Is this about safety? It cannot be?
In addition to 923's point, "well-regulated" does not mean what I think you are suggesting (ie, that guns are subject to "regulation.") At the time of the founding, it meant "well trained" and/or "well functioning."
Scalia himself said in Heller that the Second Amendment only extends to guns that are akin to those used by colonial militiamen. It's not clear exactly where the line is, but it is clear (according to Heller) that this doesn't include "machine guns" (Scalia's word.) This limitation has nothing to do with the "well regulated" language.
14 year old shoots both parents in the head after being grounded from video games
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/...nts-in-head-after-grounding-from-video-games/
With Biden's shotgun....Shooting in upstate NY, 4 dead.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/13/justice/new-york-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
I don't see why it's so awful to have a gun liability law. If a gun you own is used in a crime and you haven't reported it stolen, then you should be liable for damages.
If someone uses your car and has an accident, you have to pay.
All the Constitution says is you have the "to keep and bear arms". It doesn't say you have the right to be held harmless for actions with that gun.
Personally, I think people should be required to carry insurance for gun ownership the same way we have to carry insurance for owning and driving a car.
You just posted the opinion of others just like it is fact...
"As leaders of Congress"
" unprecedented immunity for the gun industry"
"major news outlets should investigate why the gun industry remains shielded by law from the consequences of its irresponsible business practices in a way that other industries are no"
These are statements you just posted as if they are fact, and all they are is opinion. Feel free to post the Protection of Lawful Commecrce Act word by word when you get a chance...
I love the fact that you call me an extremist. Eagle Scout with two palms, WFU grad, US army vet.
Wahissa 118?
You 100% wrong about this, but you will never admit regardless of how many independent sources I show you. I've shown three so far.
What you are alleging is ludicrous. If it was the way you state it, there would have been no reason for the law or the NRA and gun manufacturers spending millions of dollars to ensure the law's passage.