“If somebody has a gun and it falls into the hands of a murderer and the murderer kills somebody with a gun, do you hold the gun manufacturer responsible?” he said to Jake Tapper on CNN. “Not any more than you would hold a hammer company responsible if somebody beats somebody over the head with a hammer.”
Now listen to one of the most viciously stupid men in Congress, Representative Louis Gohmert of Texas, a mere few weeks after the Sandy Hook Massacre. “
I refuse to play the game of ‘assault weapon.’ That’s any weapon. It’s a hammer.”
Sanders was defending his vote for a 2005 law that protected gun manufacturers from lawsuits by victims of gun violence in a manner that big corporations in no other sector of the economy have received. It’s the same law that has prevented parents of the Aurora massacre victims from suing the manufacturer who didn’t think twice about selling 4,300 rounds to James Holmes via the Internet without so much as a cursory check. Whether marketing guns to kids or bullets designed specifically to kill cops, there is no getting around the fact that Sanders joined Blue Dog Democrats and right-wing Republicans in giving arms-dealer conglomerates a get-out-of-jail-free card.
Okay I have to admit, that one kind of stings.
In fact this is one of my own personal crusades. I think that gun manufacturers, who sell products whose sole purpose is to kill (Which by the way is quite unlike a hammer.), should be held at least partially responsible if they are used to murder American citizens.
However having said that this one ideological disagreement does not suddenly make me want to jump off of the Bernie train.
After all let's face it, there are far more things I would disagree with Hillary Clinton about than I would Bernie Sanders.
And we all know that both of them, are significantly better choices than ANYBODY on the GOP side of the political aisle.
Anybody have a different opinion?
There are many things about Bernie Sanders that give this life-long liberal Democrat pause. First of all, he has disdained the Democratic Party throughout his career - until now. While voting with Democrats most of the time he should have years ago declared himself a Democrat especially if, now, he wants all of our support as our presidential nominee.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, his position on gun issues sits too easily with the NRA and gun manufacturers. I understand that his constituents like to hunt; lots of Americans do but that does not mean that there should not be stringent controls on the weapons used. There are avid hunters in Europe too but they manage to accept tough gun laws.
Thirdly, Sanders' seeming inability to understand how non-white Americans see their situation in our society. In this regard, he has "put his foot in his mouth" and incensed African-Americans over and over again. I understand that his focus is on class rather than race but he fails to understand that he has to make a case for focusing on race as well as class. Thinking that reining in wealth will automatically eliminate both class and racial tensions is pure nonsense. And saying that "all lives matter" when asked about the statement that "black lives matter" show a genuine insensitivity. He should know better or at least be willing to learn.
Fourthly, I am not sure about his foreign polity "credentials." He has to prove himself there. He will seem too narrowly focused to many people. I know that he has supported Israel but how does he really feel about Middle Eastern issues and where is he on issues like "climate change" and the issues facing Europe? No one knows yet.
Finally, I don't think he can win the presidential election - and that factor has to be really important to all Democrats as well as to those "progressives," who have a way of temper "tantruming" us into ending up with Republican presidents. Don't forget 2000 and 2004 when the super-progressives rejected the Democratic Party and voted for Ralph Nader as a "spoiler" candidate, thus giving us George W. Bush.
While I agree with Sanders on many banking and economic issues, there is a lot more at stake in this or any presidential election, I hope that he cab be a very good student because he still has a lot to learn how Americans live and about the strong positions held by the Democratic party and its members. He can start by learning to appreciate President Obama and all he has accomplished.
Beaglemom (sorry this is so long)
I have the same reservations about Obama that you have about Sanders. For starters, Obama is throwing American workers to the wolves with the TPP.
DeleteBeaglemom, I couldn't have said it any better. Thanks for expressing my view, as well as probably many others.
DeleteOne of the problems with we Democrats is that we tend to "build up" our favored candidates and then let them fall from grace when they do something that displeases us. Look at all those Obama fans who turned away when he didn't live up to THEIR "view" of him. I'm about as wary of Sanders as you are. He's NOT perfect and woe to his "fans" who see him that way.
Gryphen is a good example of that. Sorry, Gryph, I just had to say it.
I have no problem with Bernie being a giant rock star, given he has no competition on the road. Things will heat up soon enough.
