All it took was Bernie to turn DU into a bunch of NRA apologists!

[DanTex]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Sissyk (a host of the General Discussion forum).

Background checks (the Brady bill)? Who needs them!
Legal immunity for gun manufacturers? Great idea! Let's stand up to corporations, except for the ones that profit from murder!
Gun control? A minor issue! What's 30,000 gun deaths a year between friends? It's mostly poor people anyway. Think of it as "thinning the herd".

Plus, everyone knows gun control is a hopeless cause. Unlike, you know, the Bernie Sanders candidacy, obviously that's not some kind of idealistic pipe dream. Let's be realistic, people!

Of course, I'm being unfair. We have to understand, nobody is going to be on the right side of every issue. One or two horrible stances isn't enough to disqualify a candidate. Unless that candidate is named Clinton...

[NYC_SKP]

1. Manufacturers of legal things should not be held liable for their misuse.

How is that not an obvious thing?

[DanTex]

5. Exactly! Why just the gun manufacturers! All industries should be immune from all lawsuits!

Why just the gunners? Where's the love for the chemical companies and the banks? Bernie had the right idea, just didn't take it far enough!

[NYC_SKP]

31. Manufacturers are liable for faulty designs, poor construction. Cars, appliances, chemicals.

Those attempts to legislate guns out of existence by blaming gunmakers for asshole owners and criminal's behavior were non-starters.

[Mojorabbit]

35. +1000 nt

[DanTex]

75. Which is why the gun industry needs special protections? Umm, yeah, of course. Go NRA!

[NYC_SKP]

77. Please point to the special protection that they enjoy. I haven't seen that.

[DanTex]

79. Really?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act

[NYC_SKP]

89. Awesome.

But in reality, it has great value in setting a precedent that discourages copycat crap lawsuits, like someone saying that the makers of the Subaru WRS should have known that a bad driver might use it to go fast and then kill some young teenager.

It's a sensible law.

[DanTex]

93. Hell yes! Lawsuits against innocent corporations are a huge problem! It's killing the economy!

Poor corporations, always being victimized. I heard they were even suing banks over money laundering! The horror! They are just providing banking services!

Free market rulz!!!!!

[NYC_SKP]

96. Stupid lawsuits have consequences.

[beevul]

82. Thats sure how it appears:

Senior U.S. District Judge Richard P. Matsch of the District of Colorado dismissed Sandy and Lonnie Phillips’ suit against four websites because Colorado and federal laws shield firearms and ammunition sellers from liability based on a customer’s wrongful acts. Phillips et al. v. Lucky

http://blog.thomsonreuters.com/index.php/parents-lost-daughter-mass-shooter-now-owe-220000-suppliers/

[DanTex]

84. Exactly! Thank you team NRA! At least you openly side with the gun manufacturers.

Unlike your cohorts, who are trying to pretend that they want gun companies to actually play by the same rules as everyone else.

[NYC_SKP]

91. Always know the consequences of losing before filing a lawsuit. Paying the winners legal costs.

That's not just for this Colorado lawsuit.

And it was a loser after all, suing ammo dealers for the nutcase shooter's crimes.

Crazy, man.

[beevul]

94. No manufacturers sued in the case I linked.

Please, explain why a seller OR a manufacturer should be held responsible when someone illegally misuses a product of ANY KIND.

"Unlike your cohorts, who are trying to pretend that they want gun companies to actually play by the same rules as everyone else."

Same rules as everyone else?

Fine. Lets make it so ALL manufacturers and sellers of all things in this nation be shielded from being sued for the misuse of an otherwise legal product by a third party.

Somehow, I'm thinking you wont like that idea either.

[DanTex]

97. Yes, extend the same immunity to all corporations! Why didn't they think of that?

You are speaking my language. Corporations all the way. Hell yes. If only the rest of the Bernie Sanders supporters could see the wisdom of the unfettered free market.

[beevul]

109. Dantex invents "widget A".

Dantex invents "widget A".

Dantex incorporates (now its dantexcorp) and begins manufacturing widget A's and selling them to resellers.

Dantexcorp finishes manufacturing the first run of widget a's and ships them to vendor B.

