|
July 27, 2005
Beware! Cheap lawnmowers from the South cause crime!
There's a big fuss being created right now over Senate Bill 397, which would exempt gun manufacturers from lawsuits based on the "criminal or unlawful misuse" of firearms. I'm getting a bit tired of opponents of this bill saying that it would protect manufacturers and gun dealers against ordinary negligence actions. Here's today's Philadelphia Inquirer editorial: ....the focus of Majority Leader Bill Frist (R., Tenn.) and other Senate leaders wasn't on gun victims yesterday. Instead, they made yet another outrageous attempt to shield gun-makers and dealers from negligence lawsuits.Ordinary negligence? Manufacturers of lawnmowers? Nonsense! When was the last time someone sued a lawnmower manufacturer or dealer for the criminal misuse of a lawnmower? The bill specifically states that it is intended to protect against actions: ....resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of a qualified product by the person or a third party, but shall not include-- More here. Like the previous Inquirer article regurgitated by the Kansas City Star and other Knight-Ridder outlets, the Inquirer's editorial also focuses on the price of the gun, calling it a "cheap Saturday-night special." What is a Saturday night special? The term "Saturday night special" is of racist origin, and while the "N" word has been dropped, it is loaded language not grounded in logic, but in emotion. Why object to the low price of any item for sale, unless that objection is grounded in a dislike of the technology itself? Safety is not the issue; no one is saying the gun failed to work or that it blew up in someone's face. The sole criteria is price. In other words, "these guns are so cheap that poor people in the inner cities are able to buy them." Would anyone say this about low cost computers? Almost all of the recent torrent of editorials (and "news releases" like this) cite the case of Anthony Oliver, so I think it's worth a look at the allegations. Here's the Philadelphia Daily News: Anthony's parents, Anthony Oliver Sr. and Sheree Goode, filed suit this week in Common Pleas Court against the gun shop and Phoenix Arms, the Ontario, Calif., manufacturer of the .25-caliber semiautomatic pistol.He didn't know anything about guns, but he knew enough to go out and spend $50.00 for a gun, because someone had threatened to shoot him? According to his own statements, he also knew enough to tell another friend to hide the gun, and enough to lie to the police: "I jumped up to see if Anthony was all right... he was moaning, saying, 'Call the cops,' " Scott testified.There was apparently a string of illegal transfers of the gun before Durham purchased it with his allowance. Yet (we are told) every single one of those transfers should have been anticipated by the manufacturer. And the dealer. Let's look at the dealer Stanton Myerson, now defendant in this lawsuit. Here's what he told the Philadelphia Daily News: ....Stanton Myerson, owner of Lou's Jewelry and Pawn, said he follows the law and is a responsible gun seller.From personal experience, I can attest that Myerson is right. When I bought a gun in April, I had to go through the same bureaucratic check. What happens is all dictated by law. I filled out a couple of lengthy forms, and following that the clerk called some special line, entered the information, and was on hold while the bureaucracy's computer performed its check. After a few minutes he was given an approval code to write on the form. Now, I had to pay a fee for all of this, and I had to wait while the guy was on hold. For the sake of argument, let's assume that I'd bought five guns in the same store previously, and the guy did what the Brady people would apparently have him do, and refused to sell me the gun. He had just run the legally-mandated background check which the state required him to run and which I'd had to pay for, and which I'd passed. I think I'd have an excellent lawsuit against him for refusing to sell me the gun, and I don't think he'd be in business very long. (Perhaps that's what the Brady people want?) These lawsuits are absolute nonsense, and they are frivolous in the extreme. If I buy dozens of guns, it is my business. The dealer has no control over whether I hang them on the wall, coat them with grease and bury them in my yard, shoot someone, or resell them to others on the street illegally. If I do the latter things they're crimes. I've known people who've collected hundreds of guns; should they have been refused purchase? What duty would they impose on this dealer beyond the considerable paperwork already imposed? And why stop at requiring him to check the number of guns I might have purchased previously at his store? Shouldn't he also attempt to discover whether I've purchased other guns at other stores? I mean, if you're illegally reselling guns, why make it obvious? And if there's to be a legal precedent holding the dealer liable for what I do with the gun, why not require him to ask whether I plan any holdups? Or whether I'm considering suicide? If this sounds laughable, it's no more laughable than the idea that the dealer should check to see how many guns I am purchasing, or whether the gun is "too cheap." Individuals should be held responsible for their own conduct, not that of others. Blaming dealers and the manufacturers for what ultimate purchasers do with the guns makes no sense at all. Might as well blame a region. Oh yes. There's a notorious "Iron Highway" which brings guns up from the dangerous, evil South.
