Senator Chris Murphy (D-Connecticut) has launched a tweet attack on Democratic presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont).
Democrats cannot nominate a candidate who believes that toy gun makers should be held to a higher legal standard than real gun makers.
— Chris Murphy (@ChrisMurphyCT) April 5, 2016
Murphy has endorsed Sanders’ rival Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton for President.
In five tweets, Murphy went after Sanders for again repeating that he doesn’t support gun manufacturer liability in the case brought by the victims of the Sandy Hook massacre against the makers of the AR-15 assault rifle that killed 26 people including 20 children.
“There’s a case currently waiting to be ruled on in Connecticut. The victims of the Sandy Hook massacre are looking to have the right to sue for damages the manufacturers of the weapons. Do you think that that is something that should be expanded?”
“Do I think the victims of a crime with a gun should be able to sue the manufacturer, is that your question?” Sanders says.
“Correct,” say the editors of the Daily News.
“No, I don’t,” Sanders says.
“Bernie is a friend, but this is really bad” Murphy tweets. “Dems can’t nominate a candidate who supports gun manufacturer immunity.”
“Let’s be clear,” Murphy says. “Supporting restoring liability for sellers is not the same thing as restoring liability for gun makers.”
“For Sanders to say that the Sandy Hook families should be barred from court, even if the weapon was negligently made, is wrong.”
“Democrats cannot nominate a candidate who believes that toy gun makers should be held to a higher legal standard than real gun makers.”
“And if this isn’t Sanders’ position — if he supports full return of liability for sellers and makers, then he should clarify immediately.”
Josh Koskoff is the lawyer representing the Sandy Hook victims in the lawsuit against Remington.
“This case is about a particular weapon, the AR-15, and its sale to civilians,” Koskoff told Corporate Crime Reporter last month. “It has nothing to do with the firearms industry as a whole. The AR-15 is to guns what a tank is to cars — uniquely dangerous and not suitable to public use. The AR-15 was designed and manufactured for the military for the purpose of killing the enemy with maximum efficiency.”
“The families’ lawsuit does not contend that Remington should be held liable simply for manufacturing the AR-15,” Koskoff said. “Indeed, Remington and other manufacturers’ production of the AR-15 is essential to the military and law enforcement. But Remington is responsible for its choice to sell that same weapon to the public, and for highlighting the military and assaultive capacities of the weapon in its marketing.”