DeleteBeaglemom,
DeleteRegarding your 4th point I think Bernie is right to focus on the U.S. We have given so much $$ and weapons to the Middle East and Europe they should take care of themselves. This country has real problems, beginning with income equality and going on the race/prison issues. What, you seem surprised Bernie has not fleshed out his views on every single issue in the first few months he's been running? Also, as a sitting Senator I think he may know where bodies are buried to get more stuff done than President Obama (whom I adore) did against the wall of NO from the Rs. I'm pretty sure he has a better handle on "how Americans live" than you do, having a wider perspective as a senator. And by the way, nice how you are starting to eat our own. Finally, I've not been that impressed with the Democratic party and its members. They seem too Republican-lite.
sarafina
Beaglemom,
DeleteIt's coming across that you are putting down Bernie "fans" just to make your point(s) or justify your limited knowledge of Mr. Sanders career or points of view. That's never a good look (i.e. eating our own.)
Just say you're on the fence and then ask your question. IM is pretty good about helping you flesh out the details and locating answers you seek.
As much snooping around as we do here, it would seem as though you would have already looked up Sanders track record. Of the many sources I've found from a simple Google search, they've all shown a consistent and factual point of view that was not emotionally tied to a flavor-rage of the week. As a person of color, I think he has a much better handle on how politics impact the poor, people of color, people with handicaps, disadvantages and disabilities than you give him credit for.
Take just a little time to read up on his well documented career and role in community development and political activism over the last 40 plus years. (I go by a rule of finding 5-10 sources on an issue before I try to come up with my own assumptions.) You will definitely answer a lot of the issues and questions you posted.
Besides, the elections aren't until next year. No one has a plan ready for next year's platform. To expect one now that is fully detailed and mapped out just doesn't make any sense at all.
No pause required. I served in the military for eight years and trained women how to shoot their rifle, adjust the coordinates for the line of sight, and lock, load, carry and clean their weapons.
DeleteUnless the gun was faulty, and it caused the death of someone unintentionally, or the manufacturer promoted the use of its weapons to harm others based on discrimination, sexism, etc...then yes, the manufacturer should be sued. Otherwise, a gun manufacturer should not be sued if their product does what it is supposed to do -- in this case, diminish capacity and/or ultimately cause death.
It is the responsibility of the gun OWNER to manage the handling of the gun.
I want each candidate to tell me their plan for keeping high capacity, rapid fire weapons out of the hands mentally unstable people.
ReplyDeleteTalking about hammers instead of solutions is the refuge of an infantile mind.
The question you posed is not the question that he answered.
Delete@5:40 hahahaha Nobody in politics wants to be asked the question I posed, because they sure as heck do not want to answer it.
DeleteI think John is correct, you didn't ask bernie and no one has but I suspect he will have a more reasonable answer than you think. The problem is no one wants to point a finger or be the snitch that someone is really mentally unstable. For instance, the professor that reported to the university that the theater shooter was really crazy, should have called police and mental health authorities as well as locating and finding his parents and reporting. If it turns out not to be a viable report, ok, but if she had, someone would have found all the weapons he had stored in his apartment.
DeleteUntil Congress and the states change the 2nd amendment, we are stuck with the proliferation of firearms in the USA.
ReplyDeleteAnd we should change the 2nd to reflect the fact that we are no longer a loose aggregation of 13 agricultural states living in the 18th century, but good luck getting any amendment passed with Congress and state legislatures full of Gohmerts, Cruzs and Arpaios.
Given that premise, I think Bernie has a good point because anything legally sold to the public under current law makes litigation a very tricky proposition, even in cases like Sandy Hook or the church in Carolina
As a gun owner,myself, I'm all for stricter background checks, closing the gun show loophole, and making people more responsible if their weapons are used in a crime.
I also see nothing wrong about forcing *EVERYONE* who wants to legally own any firearm to get licensed and take a safety course before they can buy one.
For doG's sake, you can't even drop a fishing line in a pond without a license as an adult.
I can't imagine Bernie actually getting nominated, but I think he'd make a great President if the stars all aligned.
Above all he is ferociously focused on tax reform and forcing the giant corporations to pay a fair share, in spite of how impossible that seems in a Congress where Senators are literally bought and sold like cattle.
Gryphen, thank you for your untiring efforts and the hard work of posting relevant and interesting articles.
You are doing yeoman's work in keeping up the freedom of the "press" with this blog!
"...who wants to legally own any firearm to get licensed and take a safety course before they can buy one...."
