Gun control "advocates" overlooking the IWR?

[beevul]

4. The brady bill vote they so loudly object to...was in like 1993

If that aint reaching, I don't know what is.

Yeah a vote against gun control 22 plus years ago, is SO much worse that voting for the IWR.


That of course, leaves the PLCAA, which none of them will characterize honestly, or discuss earnestly. They make claims, and back them up with cites to other claims, but nothing really substantial. And don't even bother trying to discuss the text of the actual law with them. They call doing that "nra talking points".

Several of them both here and elsewhere illustrate their intentions plainly enough, however:

It is outrageous that a product that exists for no purpose other than to kill has an exemption from state tort liability. Allowing tort liability would force gun manufacturers to pay some of the costs imposed by their products, increase the prices for assault weapons and maybe even cause some manufacturers to stop making them.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/12/19/why-isnt-the-media-discussing-the-unprecedented/191910

Repealing immunity should be a top priority

Then multiple states and cities can sue the gun industry into oblivion.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022327471#post54