Another unsigned editorial
Speaking of the LA Times, an editorial entitled Remember Gun Control:
Over the last four years, the president and his congressional allies have repudiated or quietly eviscerated key gun laws and regulations.
Really, name one?
Now they are poised to shield firearms makers and sellers from nearly all damage claims when their products kill or maim. Not only is this a gift no other industry enjoys, it’s a truly bad idea that even gun owners have reason to oppose.
I support it merely to annoy hysterical bed-wetters like the editorial board of the LA Times. However, the bill just shields dealers who lawfully sell products from lawsuits that result from the misuse of those products. The analogy, of course, is suing Ford because that’s what kind of car a drunk moron happened to be driving when he plowed into a family of six.
Last year, Republican congressional leaders simply ran out the clock on the 10-year-old federal assault gun ban, refusing to even call a vote on renewing it despite steady popular support for the law.
Another lie. I watched, live on CSPAN, as Congress brought the bill up, voted on it and then killed the overall bill.
And now, the real hysteria:
With it died the ban on domestically made ammunition clips with more than 10 rounds, a boon for any disgruntled employee, terrorist or high school student who wants to mow down a crowd.
Actually, there was only a ban on making or importing new ones. There will still plenty around from before the ban. I’d venture to guess that over 95% of all AK magazines on Earth were made prior to 1994.
Meanwhile, a Government Accountability Office study examining FBI and state background-check records found that 35 people whose names appeared on terrorism watch lists were able to buy a gun. Incredibly, a would-be buyer’s presence on a watch list does not disqualify him or her from buying a firearm.
Yeah, that pesky due process of law.
It would even block injury suits from gun owners. That means gun owners can’t sue if poorly made handguns explode in their hands or fire unintentionally.
Another blatant lie. The bill will not protect manufacturers who make faulty or defective products.
April 12th, 2005 at 9:15 am
It would seem to be that the firearm industry is one that would need protecting because it is in the national intrest (much like the avation industry that builds our fighters).
While I do not agree with that, I would think it would make sense to a hawk socialist (if there are any)
April 12th, 2005 at 4:08 pm
These are reforms that all industries need. But if we have to protect them from ridiculous lawsuits one at a time, gun manufacturers are near the top of the list.
April 16th, 2005 at 4:16 am
Very nice post! It’s good to see people are out there who actually understand what this is about. I get so tired of hearing the lies people are making up about this potentially good law.