Bernie Sanders laughing

So, Larry, do you think that holding gun manufacturers and dealers liable for what crazy people and criminals do with the guns they legally purchased is just?

I assume you're referring to the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act? You do realize the people you more than likely consider evil, weapons manufacturers and dealers, are still liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible in much the same manner that any U.S.-based manufacturer of consumer products is held responsible. They may also be held liable for negligent entrustment when they have reason to know a gun is intended for use in a crime.

His support for this common sense measure is probably one of the most sane moments in his career. Tort is out of control.

Yet now, in a desperate move to answer, "how are we going to pay for all your free stuff plans?" he's taken to vilifying and demonizing the energy sector, threatening massive lawsuits to confiscate wealth so he can attempt to fund his life long dream of a communist take over of America.

I grew up in an America where people did not expect to own the weapons of war. People killed each other, but not with automatic weapons. Most people don't want or need these weapons. However, I am not in favor of outlawing them for everyone. I know people who have them. What I want is for laws that will make it more difficult for the mentally incompetent to own them, etc. Most people buy them for the same reason they by an ATV they use two or three weeks a year. They have the disposable income and have bought the advertising.

I grew up in America as well. I haven’t encountered anyone who expected to own “weapons of war” either. No tanks or grenades for sale. No mortars, flame-throwers, or automatic weapons for sale either.

You see, there is a big difference between automatic weapons, which are illegal for private citizens to own, and semi-automatic weapons. There is a lot of false beliefs being pushed by those vehemently opposed to 2A and gun ownership in general. Most pistols sold today are semi-automatic, and they’re more commonly used in homicides, by far. However, AR style rifles look scary and more like ‘weapons of war’ so they’re the current target of the radicals seeking to strip the rights of millions of Americans because of the actions of a few. It’s called throwing the baby out with the bath water.

No amount of legislation will ever rid the world of evil, Larry. There are mentally disturbed people, there are immoral people, and unfortunately there always will be. The ideas around ‘red flag’ type laws deserve some further debate, however, it’s a really slippery slope. One thing is for sure, the current proposals take a ‘guilty until proven innocent’ approach which in my mind is off the table.

Who decides who is "mentally incompetent" as you say? Imagine this…two people are in a relationship. One of them is a gun enthusiast and loves to hunt. They have a bitter falling out. Knowing how much their guns mean to them, the non-gun owner, out of spite, goes to the police and says…they’re crazy! They threatened to kill me and they own all these guns, I’m scared! Please help me! So, currently proposed ‘red flag’ laws would immediately confiscate that person’s guns and force them into a long drawn out litigious process where they must prove their innocence. Is that fair and just?

Your analysis of the motivations for purchasing a firearm are pretty simple-minded. Disposable income and advertising? Just because you have no interests in shooting sports, hunting, or home-defense doesn’t mean the rest of us should have our rights stripped. Criminals don't obey laws. I hope you never experience a home break-in where you and your family's lives are threatened.

Mentally Incompetent is a legal status. Mental health professionals evaluate a person's ability to understand the gravity of their actions. If a judge agrees with an evaluation that a person is not competent, they may appoint a custodian of the person or the estate of the person, to protect them and society. Without proper checks a person who is legally mentally incompetent may purchase a weapon. I don't think it would be easy for someone to get in front of a judge with the flimsy case you suggest. And, the gun owner would have their own lawyer who would keep the railroading you describe from happening.

Anyway, I don't live in fear. It has nothing to do with weapons. The likelihood that I will ever have a need for one is so small that it is not even a consideration. But, I also have no reason to deny you or any other sane person, access to legal weapons.

Fair enough. I'm glad that despite having no interest in firearms, you agree that other citizens should be able to have them. I doubt there are many people out there fighting for the gun rights of psychotics who can't handle their own affairs due to a mental defect. That's not what's being debated.

The 'flimsy case' I used to illustrate my point is exactly the type of situation that is being proposed with these so called, 'red flag' laws. One citizen makes a claim that another citizen is a risk to society...that's the trigger that initiates the cops showing up at their house, confiscating their property until the accused has proven they're NOT a risk. You know...Soviet style Bolshevik justice.

Red Flag is the sort of intervention that was taken in many small towns, before we got so large and complex. Art imitates life at times. You can see this in many old Westerns. When someone was "out of control," their guns were taken away by law enforcement. The biggest problem today is that people feel so threatened by a gun control boogeyman that they choose to ignore all the people (in a country of 300-million should it be surprising that there are thousands) who temporarily lose control. Alcohol and drugs affected my family, big time. I was lucky and missed the gene. But, I can see how my Dad would have reached for a gun, instead of what he beat us all with, and I would not be here. I worked for the VA for 30-years. I was the AOD (night manager) at a VA Hospital for three of those years. I took many weapons away from drunk Veterans who were smart enough to come to the hospital when their lives were spinning out of control. I even had one of the VA Police who would bring me his pistol to lock in my safe from time to time. They got their weapons back when things cooled down. I think a voluntary, temporary weapon safe-house would be a great idea. What would make it better is if a gun club or group would run it. Don't look for the NRA to endorse the idea. They have spent too much time and money trying to convince us that guns are fun and nothing else. Peace.

You miss the point of the 2nd amendment entirely.
The point was to have an armed population that were armed to the teeth with military weapons so that the government wouldn't even consider infringing on our right. Once guns are limited or removed, it may take a generation or two, but the government will then remove all of our rights. Just take a look at England.