DeleteAnd, of course, everyone that owns a gun or has access to a gun should be regularly checked that they retain the mental and physical capacity to be safe with the weapon. Unexpected drug interaction, onset of Alzheimer's, dementia, schizophrenia, stress, depression etc. is certainly the responsibility of the gun purchaser to be monitored and the weapon safely removed if necessary.
Adam Lanza murdered 20 children and 6 adults at the Sandy Hook School. Each gun purchase and continued gun ownership should be assessed against the kind of damage Adam Lanza did.
Barack Obama has no solution and neither does Bernie Sanders. Neither of them gets a free pass on this issue.
His mother should have been held responsible but she was his first victim...she should have been held responsible when he was under mental health counseling but probably didn't tell them she took him to a shooting range and that he had access to guns. Perhaps, his father should be held accountable, surely he knows what was going on with the shooting range and they did nothing but continue with their own stupidity about what they were doing with him.
DeleteAJ Billings....thank you....that is responsible gun ownership.
DeleteThere's no way Bernie Sanders could ever have been elected in Vermont had he taken an anti-gun stance. Once again it looks as if Democrats will let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
ReplyDeleteWhen someone finds the ideologically pure candidate who agrees with every single progressive position let me know. Until then, I'm keeping an open mind about Bernie Sander's candidacy.
I'll be voting for a Democrat. That's pure enough for me.
DeleteGood for you, Barbara. It's true, there are many issues and choosing just one to rule your politics is fine for the individual, maybe not so much for the rest of us.
Deletesarafina
I agree. As far left as I lean, the one thing I don't support is the taking of the guns and a defenseless citizenry. Bernie just became that much better a candidate in my book.
Delete@7:06
DeleteI was keen on removing the loaded guns from my sight impaired 80+ year old father's dining room in the unlocked home in a neighborhood filled with children. But my gun humper siblings decided that the children DESERVED no defense from my clearly dangerous father. USA USA USA
anon@9:00, did they also let him keep his driver's license? Cars and guns are the most dangerous weapons for the elderly to own.
DeleteNo, don't flame me, I am 75 and have instructed my children that, should I not recognize my limitations at any time as I age further, I want them to take my car and license. I do not own a gun, so they won't have to worry about that. I am sure you worry, but you have done all you can and I hope your family will "see the light" before your father inadvertently does damage.
good, Barbara Delaney.....I will go with bernie because he has been consistent and has been specific about what he will do. Hillary is Hillary, a corporatist lawyer, who is backed by wall street, big banks, and corporations. She may do some things but it won't be neartly enough and at the end of her term, we may have lost more than we would have and no chance of recovery or regaining the emotional momentum. I say go with the new. leave the first female presidency to the woman who really deserves it, elizabeth warren, who has taken on those who harm the middle class. That is her voice, not hillarys that has been exposing them.
DeleteI once sat on a jury where the plaintiff was suing the manufacturer of the hockey puck which grazed his eye and rendered him legally blind, during a pickup game.
ReplyDeleteI hate guns, but holding the manufacturers responsible for the actions of the gun owner is ridiculous.
BTW, the hockey puck case was finally dismissed (for reasons of absurdity!).
Hockey sticks aren't made for the sole purpose of killing, though. Guns are.
DeleteWell what about the manufacturer of say... rat poison. A child gets into it and dies. Does that make the manufacturer responsible?
DeleteIf some people in this country feel the need to buy these dangerous weapons, because it's their "constitutional right" then they must meet stringent qualifications in order to do so.
Aspirin bottle - child proof cap. Motor vehicle - ignition key.
DeleteGun - no child proofing needed... silly rabbit, guns are for kids.
Issues facing the nation are not as simplistic as Sanders would like them to be. At times he sounds like a more sane leftist Trump. His jingoistic "solutions" are just that...BS to bait the far left out of voting for their best interests, just like Fox News spews it's crap so the far right votes against their best interests.
ReplyDeleteWe need a candidate who can WIN, not just pretty words we can sleep easy with.
To compare a man with years of public service to a self-promoting egomaniac, is unfair.
DeleteOh please. Bernie Sanders is in no way reminiscent of Trump. Trump is in this for himself. Sanders is in this to try to rein in the unfettered big money that is stripping the U.S. to the bone.
DeleteYour use of the term "far left" is suspect. There is no such thing. You either are fine with obscene Wall Street profits taking precedence over Main Street's survival, or you're not.
I think I could be considered part of the 'far left' and I'm watching Bernie closely. He's worked for a long time on these issues, and like Obama seems free of scandals. It's a long time to go though, and Hillary (whom I also like) has time to be more progressive and less Wall Street-friendly
Deletesarafina.
