Stephen Crowley/The New York Times FEDERAL PROTECTION FOR THE GUN INDUSTRY Congressional Republicans surrounded President George W. Bush as he signed a law shielding firearms manufacturers from liability in 2005. Testimony from lawsuits filed before the bill passed provides a look at the gun makers’ thinking.
New York Times
The Glock executive testified that he would keep doing business with a gun dealer who had been indicted on a charge of violating firearms laws because “This is still America” and “You’re still innocent until proven guilty.”
The president of Sturm, Ruger was not interested in knowing how often the police traced guns back to the company’s distributors, saying it “wouldn’t show us anything.”
And a top executive for Taurus International said his company made no attempt to learn if dealers who sell its products were involved in gun trafficking on the black market. “I don’t even know what a gun trafficker is,” he said.
The world’s firearms manufacturers have been largely silent in the debate over gun violence. But their voices emerge from thousands of pages of depositions in a series of liability lawsuits a decade ago, before Congress passed a law shielding them from such suits in 2005, and the only time many of them were forced to answer such questions.
Although I can understand their position, it does seem a bit unfair that they can profit from the flow of guns into the criminal world, and even lobby for laws which make that possible, and still claim that they're not responsible in any way.
What do you think? Please leave a comment.
