Article: BERNIE SANDERS: GUN MANUFACTURERS MAY NEED TO BE HELD LIABLE FOR GUN CRIME

His point is that dealers don't know who will flip out but manufacturers shouldn't sell too many guns to areas with problems? Put down the bong, idiot.

What he really wants is to crush the manufacturers so that gun shops will close for lack of product.


Sent from my C6530 using Tapatalk
 
Awesome plan. Then we will be able to sue knife makers for mass stabbings, Toyota, when some jerk drives into a crowd and Stanley when some nutbag offs someone with a hammer.

Perfect plan. What could go wrong.
 
If anyone can't see through this blatant example of pandering and flipflopping for votes on a "hot button" issue, then they are truly foolish. Then again, if you were considering voting for Bernie in the first place, you were already foolish to begin with. The left won't stand for his prior apathy on gun control, so he's got to make it seem like he's all for strict control. I wish someone would ask him about VT, and why in a state that's quite lax there isn't rampant "gun violence."
 
So manufacturers can't sell products to high crime areas where the local authorities have already regulated all legal gun shops and carry out of existence.

Logic is not a strong point of socialists beyond calculated oppression.
 
Bernie Sanders: redlining is good when applied to constitutional rights he dislikes

Sadly, most people discussing the PLCAA have never actually read the text.

Bernie said:
On the other hand, where there is a problem is there is evidence that manufacturers, gun manufacturers, do know that they’re selling a whole lot of guns in an area that really should not be buying that many guns. That many of those guns are going to other areas, probably for criminal purposes. So can we take another look at that liability issue? Yes.
Click to expand...
So he wants distributors to engage in redlining, refuse sales of "too many" guns to dealers if they are located "near" cities like Chicago?
 
Kevin_NH said:
Sadly, most people discussing the PLCAA have never actually read the text.
Click to expand...
Read it? He voted for it. Even by The Pelosi Doctrine he should thus know what it says. He's just chasing the national moonbat base that's far more anti than the special flavor of VT moonbat.
 
When do we start holding Politicians liable for gun crimes in GFZs? Or for murders by drug lords and terrorists they armed to prove political points?
 
I think what he was trying to say was manufactures should be aware if they sell x(large) number of guns in a small population. You sell 1000 Ak's in a town of 300 people in a month there is obviously something wrong; straw buyers or criminal purposes. Sounds like a job for the police not for Ruger,S&W, Glock etc.... to me.
 
Horrible said:
When do we start holding Politicians liable for gun crimes in GFZs? Or for murders by drug lords and terrorists they armed to prove political points?
Click to expand...


This is exactly why these kind of progressive 'ideas' simply won't work. They know it too! It simply to gain more control and put more pressure on manufacturers to stop producing.
 
Vineyard45 said:
I think what he was trying to say was manufactures should be aware if they sell x(large) number of guns in a small population. You sell 1000 Ak's in a town of 300 people in a month there is obviously something wrong; straw buyers or criminal purposes. Sounds like a job for the police not for Ruger,S&W, Glock etc.... to me.
Click to expand...
In areas like Illinois, it isn't uncommon for a dealer in a town just outside Cook County limits to sell 1000 "AKs" in a month, because they get all the business from everybody inside Cook County (Though a new lawsuit may change this)

And while "distributor shipped 1000 Aks to a 300 person town in a month" might be the situation they claim to be interested in addressing, when you look at actual lawsuits they've attempted, that isn't the real goal at all; rather the goal is to expand the reach of failed cities like Chicago beyodn their borders, to address situations like Chicago where (until the recent court decision) it was illegal to operate a gun store at all, so stores just outside the city limits (like Shore Galleries and Chuck's Gun Store) did a booming business in selling handguns to Chicago residents. Even now that Chicago residents are no longer subject to the Catch-22 registration regime, [URL="http://www.ammoland.com/2015/06/fr-pfleger-racebaiter-jessie-jackson-threaten-to-snuff-out-gun-owners/"]Father Pfleger and the Brady Bunch are stilling attempting to use lawsuits to drive them out of business.[/URL]:
The lawsuit said guns sold at shops in those suburbs end up in Chicago neighborhoods “in a manner that disproportionately jeopardizes the lives of African Americans, causes mental anguish and distress and diminishes the value of their homes and other property.”
. . .
The lawsuit asks the court to declare those three suburbs in violation of the Illinois Civil Rights Act and issue an injunction requiring them to strengthen their regulation of gun stores.
Click to expand...
 

Similar threads

Article: Texas AG: Response to Church Shooting Should Be More Armed Law-Abiding Citiz
Replies
5
Views
763
KBCraig
KBCraig
Article: Trump Bypasses Congress to Open Up World Markets to U.S. Gun Makers
Replies
10
Views
968
Crotchrocket
Crotchrocket
Article: Veterans Day 2017
Replies
5
Views
536
Len-2A Training
Len-2A Training
Article: Paul Ryan Ignoring National Reciprocity for 43rd Consecutive Week
Replies
6
Views
1K
weldingmachine
W
Article: ABC News: Firearm Confiscation Orders Part of Solution to Mass Public Attack
Replies
20
Views
2K
Lucus
Lucus
Back
Top Bottom