Vendor B sells out completely of widget A's. All sales are background checked, because widget A's can be misused to a dangerous even fatal extent.

Months pass, and widget A's are selling like hotcakes.


One fine day, Dantex gets served papers informing him that dantexcorp is being sued by someone. This "someone" was murdered by a repeat felon, who used one of the widget a's manufactured by dantexcorp to commit the murder.


Is dantexcorp liable? Should it be?

Not that I expect honest rational answers...

[DanTex]

110. Like I said. Immunize them all, don't let the courts decide, more rights for corporations!

It's great that's what you stand for, and I know that there are a lot of people who share your beliefs. The point of this OP is that most Bernie Sanders supporters don't stand for that, or at least they don't think they do. If you are already a Ron Paul/Milton Friedman corporate/libertarian, then obviously you will see things differently.

[beevul]

111. Have you been drinking?

"If you are already a Ron Paul/Milton Friedman corporate/libertarian, then obviously you will see things differently."

I honestly can't see what would make anyone of any race creed color stripe or political bent believe that:

A company or seller should be responsible for the illegal misuse of a legal product.


Except the hatred of guns, and the people that own them and value the right to do so.

[AgingAmerican]

100. List the 'everybody else' product

manufacturers that can be sued for misuse of their products. Thanks in advance.

[DanTex]

104. Everyone who is not specifically immune can be sued for anything.

Whether the lawsuit succeeds is another matter. If it's frivolous, it won't, and the plaintiff will have to pay the legal costs. Evidently that wasn't enough for the NRA. They needed a special law. Hmm. Why would that be? I wonder how you would feel about a special law absolving banks of money laundered using their accounts? Well, no, I don't wonder, obviously you'd be in favor. But do I wonder how progressives would feel about that.

[AgingAmerican]

105. Still waiting for your list

Meanwhile, my chihuahua is off to war in his chariot!

[DanTex]

108. Umm, list? Waiting? Chihuahua? Sounds like you're having a good night!

[GGJohn]

112. And again, you're wrong.

You can take the manufacturers to court, where it will be dismissed.
It's already happened several times.

[DanTex]

115. And again, I'm right. You can take anyone to court, and if it's a baseless suit,

it will be dismissed. Except for gun manufacturers, who have a special law protecting just them. Why should they have a special law? Aren't you worried that other corporations might get jealous? Where's the love for the banks and petrochemicals?

[GGJohn]

119. Sorry, you can repeat this all you want,

but the facts don't lie.

[DanTex]

121. This is fun! Are you having fun?!?!

[GGJohn]

122. I'm having a lot of fun.

This is entertaining.

[DanTex]

124. Good times then.

Aside from this conversation, I'm pretty excited about Barcelona beating Munich 3-0 today in the Champions League semis. Not sure if you're a soccer fan, but even if you're not, you gotta admit, Messi's second goal was awesome:

[GGJohn]

126. I like soccer,

but I love baseball, our DiamondBacks aren't doing so well, but the season is still young.

[DanTex]

127. I don't get into baseball until the post-season usually. Then I root against the Yankees.

But don't tell anyone. Everyone I know here in NYC is a Yankees fan.

[GGJohn]

128. I tell people that I have 2 favorite teams.

The Arizona Diamondbacks and anyone playing the Yankees. LOL.

[DanTex]

129. LOL. Well, we agree on something.

Probably on most political issues except for guns also. Anyway, it's all internet chatter. Good talking to you.

[GGJohn]

132. Yup, I'm quite sure we agree on just about every other issue.

Great talking to you too.

[AgingAmerican]

71. Your premise is...bizarre

Think!

[arcane1]

18. He's been running for less than a week, and this is how scary he already is.

It's quite a sight!

[bigwillq]

24. Yup.

[NuclearDem]

42. ...argued the entire fucking tobacco lobby.

[NYC_SKP]

60. No. The Tobacco Lobby argued that their products were safe, but they weren't.

Smoking was not a harmless act, it is a dangerous substance, and addictive, and the industry lied about it.

Guns are like cars and knives and drano, safe if used according to instruction, but dangerous enough to be regulated within reasonable limits.

