The Insane New Push for Gun Control: Sue the Manufacturers

| |

Top Tier Gear USA

m4 assault rifle

There’s nothing inherently wrong with being uncomfortable around firearms, and not wanting to own them. There also isn’t anything wrong with trusting the police to protect you as opposed to protecting yourself with a gun, if that’s your personal choice. But the moment the anti-gun crowd tries to argue that everyone else should be disarmed as well, it becomes impossible to ignore how warped their thoughts really are.

It’s almost as if they don’t understand the basics of cause and effect. They have no grasp on the realities of human behavior, both good and bad. When someone is killed, they’re confused about who the real perpetrator is. They fear the power of inanimate objects, rather than the intent of the people who use them. Everything about how they see the world is just utterly baffling.

If you’re not sure about what I’m talking about, take a look at this new bill that Democratic lawmakers have just introduced.

Democrats are trying to pass a bill that would hold gun makers liable for crimes committed with the weapons that they produced or sold. Passing the legislation will be an uphill battle in a Republican-controlled Congress.

The law would reverse protections by the gun industry granted by the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005, which shields it from litigation over gun crimes.

“If you’re a carmaker and your airbags kill someone, you’re potentially liable,” Rep. Adam Schiff (D-California) told The Hill in an interview. “If you’re a pharmaceutical company and sell faulty drugs, you can be held liable. If you’re a liquor store and sell alcohol to minors, you can be held liable.”

“Why should it be any different for gun manufacturers?” Schiff, one of the lawmakers behind the bill, asked.

Really? How do all those thoughts coalesce in the same brain without causing an aneurysm? It’s madness.

Car manufacturers can be sued when their vehicles malfunction and cause accidents, not when their customers deliberately run people over or drive drunk. Pharmaceutical companies should be sued if a defective product poisons somebody, but not when their customers deliberately overdose on their meds to get high. And how does the liquor store example have any bearing here? Gun manufacturers have no way of knowing which customers are going to use their guns to commit crimes, whereas liquor stores can check ID’s to make sure their customers aren’t minors. Gun store owners have to run background checks, but that hasn’t stopped any of the recent mass shootings.

Gun companies should be held to the same standard as every other company. If they make a weapon that spontaneously blows up in someone’s hands under normal conditions, they should owe that person money. They don’t owe the victims of crime a single dime, and hopefully they never will. Could you imagine what kind of legal precedent that would set?

Look at all the objects in your house and try to imagine how each one could be used to deliberately hurt someone. Pretty much all of them right? If this bill became law, then every company that produces and delivers goods in this country would go out of business due to frivolous law suits.

What this bill is really about however, is not public safety or holding the gun companies accountable for wrongdoing. This is all about finding another avenue for gun control. The gun grabbers have failed to restrict firearm ownership time and time again. No matter what they do, the majority of the public remains unconvinced and the government fails to pass any meaningful legislation. And in their desperation to halt the sale of millions of firearms, they’ve concocted an idea that is completely bonkers.

Fortunately it’s doubtful that this bill will pass, but that doesn’t mean it won’t become a law in the future. For instance, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have proposed removing the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, and letting the victims of killers sue firearm manufacturers. Think about that. These are the most popular candidates for the Democratic Primary. These are candidates that are suggesting something that is completely insane, and it’s very possible that one of them could be our next president. And if it’s possible for them to be elected to the highest office, it’s also possible that one day, enough like-minded lawmakers could be elected to Congress as well.

In other words, our country is just a stone’s throw away from being run by brain-damaged people. You may think that the people running our government are crazy, stupid, evil, and corrupt now, but believe it or not, we could do worse.

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Contributed by Joshua Krause of The Daily Sheeple.

Joshua Krause is a reporter, writer and researcher at The Daily Sheeple. He was born and raised in the Bay Area and is a freelance writer and author. You can follow Joshua’s reports at Facebook or on his personal Twitter. Joshua’s website is Strange Danger .

Wake The Flock Up! Please Share With Sheeple Far & Wide:
  • Mr Reynard

    Then the next step is to sue Samuel Bronfman & Co for every victim of drunk drivers killed or injured on the road…
    What’s good for the goose,is good for the gander??