The South is only responsible for what goes on in New York and Camden. Something must be done!
posted by Eric on 07.27.05 at 10:05 AM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/2592 Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Beware! Cheap lawnmowers from the South cause crime!:
» http://pajamapundits.powerblogs.com/posts/1122508205.shtml from Pajama Pundits
I've had an America Online account since 1993. I've kept it since broadband became available in my neighborhood for two reasons, a way to access the internet from anywhere there's a phone line, and this one little message board I... [Read More] Tracked on July 27, 2005 07:55 PM
Comments
And every Fourth of July, the South pays the Yankees back with tons of illegal fireworks -- an annual crime wave in the name of "patriotism"! There's a lot of crime up here caused by you sneaky folks down there! (No wonder I moved to California.) Eric Scheie · July 27, 2005 01:29 PM Another crime we're responsible for is cheap smokes. And weed. The high dollar weed in TN is not sold locally. SayUncle · July 27, 2005 01:49 PM So, in addition to the "Iron Highway," we've got "Tobacco Road," and the "Cannabis Corridor"? Disgraceful! And it's high time something was done! You people have been messin' with Northern morality since the Moonshine days! Eric Scheie · July 27, 2005 02:17 PM Don't get uppity. Remember, unlike the last war, now we have all of the guns. John · July 27, 2005 03:42 PM So, obviously, this bill doesn't do much in terms of really enforcing guns from getting on the street. However, there still should be some way to enforce gun shops from illegally selling guns. That is beleived to be the case with the DC (?) sniper a few years ago, he actually got ahold of several guns that were 'stolen' from a spokane gun store. The problem is that this store has a 'history' of reporting guns missing, which later appear on the street. alchemist · July 27, 2005 05:25 PM Alchemist: The BATF's job is to do just that sort of thing. And, of course, any gun that really is stolen honestly is very likely to end up on the street, I imagine. Given that, you know, robbing a gun store isn't something that people normally do to build a peaceful gun collection. I'd expect guns stolen from a gun store to end up in crimes; the gun's already in the criminal element at that point, and most likely to be sold to someone not exactly law abiding. (As law abiding people don't generally buy guns from the black market, pretty much by definition.) Sigivald · July 27, 2005 07:20 PM Not only is Sigivald correct, but the new law spells out that the exemption for damages resulting from dealer violations: shall not include-- Eric Scheie · July 27, 2005 10:29 PM We should start suing the gun-ban lobby every time somebody is robbed, raped, or murdered because he or she was denied the means wherewith to defend him/herself. Steven Malcolm Anderson the Lesbian-worshipping man's-man-admiring myth-based egoist · July 27, 2005 11:42 PM |
|
December 2006
WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR
Search the Site
E-mail
Classics To Go
Archives
December 2006
November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 May 2002 See more archives here Old (Blogspot) archives
Recent Entries
Holiday Blogging
The right to be irrational? I'm cool with the passion fashion Climate change meltdown at the polls? If you're wrong, then so is God? Have a nice day, asshole! Scarlet "R"? Consuming power while empowering consumption Shrinking is growth! My dirty thoughts
Links
Site Credits
|
|
The South is only responsible for what goes on in New York and Camden.
We're paying you yankees back for the War of Northern Aggression.