We need a candidate who will absolutely do what will benefit the majority of the people in this country, the middle class. Sorry, Bill did better than any democrat but he hurt the middle class and she will too. She will not go against big banks and will not hurt the corporations who take their jobs overseas by taking away their loopholes. Her son-in-law is a hedge fund manager....lol she is not going to rein them in.
DeleteGryphen, that aspect of Bernie Sanders concerns me greatly because more stringent gun control is one of my issues. Hillary Clinton has just come out in favor of it, which gives her a plus sign in my mental tally. I know in the long run I'll vote for whoever gets the nomination, and as of now, it's very much hers to lose, but I would like to be able to whole-heartedly vote for a candidate. In the unlikely event Sanders gets the nomination, my vote for him would no longer be that.
ReplyDeleteHillary brokered selling military weapons including chemical and biological to various countries for a $100,000 donation to the clinton foundation. No country needs biological or chemical weapons, and many don't need american weaponry. Hillary is another corporatist and she is talking in general terms with no details. lol Hillary is a moderate democrat. If she wasn't before, she won't be tomorrow. This is political speech only. Look at her donors...she is not going to do anything to the big banks, tax breaks for corporations, and the TAPP.
DeleteNope. Same opinion. Furthermore, there can never be a candidate who fulfills everyone's every wish. Overall, the man has been a fighter for the betterment of the citizenry, and that is more than enough for me.
ReplyDeleteFor the sake of argument, there are times when "a weapon is a weapon is a weapon" may be part of a theoretical/philosophical discussion and as such may not be a policy statement but a summation or that discussion.
I detest the "culture" (using that word lightly) of weapon worship and hope that while it is unlikely that the NRA's/weapon manufacturers' stranglehold upon the nation can be broken, it will at least become diminished by more realistic politicians in the near future.
PS. The picture above shows the "flinty" look that characterizes the man. I like that.
Bernie Sanders’ Senate colleagues stunned by his ascent
ReplyDeleteThe Senate backbencher is drawing huge crowds on the trail, but his Democratic colleagues warn voters not to buy the hype.
...Yet many are also implicitly — and some explicitly — warning voters not to jump on the Sanders bandwagon. He’s too far out there to win a general election, a number of Democrats who’ve worked alongside him — most, or all, of them Hillary Clinton supporters — say.
And they fear the stronger he gets, the more he’ll pull Clinton to the left, hurting her chances in the general election.
“I just hope they don’t move Hillary so far left that people believe she is out of the realm,” said Sen. Joe Manchin, a moderate West Virginia Democrat who supports Clinton. “I’ve seen bases move people.”
“No,” Sen. Bill Nelson said when asked if he was excited about Sanders’ candidacy. He added that Sanders would lose his critical swing state of Florida in a general election. “I’m totally behind Hillary.”
ttp://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/bernie-sanders-2016-senate-colleagues-opinions-120007.html
Notice it's the right leaning Dems, the 'blue dog' types that are having a hard time with Sanders. Manchin should be a Republican, he is an embarrassment to true Democrats. Bill Nelson isn't much better and McCaskill is pathetic.
These DINO's are so full of shit. They aren't afraid moving to the left will cost Democrats the election. They're afraid it will cost THEM their cushy positions as Wall Street handmaidens.
DeleteI agree with 8:13....these demos are backed by the same corporations that have been killing us....Hillary is not going to break up the big banks...she gets large donations from them and they are not backing off donating to her because they know she is going to let them stay as is. This is to me, the hillary machine putting this crap out there. as far as the gun manufacturers being held responsible...no I think it is the NRA back politicians that vote and give the right to own these weapons.There are supposed to be background checks but the NRA helps to get around those checks. If someone purchases guns and ammuntiion without a background check, and the store allowed it to be sold w/o, then that store should be held accountable. However, thee were so many others that should be held accountable....parents who know their child /relative is talking hate speech or killing speech, they should notify the authorities. In colorado, the professor or whoever called to warn how crazy he was, should have called more than the college. It is a hard call sometimes, but when one talks about killing, as an educator, I am to alert more than the school, I make reports to social services, police, parents or I can be in serious trouble for not reporting to these agencies.
