End of Second Amendment: Democrats Seek to Change Rules So Victims Can Sue Gun Makers for Shootings


In a move that would mark the end of the Second Amendment in the U.S.A., House Democrats are seeking to change rules to allow victims to sue gun companies after being injured in shootings.

To be able to sue companies because of how customers misuse their product is so entirely un-American, no to mention so materially unfair, that it boggles the mind. But that is what Democrats want.

According to The Blaze:

Trending: 9th Circuit Court Hands Trump 2 Wins: Planned Parenthood and Sanctuary Cities CAN Be Defunded

The bill, titled, “The Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act,” seeks to repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, a 2005 law that immunizes the firearm industry from civil liability in both state and federal courts.

take our poll - story continues below

Which Democrat Presidential Hopeful Has The Wildest Campaign Promise So Far?

  • Which Democrat Presidential Hopeful Has The Wildest Campaign Promise So Far?  

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Completing this poll grants you access to Godfather Politics updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

“[The bill] will allow civil cases to go forward against irresponsible actors in state and federal courts, just as they would if they involved any other product. Letting courts hear these cases would provide victims of gun violence their day in court,” reads a press release about the bill.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, the bill is sponsored by the maniacal Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) in the House (and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) in the Senate) They claim “numerous cases” have been dismissed on the basis of the PLCAA “even when the gun makers and sellers acted in a fashion that would qualify as negligent if it involved any other product.”

No, not really. But that is their claim.

Think of what this means when projected to some other product. Imagine if every car maker can be sued when someone drives their car drunk? It would be absolutely absurd if you could sue a company because someone else misused their product.

Of course, their main goal is to make it so expensive to do business in the firearms industry that few will bother. And that, in turn, would essentially put an end to the Second Amendment because no one could get any supplies or new firearms.

Indeed, this whole situation was already foreseen by founding father and third American President, Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson understood that preventing Americans from having access to something automatically means their rights are curtailed.

In his 1792 Report on Navigation of the Mississippi (ME 3:180), Jefferson wrote: “It is a principle that the right to a thing gives a right to the means without which it could not be used, that is to say, that the means follow their end.”

Exactly right.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

You Might Like
Previous U.S. Soccer Star Megan Rapinoe Refuses to Sing National Anthem During World Cup in France
Next Joe Biden Promises to Cure Cancer if He Becomes President, But There is Just ONE Little Problem...

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.