  • Jonny rRingworm

    This is what liberal brainwashing looks like. Zero common sense. Funny though, most of these people have security, right?

  • patriot156

    Not new just rehashing it.

  • SP_88

    And maybe we should sue the government for all of the criminally negligent things that they have done.
    Why didn’t these crooked politicians mention that vaccine companies are protected from being sued by people who have been harmed by the toxic chemicals in the vaccines they manufacture? And that would be a legitimate reason to sue someone. They make something and tell people it’s safe, but it’s really poison. And the government wants to protect these scumbags? But they want to be able to sue a gun company, who has done nothing wrong, because some criminal shot someone with a gun they made? This is madness. And what’s worse is that there are people who are stupid enough to think that this is somehow ok. They need to realize that if they don’t vehemently oppose this law, that it will turn America into a lawyer’s paradise.
    Suing a firearm manufacturer because someone used one of their guns during a crime is nothing more than backdoor gun control. People need to realize the ramifications of allowing people like this to become politicians.
    Think of all the businesses that manufacture a product that can be used as a weapon.
    Baseball bats, crow bars, wrenches, pipes, jack handles, pens & pencils, knives, chains, a rock in a sock, etc, etc.
    And there are other things that are also weapons, such as: bow and arrows, crossbows, machetes, axes, hatchets, slingshots, etc, etc.
    And what if the law allows lawsuits from crimes committed before the law went into effect? Think of all the lawsuits that would clog up the courts. Think of all the businesses that may not survive the continuous lawsuits, and all the people who will lose their jobs. And think of how much more all of these things will cost and how much harder they will be to buy. The price of things like baseball bats and crowbars will triple or quadruple. And unemployment will go way up. This law would be an absolute disaster for America. And the brain dead politicians who support this crap should be thrown in jail.

    • They don’t plan on stopping at guns, they are going to go after crossbows and knives next, anything that you can use to resist tyranny will be outlawed or at least attempted to be outlawed, did they knife grab the machetes in NY yet? I know they were trying to. Good comment.

      • august

        that is what they think

      • SP_88

        I don’t think so. But NY does have some ridiculous knife laws. From what I read there have been 60,000 illegal knife arrests in the past decade. Many of them are for having a “gravity knife” which is a knife that can be opened with one hand by a flick of the wrist or some similar motion. Many arrests are dubious and the knives were ordinary folding pocket knives that had a worn out hinge. The police were either able to forcibly flick it open or in some cases they made the arrest based on the possibility that it could be done. The idea behind this law is that a person could pull out this knife and flick it open quickly with one hand, as opposed to having to use your other hand to open it. The most ridiculous part of this is the fact that it isn’t illegal to carry a fixed blade knife, which could be deployed even quicker because it’s already open and ready to use as soon as it’s out. And according to what I read New York state has no restrictions on the length of the blade you can carry, but New York city has a limit of 4″.
        There are groups in New York that are fighting to repeal these ridiculous laws based on several facts such as it being unconstitutionally vague. They are also trying to add “criminal intent” to the law so that they will stop arresting people who are not criminals for carrying a pocket knife to cut open boxes and other such tasks.
        Unfortunately, as ridiculous as these laws are, there is significant resistance to repealing them because they are a source of revenue. The police in New York have been under pressure to make arrests and this intentionally vague knife law is a good source of arrests. There was even an officer who was typing on his computer to a rookie on a law enforcement chat room and he wrote “be sure to look for “GK’s” and make sure they have a prior conviction so you can bump it up to a felony”. (GK = gravity knife)
        So clearly there is an intent to make money from crime. And to increase the “profits” from crime, they simply make everything illegal. And I would guess that by trying to get a felony conviction they are also taking the 2nd amendment rights away from another citizen.
        It’s pretty screwed up how these people think.

        • Damn, I collect butterfly knives, no NYC for me.

