In the last Democratic debate, Bernie Sanders gave in to pressure and changed a sensible stance of his to nonsense.
Suing someone because something they made was misused by someone else is idiotic.
A manufacturer sells their product to a distributor, who sells it to a store, who sells it to a customer. The only logical case you can make is about that final link between the customer and the point of sale.
The specific issue was about guns, but what if you applied this logic to other things? Should a car manufacturer be sued if someone maliciously hits another person? Should a book printer or writer be sued if their book leads to someone committing a crime? Should S.C. Johnson be sued if a child drinks Drano and dies?
For guns, if a customer passes the background check, what’s the seller to do? Are sellers encouraged to profile and discriminate, as they bare liability for another person’s actions?
To assist in background checks, are we to give the FBI our medical records? Are we or our service providers to give the FBI a list of our web searches, shopping receipts, favorite books, movies, and music? Are we to assemble a list of family and friends who vouch for us and would be willing to bare liability for our actions?
If I go to prison for something, can I sue my parents, teachers, and friends for not teaching me what’s right and wrong?
Bernie Sanders once recognized how absurd the concept was, but now he’s caved into pressure from Hillary Clinton and the Democratic base. Shameful.
Pass law so there are the same if not more aptitude tests required for gun ownership than there are for car ownership. Enforce maximum magazine sizes. Tax guns and ammunition like cigarettes and alcohol. None of those infringe any rights, nor do they hurt hunters or plinkers. But prosecuting law-abiding citizens for the criminal actions of others is not justice.