TeddyR]

56. What do you mean by "immunity"?

Gun manufacturers are not immune from lawsuit - they can still be sued if they sell a defective product. The PLCAA protects manufacturers from lawsuit when someone purchases a gun, passes a background check, and then uses that gun to commit a crime. Or in the case of Sandy Hook, if someone steals a gun and then uses that gun to commit a crime. Why exactly should a gun manufacturer be subject to lawsuit if someone steals a gun and then shoots someone with it?

[Thinkingabout]

64. I do not think immuniity is in the Brady bill.

[Blue_In_AK]

62. In this instance,

I don't think immunity means what you think it does. ALL manufacturers of ALL products have immunity if their product works as it's intended and isn't defective in some way. Car manufacturers can only be sued if a design defect causes the car to blow up, for instance. Drug manufacturers can be sued if their product has dangerous side effects that they knew about or should have known about and failed to disclose but not if someone has been advised of the dangers but takes a handful of the drugs instead of the recommended dose.

Gun manufacturers are the same. If the gun works as it is intended, the manufacturer can't be held liable if a person chooses to misuse the gun. A seller might be held to a stricter standard if he knows that the purchaser has failed a background check and he sells the weapon anyway, but manufacturers, no. They're too far removed from the end use.

[Thinkingabout]

63. The only industry with immunity is the gun industry, why?

[Blue_In_AK]

65. I just explained that that isn't true.

All industries have immunity if their product works as it was designed. You can sue a car manufacturer if you want to if someone crashes into you, but you won't get anywhere unless there was a design defect in the car. That's just basic tort and product liability law 101.

[Thinkingabout]

66. You are skirting the question, why can't families who have loved ones

Killed in gun violence not able to sue the gun manufactures and sellers?

[TCJ70]

67. Why should they?

Did the manufacturer or seller send someone to kill their families?

[Blue_In_AK]

68. It's the law.

I worked in the legal biz for 30 years. It is what it is. THE LAW. Under equal protection, a gun manufacturer shouldn't be treated any differently than the manufacturer of any other product.

Back to the car analogy, do you think every time someone is killed in a car wreck, they should be able to sue the automobile manufacturer even if there was nothing at all wrong with the car?

[Thinkingabout]

75. It isn't just the manufactures, it is also the sellers. The auto industry is not immune to law suit

[Mnpaul]

83. Sue the car companies!!!

Putting in a 160 mph speedometer and the horsepower to use the full dial is obviously encouraging reckless behavior.

[azurnoir]

73. why couldn't Rachel Corrie's family sue Caterpillar? After all she was killed using

special military version of their D-9 bulldozer? Essentially for the same reason a gun manufacturer can not be sued for how a third party uses their product-it was not made specifically to go out and kill people.

[Thinkingabout]

78. Then if this is true why was there a bill in congress passed and why did Sanders

Vote yes on the bill?

[azurnoir]

80. The bill had nothing to do with sueing Caterpillar in fact the idea for that suit was in part a

result of the failure of the 2003 bill calling for an investigation into her death which went nowhere fast

http://www.nimn.org/About/pressrelease/000042.php?section=Press%20Releases

[Waldorf]

74. Why should they be able to? They didn't kill their loved ones, the person who committed the

murder did.

[Lizzie Poppet]

86. Sue them for what, specifically?

For criminal misuse of a perfectly legal product? That's absurd.

[IndyV0te]

57. Let the States decide.

The 2nd amendment to the US Constitution gives the people the right to own firearms.

If the people of a state want to restrict that basic ability, then let them pass legislation to do so. If you want to be subject to those restrictions then live there.

[Zira]

71. I think if the NRA donated she would do whatever they wanted.

[Armstead]

72. I think they're basically similar...And I don't really care about it

I support gun control...But I also think it is inherently ineffective in its stated purpose.

[orpupilofnature57]

76. MIC are Guns, PERIOD .

[LexVegas]

77. Eye opening, huh? nt

[elleng]

79. I prefer O'Malley's:

https://martinomalley.com/policy/preventing-and-reducing-gun-violence/

[jfern]

85. Hillary's position on guns is whatever is best for attacking her primary opponent