Biden wants gun manufacturers held liable for shootings.
Watch out Oneida, they’re coming after you and your kitchen knives next.
Lauren Boebert @laurenboebert
Tweeted on February 14, 2021
[If you think this is ridiculous, or even exaggerated then you haven’t been paying attention to the U.K.
To say nothing of alcohol and cars? Petroleum? One could make a mint off Antifa/BLM’s actions with gasoline alone.
If a company is liable for wrong doing with it’s product? We don’t have a country anymore.
As Joe’s brother Doug’s wheat growing is responsible for my congestive heart failure? Because I eat three dozen cookies and a loaf of bread everyday?
Sugar manufacturers are in big trouble. They kill far more than guns do every year.
This is the sort of crap is what you get when communist China is running your country.
That isn’t the goal. Selective enforcement (or merely the threat thereof) against companies that fail to toe the government line is the goal.
Indeed. I was diagnosed with type II over 6 years ago and I been on keto every since to control my glucose (now a normal 83 when fasting). I blame ‘Diet for a Small Planet’ (a vegan treatise in the 60’s). It’s gotten so bad, that today around 60% of Americans are prediabetic which in turn is responsible for many of our old age diseases. And it is due to our diet and lack of exercise.
And yet, veganism is still being promoted left and right by our elite although keto is gaining some ground. I worry when the new green deal promotes meatless as a solution to reduce the methane all that all those cows produce. And since Biden has already banned licensing for oil leases on federal property. What’s next? Banning cows on federal property? If so, it will kill a lot more of us than any CW will.
So, cow farts will be replaced with people farts.
How is this winning?
The precident for this was established long ago. A notable example being the so-called “tobacco settlement”. Other examples go back generations, so why get excited about it long after the concept has been accepted?
Anyway, citing a goal means there is planning and coordination, and coordination requires a leadership, or a command hierarchy, which, when said goal is nefarious (subverting the Bill of Rights for example) constitutes the definition of “conspiracy”.
Thus one cannot say on one hand that, for example, “The left has this plan, and has been building the organization to carry it out”, while saying on the other hand that there’s no conspiracy. In fact it might seem, to a detached observer, to rise to a level of denial bordering on pathological.
Certainly it’s been argued that members of the conspiracy believe they’re doing good, but that only adds to their dangerousness and to the urgency of the need to apprehend them. A bank robber who believes he’s doing good by robbing banks is no less guilty of robbing banks for believing in his work, and anyone cooperating with said bank robber in his planning and execution of robberies is no less guilty of conspiracy for sharing in the belief that robbery is a public service.
And so, not only are you ponting to a conspiracy, you’re pointing to the worst and most dangerous possible kind of conspiracy; one whose members actually seem at times to believe they’re doing the lord’s work.
The goal is to give goverment the power to ban/confiscate and prosecute ANYONE for ANY REASON. With the added benefit of using these ridiculous laws to loot profitable companies that the left doesn’t like.
Manufacturers need to stop selling to military and police in any jurisdiction that tries this. You know they will write an exception for military and police into any law but the companies don’t have to play. I suppose it will mean bankruptcy sooner rather than later but even a company following government restrictions will be sued by leftist activists and boycotted by patriots so bankruptcy is inevitable which is the point of the proposal.