These things are not at all alike.

Nice try, tho!

[AgingAmerican]

73. Analogy fail

nt

[DanTex]

101. Yes they did. And the auto industry. All industries, really. They're all "special".

[zappaman]

2. One word.

Benghazi.


?1368449608

[PowerToThePeople]

3. failpost. n/t

[Evergreen Emerald]

4. Excellent post.

My thoughts exactly.

[darkangel218]

6. NRA apologists?

So anyone who owns a gun is an " NRA apologist" to you??

Holy crap!! Welcome to ignore.

[DanTex]

9. Wait, so you're not ignoring me yet? That really hurts.

[ChisolmTrailDem]

14. She is now. And so am I. Goodbye. nt

[zappaman]

17. Oh shit!

Someone else just announced their intention to ignore you!
Stay strong!

[DanTex]

30. If I can all the gun militants to ignore me, this will be my best post ever!

[GGJohn]

38. Well, you can count me out as putting you on ignore,

I debate, not ignore, and besides, I get a kick out of reading your posts about firearms, they're so entertaining, wrong, but entertaining.

[DanTex]

45. Keep 'em coming!

[AgingAmerican]

92. Problem is

None of them are 'gun militants'

That statement is the 4th Strawman I have seen you present so far in this thread, and I have only read about 1/5 of it so far lol.

[DCBob]

15. I reced this op so please ignore me also.

Thank you.

[Evergreen Emerald]

16. Wow...the poster said nothing of the sort

Lol. You may want to read the post before you put him on ignore. B

[darkangel218]

19. Where did anyone defend the NRA??

People defended their support for the second amendment.
Not the same thing, hun.

[HERVEPA]

61. Fuck the 2nd amendment. It is no longer relevant and should be changed.

O, and fuck the gun manufacturers too. Blood on their hands.

[GGJohn]

66. Welcome to the party.

If it's so irrelevant, then why does our President agree with the SCOTUS that the 2A is an individual right?
If you think the 2A is irrelevant and should be changed, then by all means, start a call for a constitutional convention to get it changed or abolished.
Good luck with that.

[darkangel218]

68. How silly.

Many democrats support the second amendment. Yes, in a perfect world there would be no guns. But they exist. Criminals have them. I doubt the 2nd amendment will ever be repealed. But good luck.

[HERVEPA]

98. How silly that that U.S. has so many more gun deaths than most of the civilized world.

Yes. very silly.

[jonno99]

133. I wonder if scrapping the "war on drugs" would help lower that stat? nt

[GGJohn]

29. Wow...he accuses those of us that stand with Bernie on gun control

of being NRA apologists and you think that's alright?

[zappaman]

8. Plonk!

Looks like someone just put you on ignore!
Hang in there.
You'll get thru it.

[darkangel218]

11. Haha! How unoriginal!

Try again.

[zappaman]

22. Plonk!

[darkangel218]

25. Take it easy.

And drink lots of water.

zappaman
22. Plonk!

[zappaman]

26. Plonk! X3

[darkangel218]

52. You may not like the hangover tomorrow.

[zappaman]

55. Do tell...

[darkangel218]

57. Good luck

[arcane1]

10. Whining about DU. How original.

[darkangel218]

13. It will most likely get locked.

All threads whining about DU get locked.

[msongs]

12. cars require insurance, guns should require insurance as well nt

[beevul]

99. Not to own or use on private property.

Only to use on public roads. Not to own.

And even then, some states do not require it iirc.

[GGJohn]

20. More of the same from Dan.

Any one who disagrees with you on firearms is an NRA apologist.
And you're STILL falsely representing the PLCAA? What a surprise!!!
Even after being corrected numerous times, you still cling to that.

[darkangel218]

21. Its beyond unbelivable.

*shakes head*

[DanTex]

28. No, I've totally changed my mind. So persuasive are the NRA talking points, that

I now think, not only should gun manufacturers have special legal immunity, but the same should extend to every other industry. Banks, petrochemicals, pharma, telecom, everyone! The courts shouldn't be a means to hold corporations accountable. The only problem I have with Bernie's pro-gun-manufacturer stance is that he left so many other God-fearing corporations out there in the cold, vulnerable to evil DAs and greedy liability attorneys.

