Bernie Sanders Doubles Down On Support for Law That Protects Gun Sellers From Lawsuits

[sheshe2]

By Mark Joseph Stern

On Sunday, CNN's Jake Tapper pressed Vermont senator and Democratic president candidate Bernie Sanders on his support for the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, or PLCAA. As a senator, Sanders voted for the law, which shields gun and ammunition manufacturers, distributors, and dealers from liability when their products are used criminally. (Many Democrats, including then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, opposed the bill.) Explaining his vote, Sanders said:

Quote

If somebody has a gun and it falls into the hands of a murderer and the murderer kills somebody with a gun, do you hold the gun manufacturer responsible? Not any more than you would hold a hammer company responsible if somebody beats somebody over the head with a hammer. That is not what a lawsuit should be about.


This answer is dishonest and obfuscatory for two reasons. First and most obviously, hammers are materially different from firearms. The gun Adam Lanza used in the Sandy Hook massacre sent 154 bullets through 20 children and six adults in 264 seconds. With a hammer, Lanza could not have done a fraction of that damage. Sanders’ analogy is simply inane.

Second, and more importantly, it makes good legal sense to hold gun and ammunition manufacturers and sellers to a higher standard of care than hardware stores. Before the PLCAA, many states did exactly that, making gun sellers liable for civil suits if they negligently sold a firearm to someone who later committed a crime. Faced with the threat of a lawsuit, gun sellers may be more likely to perform thorough background checks on all their customers to keep their guns out of the hands of potential murderers. (Even if their guns were still used criminally, gun sellers could argue that they weren't negligent because they performed the background check.) But the PLCAA wiped out gun liability in all 50 states, rendering them invalid except for a few narrow exceptions.

More
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/07/06/bernie_sanders_doubles_down_on_support_for_gun_sellers.html?

[Thinkingabout]

1. Without responsibility the market is without any regulations.

Also, if the ammo and gun manufacturers delivers a defective product then they should be held responsible for those defects. E
We hold car manufacturers and other industries responsible for their products, why should this industry get a free pass? It is dumb laws like this is not get passed.

[Cha]

3. Good point about the car manufacturers, Thinkingabout.. exponentially better than hammers.

[TeddyR]

7. Gun manufacturers can be held responsible for delivering a defective product

However, they can't be sued for delivering a legal product that is misused by a criminal. Just like Ford can't be sued when a drunk driver kills someone with a F-150. Simple really, and not controversial.

[Cha]

2. I wish he wouldn't say things like that.. he has a big pulpit now.. he could use it to help victims

of gun massacres.

from your link, she..

"Perhaps Sanders believes that gun and ammunition sellers should receive total immunity from these kinds of lawsuits, and should have no legal incentive to perform comprehensive background checks on their customers. But if that's his position, he should be honest about it. The PLCAA blocks states from holding gun sellers to a higher standard of care than other retailers. It bars victims of mass shootings from seeking justice against the businesses that enable massacres. If Sanders really supports that, he owes it to voters to stop using misleading, asinine analogies and actually explain why."

[sheshe2]

5. +1000!

Well said.

[freshwest]

17. That's sad, Cha. n/t

[George II]

4. I didn't see the interview, but did he really use the hammer analogy?

I thought he was reasonably intelligent and thoughtful. I may have to change that.

Hey Bernie, the DIFFERENCE is that guns are designed to kill. Hammers are designed to drive nails into wood.

What an asinine thing for him to say, I'm very disappointed.

[TeddyR]

8. A hammer is a tool

A gun is a tool. Should Home Depot be sued (and they didn't make the hammer, they just sell it) because someone commits murder with the hammer?

[George II]

9. A hammer is a tool to build things, a gun is a tool to destroy things

[sheshe2]

11. Excellent Answer!!!!!

[kjones]

14. All seriousness aside...nail guns? The slippery slope to tool-weapon obsfucation. nt

[Iliyah]

6. Thats one of the reasons why I will not support him.

[appal_jack]

10. I stand with Bernie on this.

Why should the criminal misuse of a properly and lawfully produced tool subject the manufacturer and/or distributor to civil suits?

Bernie is right.

-app

[BainsBane]

12. Corporate profits before human life is not right

Why are corporations that profit from murder better than those that profit from usury. They are not. They don't make any effort to keep guns out of the hands of felons. All they care about is profits and don't give a shit how many people are killed, and that law ensures they don't have to.

[sheshe2]

13. This is the Hillary Clinton Group.

Stand with him in GD. Leave us alone.

[George II]

15. Yes - in General Discussion, Bernie Sanders Group, or maybe even Free Republic?

[Gothmog]

16. The law protecting fire arm manufacturers is a really bad law