O’Malley Goes After Sanders: Bernie Doesn’t Support ‘Common Sense’ Gun Reforms

[Armstead]

37. Its very simple

Gun manufacturers make a product that is designed to send a bullet through the air. It can be aimed at a target, a tin can, an animal or a person. It doesn't matter in a legal sense. That is its sole purpose. What people choose to do with that is up to them.

Unless the gun misfires or is otherwise defective, if some criminal or nut chooses to use the gun to fire a bullet at a person, the product is still performing its lawful function. And the manufacturer is adhering to the law.

Therefore it should not be sued on that basis, unless it is actively supporting illegal distribution or making false claims ("This gun won't hurt people, even if fired in their direction."

In that sense it is like any other product.

Therefore, if people want to prevent guns from getting into the wrong hands, the focus should be on regulating distribution and sale.

If you want to eliminate the possibility of guns being used for nefarious purposes, they should be made illegal. Although that would not be practical either, it is the only alternative to a Catch 22 of "Your product is totally legal, but you are also legally responsible for what other people choose to do with that product."