I'm with you! Go corporations!

[GGJohn]

34. Glad you finally came around.

[TheKentuckian]

41. Please describe this special immunity, when did it become special for someone not being able to sue

Louisville Slugger if some fool hits them with a bat?

If I get hit with a cheap skillet can I sue Faberware?

If some punk in an alley breaks a bottle over your head why do you think you have a case against Newcastle?

The argument is fucking absurd.

[DanTex]

50. Yes, special immunity.

You actually can sue Louisville Slugger, for anything you want. You'll get thrown out of court, of course, unless your case has merit. And if your lawsuit is deemed frivolous and/or harassing, you will have to pay the defendant's legal fees.

Same goes for gun companies. Oh wait no, it doesn't. Well, it used to. But it doesn't anymore. Thanks to the NRA. Gotta love the gun lobby! Protect them gun manufacturers! Why should they be treated the same as anyone else?

[GGJohn]

62. You can also sue the gun manufacturers for anything you want, and the same rules apply. eom.

[DanTex]

72. No they don't. That's what the law that Bernie voted for was all about.

[GGJohn]

78. You say no, so prove I'm wrong. eom.

[DanTex]

80. OK. You really don't know? LOL.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act

[GGJohn]

87. I know exactly what the law is and what it's intended use is for.

Right now, there are several Sandy Hook parents suing Bushmaster for the criminal misuse of their firearm in the slaughter of those children and adults.
They're going to lose because no manufacturer in this country can be held liable for the criminal or negligent misuse of their product.
You really, really need to educate yourself on the intent of the law.

[DanTex]

90. It's intent is to shield gun manufacturers from liability. Obviously you are in favor of that.

You are probably in favor of protecting banks and chemical companies from the same kinds of lawsuits. You and I have different political outlooks.

I though you were going to put me on ignore? What happened to that?

[GGJohn]

107. It's intent is to shield it from frivilous SLAPP suits,

and is no different than, say Ford being sued because some drunk got into a Ford and killed someone, or
Someone uses a Louisville Slugger to bash someone's head in, or,
Bowie Knife Co. being sued because someone stabbed someone else.
You can argue all you want, but them's the facts.

Re-read my post #38, I never said I was going to put you on ignore.

[AgingAmerican]

43. Special immunity?

Have you bothered to read the legislation?

Automobile manufacturers aren't sued every time someone gets in a wreck, runs from the cops or hits a pedestrian. Does the automobile industry have, 'special immunity' or are you just grasping at straws?

[Bjorn Against]

23. Bernie got an F rating from the NRA

Now to be clear that F rating says more about the NRA's extremism than it does about Bernie's position, Bernie is far more pro-gun than I would like him to be but he is no NRA extremist. He supports increased background checks and limits on assault weapons and magazine size. He also unfortunately opposed the Brady Bill so he is far from great on the gun issue, but I do think he is someone we can at least work with as he is not an NRA extremist by any means.

[DanTex]

44. Yes, but that means nothing.

The equivalent argument would be to point out that the Koch Brothers think that Hillary is a communist, so obviously she's on the side of working people.

You are right, Bernie is not an NRA extremist. But he did vote against the Brady Bill, which is why there are federally mandated background checks in the first place. He also did vote for immunity for gun manufacturers. And he has been quoted (indirectly) as thinking that gun control is "elitist", something that really stinks in uncomfortable ways.

Obviously, my OP was satirical in nature. At the same time, the fact that people jump to defend Bernie for these indefensible positions, while attacking Hillary for things as inconsequential as her emails, says something. I'm not saying that Hillary's IWR vote and some of her centrist positions aren't legitimate points of criticism. But I am saying that Bernie's gun control stances are also legitimate.

I have a particular issue with people who say gun control is somehow "not a big deal". It is (obviously) a big deal. In terms of American lives lost, almost nothing comes close to guns (all the wars of the last decade are a small fraction). And the argument that gun control is a "losing issue" or a lost cause, has appeared on DU, which has particular irony in this case, because the Sanders candidacy is also a lost cause.