          • SP_88

            I think that you would be ok with a butterfly knife as long as the blade is 4″ or less, although I could be wrong. With a little practice you can open a butterfly knife pretty quickly. It makes no sense though because it’s ok to carry a fixed blade knife that is always “open” and ready to use.
            So a guy pulls out a switchblade and another guy pulls out a fixed blade hunting knife, the guy with the switchblade has to push a button to snap it open, the other guy’s knife is already out, and the guy with the switchblade gets arrested. That’s the “logic” of this law. Whoever wrote that law is a complete moron.

      • none

        The British did outlaw crossbows! I The pesants made them and shoot the ” Knights in shinning armor “. The one Reason was that they where stealing their winter food supplies. And potching on the kings private forest land,trying to feed their families with village.
        Side note: The Knights where also rumored to “Sweep a pesant” girl off her feet. Taking her to their castile, before she was married. A reference would be the film Braveheart staring Mel Gibson.

        • Do you mean peasants? Crossbows are the Saturday night special of bows, difficult to get and keep on target, and plenty of mechanism to mess up at the worst possible time. Ownership of a longbow was encouraged by King Edward III’s declaration of 1363: “Whereas the people of our realm, rich and poor alike, were accustomed formerly in their games to practise archery – whence by God’s help, it is well known that high honour and profit came to our realm, and no small advantage to ourselves in our warlike enterprises… that every man in the same country, if he be able-bodied, shall, upon holidays, make use, in his games, of bows and arrows… and so learn and practise archery.”

  • jps73

    Schiff is a idiot; No Pharma Liability? No Vaccine Mandates.

    by Barbara Loe Fisher

    On February 22, 2011 the U.S. Supreme Court shielded drug companies from all liability for harm caused by vaccines mandated by government when companies could have made a safer vaccine. 1

    From now on, drug companies selling vaccines in America will not be held accountable by a jury of our peers in a court of law if those vaccines brain damage us but could have been made less toxic. 2

    If you get paralyzed by a flu shot or your child has a serious reaction to a vaccine required for school and becomes learning disabled, epileptic, autistic, asthmatic, diabetic or mentally retarded, you are on your own. 3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16

    From now on – unless we stand up and draw the line on vaccine mandates – the government can legally use police powers to force every American to get hundreds of vaccinations or be punished while those, who are hurt by vaccination, can be more easily swept under the rug and left to fend for themselves. 17, 18, 19&, 20

    Big Pharma Blackmailed Congress in 1982

    To understand how this happened, we have to turn the clock back to 1982. That is when four big drug companies (Merck, Wyeth, Lederle, Connaught) blackmailed Congress by threatening to stop selling vaccines in America unless a law was passed giving them complete immunity from prosecution. 21

    The pharmaceutical industry knew they were in big trouble because the old, crude whooping cough vaccine in the DPT shot was causing brain inflammation and death in many children; 22 the live oral polio vaccine was crippling children and adults with vaccine strain polio; 23 and Americans were filing lawsuits to hold drug companies responsible for the safety of their products.

    • Michellejperry1

      1❝my neighbor’s mate is getting 98$. HOURLY on the internet❞….

      A few days ago new McLaren F1 subsequent after earning 18,512$,,,this was my previous month’s paycheck ,and-a little over, 17k$ Last month ..3-5 h/r of work a day ..with extra open doors & weekly. paychecks.. it’s realy the easiest work I have ever Do.. I Joined This 7 months ago and now making over 87$, p/h.Learn More right Here
      ➤➤➤ http://GlobalSuperEmploymentVacanciesReportsEquity/GetPaid/98$hourly❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.❦.

  • Mike

    If they make that legal, then at that point, car manufacturers, bat manufacturers, adult beverage manufacturers and the like will be able to be sued by anyone that is hurt because of some idiot, or some insane person, or some criminal while using one of their products. I will be one wealthy man.

    • bill lopez

      We are in the final days of the empire – let them pass all the laws they want. It will be interesting to see where those lawmakers find themselves once its over.

      • Where they find themselves will be determined by whether they are patriots or criminals, and that, during their trials.

