Well at least this person isn't pretending that the lawful commerce law is about protecting gun manufacturers from all lawsuits.
She does believe however, that gun makers are responsible for keeping guns out of the wrong hands
http://warrenreports.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/10/21/5508/1714
You know, this one really infuriates me. And whether you're a committed proponent of gun control or a responsible and legal gun owner, it should infuriate you too.
Because passage Thursday of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is about something bigger than whether you'd like to see more or fewer firearms on our streets. It's about our elected officials selling their votes to an inexcusably powerful lobby, and in so doing, selectively exempting a lucrative industry from being responsible to every American citizen for its unique product. It's about a government stripping us of one of our fundamental rights to address grievances in situations where those grievances are warranted, and demand responsibility of those who profit from the distribution of weapons in our society. It's about an NRA-funded White House and Congress creating binding, federal legislation as a solution to a problem that never existed.
It's about buying the law.
Manufacturers and distributors of firearms argue that other products, and their creators, are not threatened when those products are misused by irresponsible individuals. That is true, for the most part. People do have responsibilities for their behavior, and for using their purchases in the manner intended.
That's just it, though. In the manner intended. The firearms industry doesn't make cars, or refrigerators, or crown molding. The firearms industry makes and sells a product whose very purpose is to destroy, injure, and kill. And please, no "target practice" arguments. If The Quest For A Bullseye is truly your thing, 21st Century technology offers you plenty of alternatives to a loaded 9mm.
Of course, these companies have the absolute American right to manufacture and distribute that product. Even I would concede that, sadly, the human species hasn't yet grown up enough not to need weapons in certain desperate situations. And private gun ownership is a Constitutionally guaranteed privilege, whatever your personal view.
But let's tell it like it is, kids. Guns are designed with one ultimate consumer use in mind. It only seems logical, then, that the industry should have a spontaneous, genuine, vigorous interest in making sure that this deadly product is distributed under the strictest of guidelines - and many tough regulations already exist. That just makes sense, for the safety and protection of gun opponents and gun owners alike.
And in those few instances where there is enough negligence, or complicity, or carelessness during that process that it's a demonstrable factor in the commission of a crime, shouldn't we the people have a guaranteed right to punish all the offenders? There aren't many that fit that description, so what possible reason could there be to protect a handful of rotten apples from any and all accountability - at our expense - and to immediately dismiss those pending cases which obviously had enough merit to have made it to trial in the first place?!
This is not a partisan howl, nor even a pro-gun/anti-gun debate. This is Red, White and Blue disgust with the unmistakable image of our government leaders, standing on a secluded street corner and whoring their wares to the highest bidder, instead of ensuring the legal protection of their constituents. Our laws should not be dictated by lobbyists or corporate contributions - and our rights as American citizens should not be on the market at any price.
She does believe however, that gun makers are responsible for keeping guns out of the wrong hands
http://warrenreports.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/10/21/5508/1714
You know, this one really infuriates me. And whether you're a committed proponent of gun control or a responsible and legal gun owner, it should infuriate you too.
Because passage Thursday of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is about something bigger than whether you'd like to see more or fewer firearms on our streets. It's about our elected officials selling their votes to an inexcusably powerful lobby, and in so doing, selectively exempting a lucrative industry from being responsible to every American citizen for its unique product. It's about a government stripping us of one of our fundamental rights to address grievances in situations where those grievances are warranted, and demand responsibility of those who profit from the distribution of weapons in our society. It's about an NRA-funded White House and Congress creating binding, federal legislation as a solution to a problem that never existed.
It's about buying the law.
Manufacturers and distributors of firearms argue that other products, and their creators, are not threatened when those products are misused by irresponsible individuals. That is true, for the most part. People do have responsibilities for their behavior, and for using their purchases in the manner intended.
That's just it, though. In the manner intended. The firearms industry doesn't make cars, or refrigerators, or crown molding. The firearms industry makes and sells a product whose very purpose is to destroy, injure, and kill. And please, no "target practice" arguments. If The Quest For A Bullseye is truly your thing, 21st Century technology offers you plenty of alternatives to a loaded 9mm.
Of course, these companies have the absolute American right to manufacture and distribute that product. Even I would concede that, sadly, the human species hasn't yet grown up enough not to need weapons in certain desperate situations. And private gun ownership is a Constitutionally guaranteed privilege, whatever your personal view.
But let's tell it like it is, kids. Guns are designed with one ultimate consumer use in mind. It only seems logical, then, that the industry should have a spontaneous, genuine, vigorous interest in making sure that this deadly product is distributed under the strictest of guidelines - and many tough regulations already exist. That just makes sense, for the safety and protection of gun opponents and gun owners alike.
And in those few instances where there is enough negligence, or complicity, or carelessness during that process that it's a demonstrable factor in the commission of a crime, shouldn't we the people have a guaranteed right to punish all the offenders? There aren't many that fit that description, so what possible reason could there be to protect a handful of rotten apples from any and all accountability - at our expense - and to immediately dismiss those pending cases which obviously had enough merit to have made it to trial in the first place?!
This is not a partisan howl, nor even a pro-gun/anti-gun debate. This is Red, White and Blue disgust with the unmistakable image of our government leaders, standing on a secluded street corner and whoring their wares to the highest bidder, instead of ensuring the legal protection of their constituents. Our laws should not be dictated by lobbyists or corporate contributions - and our rights as American citizens should not be on the market at any price.