Delete...1. Gun Violence: Every day 30-plus Americans are murdered with guns. We are talking over 10,000 Americans killed each year by gun violence. And every single day, including today, five children or teens are murdered by someone using guns, that is 11 times more often than children are killed by gun violence in other “high income” nations.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, far more Americans have been killed by gun violence in 2013 alone (33,636) than all the Americans killed on U.S. soil by terrorists in the last 14 years, and that’s including 9/11. (2,977 Americans were killed on 9/11 and only 48 have been killed since by terrorism on U.S. soil.)
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/13/the-biggest-threat-to-americans-other-americans-with-guns.html
70 Years Ago, The U.S. Government Declared War On The American Left
ReplyDelete...But by then, the damage had been done.
The goal of dismantling the American left was not achieved, but severe damage has been done regardless. By using a narrow target, they branched out to attack any target they so chose. Because of the power they wielded, they could bring down even the most powerful and influential with little trouble. While some today call their activities the “Red Scare” or a witch hunt, often times focusing on Senator Joseph McCarthy, it was nothing less than a calculated move against the left-wing in this nation.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/07/12/smith-act/
I found this interesting.
ReplyDeleteBernie campaigning in Alabama.
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2015/07/alabama_feeling_the_bern_for_s.html
Makes me like Sanders even more.
ReplyDeleteWeiner is whining about Sanders.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.businessinsider.com/anthony-weiners-question-for-bernie-sanders-2015-7
Awesome discussion with a lot of interesting points made.
ReplyDeleteBut it is consistent with Bernie's personal beliefs and he doesn't waver or flip flop based on what is popular with the voters.
ReplyDeleteWhile I may disagree with is stance, you'll never find a candidate that matches your own wants 100% and I admire him for his ethics, integrity and sticking to his guns.
I already chimed in in the "Republicans for Bernie" thread., The gun issue is one that happens to be at the top of my "must get done" list, but it's ONE issue, and I'm not going to paint with too broad a brush this early in the game. The Democratic Party has good candidates, each with experience and a long background in politics.
ReplyDeleteEither of them would make a far better President than the fifteen (so far) candidates the GOP has paraded out. I DO understand there are good people who are responsible with gun ownership, but someone's got to find common ground and somehow get stricter laws to keep our kids and ourselves safe. And as an aside, a lot of people are labelling the mentally ill as "the problem", which isn't fair nor true. Chances are, someone who's clinically depressed, bi polar, etc are more inclined to do harm or worse to themselves with access to a gun than quote normal unquote people.
Thanks, Gryphen, for giving this the exposure it deserves and for opening the conversation, I wish more people, including the media, would follow your lead. I've learned so much by reading, visiting links you and your commenters leave.,
Topics and posts like this are what adds value to visiting this blog.
I agree most with 5:42, A Super Fan in Atlanta. My husband is a gun collector who belongs to the NRA. You can imagine the lively discussions we've had over the years. I don't think we should be able to sue the gun manufacturer, except under very specific circumstances: the gun misfires, explodes or is otherwise faulty. My DH agrees that background checks are needed; I'd add that they need to be comprehensive and should demand a waiting period to allow the seller to complete the check and the buyer to reconfirm his/her need for such weaponry. Gun purchases should never be based on an impulsive decision. We should outlaw high capacity magazines except for the military (police departments don't need such killing power among civilians).
ReplyDeleteI think the 2nd amendment is pretty clear about a "well-regulated" militia. Setting aside the other issues I have with that amendment, I think if the anti-gun lobby claimed the "well-regulated" meme, there is a chance more people can recognize that no regulations don't make sense and the Constitution even warned against that by putting the wr phrase in the amendment. Now those regulations can go too far, so we need to elect people who are capable of making thoughtful decisions instead of throwing the whole amendment out.
Given our history and desire for personal independence, I don't believe we could pull off an Australia - having people turn in their guns and banning them thereafter. If we concede that gun ownership is a right, we need to show the public that regulation is not only necessary, it is required in the wording of the amendment as written. People who say *no* regulation is allowed have gone off the rails, and we should point at them and laugh.
Getting back to the question of supporting Bernie Sanders, his stand on gun control is mostly reasonable and I'd have no problem voting for him. And as many have pointed out, it is impossible for any politician to espouse views with which I am totally in agreement. One-issue voters are the bane of the electoral process. All we can do is educate them and hope some actually do learn.
Bernie represents the people of Vermont for whom owning and using a gun is the way of life for most. They don't really have the problems that the cites have with guns so why would they want to restrict access?
ReplyDeleteThese are the people we need to start working with to find solutions.