In Defending Controversial Gun Vote, Bernie Sanders Proposes A Measure That Already Exists

[RandySF]

Pressed on the issue at a Democratic candidates forum on Monday, Sanders said that he does not think his vote was a mistake, but would consider revising the law to prosecute large gun manufacturers who may know that their guns "are being distributed to criminal elements."

"If you are a gun manufacturer who is selling guns into an area and you’re selling a whole lot of guns, and you have reason to believe that a lot of those guns are not meant for people in that area, but are being distributed to criminal elements, should you be prosecuted? Damn right," he told Fusion's Jorge Ramos.

However, that measure already exists. According to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, the law that Sanders supported contains six conditions in which gun manufacturers would not be shielded from lawsuits. One of these includes "an action brought against someone convicted of 'knowingly transfer[ing] a firearm, knowing that such firearm will be used to commit a crime of violence' by someone directly harmed by such unlawful conduct."



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/bernie-sanders-guns_56946081e4b09dbb4bac619b

[leftofcool]

1. Not surprised. Sanders was bad on guns then and bad now

[SunSeeker]

2. He STILL won't admit his vote for that awful law was a mistake!

Pressed on the issue at a Democratic candidates forum on Monday, Sanders said that he does not think his vote was a mistake, ...

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/56946081e4b09dbb4bac619b

[JonLeibowitz]

3. The law was not a mistake

Why should a firearms manufacturer be sued for making a product in full compliance of the law and selling it in the good faith belief that it will be used responsibly?

I still have not heard a cogent answer on this.

[SunSeeker]

5. Because it is negligent to market military style weapons to civilians.

There is no "good faith" in this marketing campaign, geared to nuts and psychopaths:






The sellers of lawn darts were in "full compliance of the law" and sold them in "good faith," yet the product was rightfully sued out of existence when kids got impaled by them.

[anigbrowl]

6. The correct place to make that argument is in a court, not in Congress

I don't believe the gun industry needs special treatment in this regard. There's no law against suing the manufacturers of most other goods, and courts are quite good at spotting frivolous lawsuits and dismissing them. This has become even easier in recent years following the Twombly decision, which established the precedent that plaintiffs must make some showing of malfeasance in a complaint rather than merely asserting the possibility of such.

[JonLeibowitz]

7. The law was passed because firearms opponents were suing small manufacturers

The goal was to hurt the industry by suing them into oblivion. And that was when they were just getting started.

Defective products can still result in a successful suit, as can manufacturer's impropriety.

[anigbrowl]

8. Boo-fuckin'-hoo

Doesn't explain why they deserve special protections that aren't extended to any other industry. I support people's right to own firearms but my opinion of most of the gun industry is unprintable in this family newspaper. The manufacturers and dealers could easily immunize themselves against this sort of litigation by including a detachable trigger lock with every firearm sold, but no, they prefer to pay their puppets in Congress to grant them legally immunity. Fuck those people and the yellow-bellied horse they rode in on.

[anigbrowl]

4. He understandably doesn't want to alienate recreational gun owners

Seems a big misguided to me but that is what has worked him as a crossover candidate in Vermont, plus he doesn't want to give the GOP an easy soundbite to use against him when he's trying to peel off some of their voters by appealing to their desire to drain the swamp.

[TheFarS1de]

9. Salami tactics .

[anigbrowl]

11. I'm not sure what you're attempting to say here.

I know what Salami tactics are and you seem to be using the term in a different way from the usual meaning. Please clarify.

[TheFarS1de]

12. You don't take away their toys all at once ...

You slowly hobble them , slice by slice . Given the current political climate it is about the only way of getting sensible reforms through .

[anigbrowl]

13. Would you please try writing in plain English instead of code

I don't know who is the subject of your sentence or how you think Sanders is implementing that idea. It's very stylish but unfortunately I am not psychic and cannot guess which of the several possible interpretations of your post is the correct one.

[msanthrope]

10. Interesting, not wanting a jury of the people to punish a corporation. nt