    • Reverend Draco

      Remember. . . if a loved one is killed in an auto accident, and the reason given is “excessive speed,” sue the automaker for manufacturing a vehicle that will go 2, 3, or more times the legal speed limit – I mean, if the speed limit is 65, why does anyone need a car that’ll do 160+? That’s the death of innocents begging to happen.

      • Are you saying that all drivers should have to put up with speed governors?

        • Reverend Draco

          “If It Saves Just One Life” ©

    • The problem comes in the fact that most guns are made safer by malfunctions, not more dangerous. Guns are unique among items over which opponents want to sue makers for liability, since they very seldom ever harm the user.

  • Another Thought Criminal

    So the bill’s sponsors are blumenthal and shiff; following in the footsteps of the other gun grabbers; feinstein, schumer, boxer, bloomberg, et al.
    Don’t people remember what happened in bolshevik Russia when the exact same group of people took over that country and disarmed the people.
    Hasn’t anyone heard of the Holomodor?

    • That stuff has been memory holed and you’re just supposed to remember the holohoax and the “6 million” and forget about the 20th century victims of communism. Yes, it’s looking like early 20th century russia more and more and the people better wake up!

  • Squid

    How about we pass a bill that allows legislators to be sued when they allow criminal illegal aliens to thrive due to their inaction. When an illegal kills a citizen, the legislator, who voted to allow continuation of sanctuary cities, gets to pay the victims large sums of money.

  • ignoranceNpower

    Might we sue the gas station that distributes gasoline to that Fed X delivery truck, the designer of the particular ammunition used and the university which educated the ballistics engineer? Or, should we just leave our Constitution alone?

    • No. It should be dumped for a return to the Articles of Confederation and Individual State Sovereignty.
      Otherwise, collapse.

      • Too few have ever learned about the Articles of Confederation for them to know what it was. State sovereignty wasn’t undermined by the Constitution, but by ignorant citizenry.

        • Are you not familiar with the so-called, American Civil War.? It laid to rest the notion that Individual States are sovereign. The constitution destroyed the league of sovereign states and created a centralized national government.

          • It had more to do with the north’s desire to return the former southern states to the desired situation of colonies than to anything else. As it was, it was just Lincoln’s violation of the Constitution by declaring war against a sovereign neighbor country without the Congress’ due diligence. Every president since JFK has demonstrated their mastery of Lincoln’s lesson.

    • We’d have to restore and enforce it before we could leave it alone.

  • ignoranceNpower

    Are each of these ‘lawmakers’ Israeli citizens?

  • Collectivism is the problem – not the solution.
    Why would the ‘Last Free Man’ call for even more collectivism?
    ‘The majority rules’ is a meme one should avoid at all costs.

    • Razedbywolvs

      I looked at your profile/comment thread. Holly shit man, i’m going to be arguing at ALTERNET for the next year (or in tell i get booted). Were did you find these people?

      • They love to hate me. I merely advocate for Individual Rights.

  • bill lopez

    80% is all one needs to know to avoid the gun confiscation. The government cant confiscate what they don’t know you have.

    • Give up your known weapons if they come for them, to fight them at that point is just suicide but you’re right, they can’t confiscate what they don’t know you have.

      • And if they take you to jail for failing to have the ones they list you as owning?

        • They can have all of the ones I list as owning.

  • Get all Israeli dual-citizen zionist scumbags out of our government! In Israel you can’t have a dual citizenship and be in the government but Israel is the land of “do as I say but NEVER as I do.”

  • Truthsetsyoufree

    “From my cold dead hands.”

  • Razedbywolvs

    And how does the liquor store example have any bearing here?
    If the manufacture sells to miners they can be held liable. Unless the kid has a FFL but i think the DOJ would have to take the blame for that one. But who would do that under the watchful eye of Eric Holder?

    • Miners aren’t allowed to buy liquor? I thought it was just minors…

  • It is unlikely that any congresscritter who has committed treason, as most of them (and most military members) have would ever pass legislation that could backfire on them in application. Besides, treason is already unlawful by the language in the Constitution, and when was the last time anyone was prosecuted for it?