[Bjorn Against]

58. I agree with your post until the last line

I think Bernie is an excellent candidate in many ways, but I do think he does deserve criticism on the gun issue. There are no candidates that are good on every issue and they all need to be called to task when they are wrong. That being said I think Bernie is right a hell of a lot more often than he is wrong, and his campaign is not a lost cause. Even if does not win he has a message that can inspire people on many issues and win or lose I think he will have a positive impact on this nation.

[arcane1]

59. Perfectly said!

[DanTex]

70. Fair enough.

I agree that Bernie is right much more than he is wrong. On many issues, I think Bernie is more right than Hillary. And Hillary's not going to be a gun control crusader either.

But downplaying the significance of gun control to make Bernie's stances on the issue look better is absurd. Are there more important issues? Sure. But let's not pretend that guns aren't a big one. If we had European style gun laws, we would be saving something like 10K or more innocent lives every year, far more than the wars (yes, the wars also have huge costs beyond American lives). The economic costs of gun violence are estimated at around $100B per year. Do even the most pessimistic estimates of TPP approach that number (I don't know)?

[Bjorn Against]

88. I have never downplayed the issue of gun control

There are probably only a small number of people on this site who are hated by the members of the gungeon more than they hate me. I have made it very clear on this site that I am very anti-gun, and while I support Bernie's candidacy I do not agree with him on guns. I do however believe he is willing to listen to both sides of the gun control debate so he is at least someone we can work with.

[DanTex]

118. Fair enough, again.

I think I might be one of that small number of people who is more hated by gungeoneers than you. LOL.

And I agree, you haven't downplayed gun control. I felt that there were a number of otherwise progressive DUers (not gungeoneers) who were making noises in that direction. Maybe I'm wrong.

[Bjorn Against]

125. Yeah you may be one of that small number

We probably take turns, some days they hate me more and other days it is you that is making their heads explode.

[cascadiance]

123. Howard Dean as governor of Vermont was endorsed by the NRA...

... and he had similar stances on gun control that Sanders has had in the same state.

http://factcheck.bootnetworks.com/article115.html

Gun control simply is not as much of an issue in Vermont as it is in other states.

I think Howard Dean also can be put in the position that Sanders was in when he ran for president here on DU a lot earlier.

I suspect that Sanders will adapt his views on the need for gun regulation at a national level much like Dean is noted her as doing then when he ran for president. Perhaps the media will have to try and find a time when Bernie yells to much to try and out him like they did Dean back then.

[AuntPatsy]

27. N/T needed

[TheKentuckian]

32. I don't support anything I didn't a year ago much less last week.

[Rex]

33. Well at least your OP was meant to unify DU and not divide it!

[GGJohn]

36. LOL.

Good one.

[Rex]

39. Well you know I don't like gun nuts...but I own a gun and live in Texas

have no problems with hunters, so I am one by default around here on DU...I find it funny that NOW, the experts on all that be political are freaking out about a Socialist Independent! NOW.

RIGHT NOW.

ON GUNS!

Guns guns guns guns...

[GGJohn]

40. Well said. eom.

[Segami]

49. LOL!

[Rex]

53. Don't be scared of guns...BE SCARED OF GUNS...wait...don't be scared of

BE SCARED!!!

[AgingAmerican]

37. Another strawman

Bernie voted to extend the waiting period for background checks.

It is unrealistic to sue gun manufacturers every time some moron does something stupid with a gun.

Another ignorance based strawman.

[DanTex]

48. Unrealistic, huh. I guess that's why the gun manufacturers needed special immunity.

Signed into law. Right when the lawsuits were starting to build up. Apparently the NRA didn't think it was unrealistic, and neither did the GOP (and Bernie). They didn't want to leave it up to the courts to decide. For some reason.

What reason could that be?

[AgingAmerican]

63. Special immunity?

Another strawman.

Are automobile manufacturers liable every time someone gets in a wreck, hits a pedestrian, or speeds in a car? No? Does thie mean auto manufacturers have 'special immunity'? No, because that's just stupid. You can sue for manufacturing or design flaws. Not stupidity or negligence of drivers.

