Senate did right to preserve 2nd Amendmentby Dan Nygaard
I find it interesting that Sen. Mark Dayton chose to lecture Sen. Norm Coleman about his so-called "disgraceful action" in voting for legislation aimed at strengthening the Second Amendment, an issue important to Minnesota's sportsmen.
It seems that Dayton has a warped view of the meaning of disgrace when he attacks a bipartisan group of senators for passing a common-sense bill while at the same time stating: "The legislation has absolutely nothing to do with protecting Americans' Second Amendment rights, which I fully support."
It appears his definition of "fully support" includes allowing lawful gun manufacturers to be sued out of existence.
After five years, I guess I shouldn't be surprised that Dayton is out of touch with Minnesota's sportsmen. Here is common-sense legislation that 33 states have already enacted into law and that two-thirds of the Senate supported, including Democratic Leader Harry Reid.
Sportsmen's organizations such as Ducks Unlimited are lining up behind this bill because they understand that allowing junk lawsuits to drive the consumer firearms industry out of business is just backdoor gun control. Dayton joins the trial lawyers and those who hate guns as the primary opponents of this legislation.
One has to wonder if Dayton actually read the legislation he is criticizing. For instance, he implied in his Aug. 2 commentary that lawsuits against manufacturers and sellers of firearms will not be permitted in cases of negligence or defective products.
This is simply not true. The legislation specifically points out that lawsuits will be permitted in cases where there is negligence on behalf of the manufacturer or seller and when a defective product is sold.
The bill also explicitly states that any firearms or ammunitions manufacturer or seller who has broken federal, state or local law would not be protected by this legislation.
Dayton also states that this lawsuit protection is not provided to any other business in any other American industry. I think he would be surprised to learn that Congress has provided similar protection to manufacturers of small airplanes, manufacturers of medical implants and employees of federally supported health centers, as well as volunteers at nonprofit organizations and food banks.
Remember, these are the same firearms manufacturers that produce the various firearms and bullets used by our troops in Iraq and around the world. Do we really want to rely on foreign countries to supply our military with guns in times of war?
The bottom line is that these lawsuits represent abuse of the legal system by people who hate guns, and it was time for them to come to an end.
Imagine if the trial lawyers began suing General Motors or Ford Motor Co. every time a drunken driver caused damage. The automobile industry would be crippled, and this would have been the likely outcome for the firearms industry as well.
I am happy that the Senate and Coleman took action on this so our Second Amendment rights will be preserved.
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1519/5557824.html.
