Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Brady Libel?

Brady fundraiser President Daniel Gross puts out the usual bit about the UK being so much safer than the US because of gun control w/o showing any stats before all the laws were passed.  You know. Usual fair an organization that has nothing new to work w/. 

This, however, is an interesting claim:
"In fact, in recent years Congress has given special legal protections to gun companies who supply criminals."
 Really Daniel?  And where is your evidence of this one?  I've heard similar claims awhile ago from Lori Oniell and NGVAC from the ancient dismissed NAACP lawsuit. All evidence so conveniently sealed to the public.

IOW, Gross can in no way support his claim and I'm sure he knows it. The only reason is to make inflammatory statements in order to try and stir up their dwindling base and get some donations.

Unorganized Militia Gear Unorganized Militia Gear
Follow TrailerDays on Twitter
Unorganized Militia Gear


Tango said...

Well... I guess technically they have. "We won't prosecute you if you let these guns walk."

I guess that's TECHNICALLY special protection.

Matt said...

If I had to guess, he's referring to the indemnification law that says weapons manufacturers can't be sued because of how others use their products.

Matt said...

Specifically, I was thinking of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.

wiki link

TS said...

Merlin: "Specifically, I was thinking of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act."

And he is saying this shortly after his own organization won a settlement for $600K from Kahr Arms- and his own head of legal said the PLCAA does not protect negligent or criminal manufacturers. Not only do they ignore the pro-gun side, but they even ignore themselves when it is convenient.