Your premise is irrational.

[DanTex]

74. Yes, special immunity. That's exactly what the law that Bernie voted for was about.

It wasn't a general law protecting corporations from liability lawsuits (which I'm sure you'd be in favor of also). This was a specific law protecting the gun industry.

[cui bono]

54. Yes, but now he says his OP is satire.

Guess he realized it is

[AgingAmerican]

65. He must have read one of the links to the actual legislation

[Mnpaul]

56. Grasping at strawmen?

posting it numerous times in numerous threads just isn't enough, it needs it's own thread. The black/white thinking here along with the rejection of any facts makes me wonder if I have stumbled onto a conservative bizarro DU.

[AgingAmerican]

67. Do you know what a strawman is?

Have you read the legislation? Apparently not.

[Mnpaul]

81. I'm agreeing with you

I was referring to the OP.

[AgingAmerican]

85. Ah, ok

[tularetom]

46. So far I agree with everything Sen Sanders says, including 2A issues

Presidential elections should not be fought over issues that have been decided for centuries, such as the 2nd amendment to the constitution.

Sen Sanders appears to be on the side of common sense on this issue as he is on many others. And he doesnt need polls or focus groups to tell him what to say.

If Bernie can hang in there and avoid being driven out of the race by big money, he'll be a viable candidate right up to the convention and perhaps beyond.

Besides, WTF are you going to say when Clinton's media gurus tell her that polls show she needs to support the second amendment? Because I can promise you thats going to happen. Gonna dump her like a hot potato?

[Puzzledtraveller]

47. No one has to apologize for anything.

You want a perfect candidate? You will be looking forever, who do you think is? This is how it's always been.

[cui bono]

51. What a crock.

You try to claim later in this thread that your OP is satire. Not even close. If you feel you have to call it satire now that you've posted it then perhaps you should edit it.

At least you realize it's vapid enough to have to make excuses for.

Clinton is a centrist. That's not one or two horrible stances, that's a principle and an ideal.

[Bonobo]

64. All it took was Hillary to turn DU into a bunch of war supporters!

Wow, sophomoric and idiotic oversimplifications are fun!!

[Puzzledtraveller]

69. ouch.

[darkangel218]

76. Truth hurts. nt

[NYC_SKP]

83. I'm putting everyone in this thread on ignore.

Except for you, Bonobo.

[darkangel218]

86. What about me??

Lol

[NYC_SKP]

95. Ok. You're on unignore now.

[darkangel218]

103. LOL!!

[aikoaiko]

102. ha.

[Marr]

106. It is actually funny watching Hillary fans grasping at everything they can to attack

Sanders with.

This sort of angle is my personal favorite, too-- the one where they try to argue he's not liberal enough... while promoting a pro-war, right-of-center neoliberal with a $2 billion dollar campaign war chest that still smells like Wall Street. It's...

[DanTex]

113. Wow! Not many DUers are willing to openly champion a right-wing nut like George Grant!

As Stephen Colbert would say, you've got some balls! Here's your hero:

[Marr]

117. LOL, that's a stretch-- even for you.

So if I post this...



Does it make me a Republican?

[DanTex]

120. A huge stretch! I mean, I had to actually look up that image you posted!

You know, this one:


All that yoga didn't prepare me for this!! Almost threw out my back! Don't try this at home!

[morningfog]

114. No candidate is disqualified as of yet.

[AtomicKitten]

116. You guys!

[workinclasszero]

130. No shit, this board is beyond ridiculous

Just because Bernie's a gun-humper, DU is now NRA country!

[ibegurpard]

131. The NRA has little to do with guns anymore

It's just their dog whistle. They are simply a right-wing shakedown squad. A Democrat and a Republican could have the same score with them and they will still go after the Democrat...every time. They are a corrupt organization that should be opposed and marginalized for many reasons.

[Sissyk]

134. Locking.

Threads complaining about Democratic Underground or its members; threads complaining about jury decisions, locked threads, suspensions, bannings, or the like; and threads intended to disrupt or negatively influence the normal workings of Democratic Underground and its community moderating system are not permitted.