On Tuesday, Connecticut Democratic Senator Chris Murphy and Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders were at odds over where the country should be moving in regards to gun laws.
In an interview with the New York Daily News, Sanders said he did not think victims of a crime should be able to sue the manufacturer when asked about a suit filed by the families of the victims of the Sandy Hook tragedy against Bushmaster, the manufacturer of the gun used by Adam Lanza.
He went on to say the following: “In the same sense that if you’re a gun dealer and you sell me a gun and I go out and I kill him [gestures to someone in room]…. Do I think that that gun dealer should be sued for selling me a legal product that he misused? [Shakes head no.] But I do believe that gun manufacturers and gun dealers should be able to be sued when they should know that guns are going into the hands of wrong people. So if somebody walks in and says, ‘I’d like 10,000 rounds of ammunition,’ you know, well, you might be suspicious about that. So I think there are grounds for those suits, but not if you sell me a legal product.”
Connecticut Sen. Murphy, who is very involved in the Sandy Hook case, was not happy with the comments Sanders made.
“Bernie is a friend, but…Dems can’t nominate a candidate who supports gun manufacturer immunity,” he wrote.
He followed that up with several more tweets, highlighting how Sanders’ beliefs would impact the families of the victims in the Sandy Hook tragedy, who are trying to sue Bushmaster, the manufacturer of the guns used by Adam Lanza.
Murphy later told Politico he was supporting the other Democratic presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, because of how much emphasis she’s put on strengthening gun control, despite the political risk associated with that stance. “Hillary could’ve checked all the right boxes on the issue of guns and chosen to focus her campaign on other issues but from the very beginning Hillary decided to make the fight against the gun lobby a central part of her campaign,” he said to the publication. “I know personally that there is real political risk.”
Connecticut Gov. Dan Malloy, who also supports Clinton, agreed with his state’s Senator. “I think he’s dead wrong,” Malloy said to Politico, indicating specifically Sanders’ opposition to the Brady Bill.
Daily News: 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?
Sanders: Do I think the victims of a crime with a gun should be able to sue the manufacturer, is that your question?
Daily News: Correct.
Sanders: No, I don’t.
Daily News: Let me ask you. I know we’re short on time. Two quick questions. Your website talks about…
Sanders: No, let me just…I’m sorry. In the same sense that if you’re a gun dealer and you sell me a gun and I go out and I kill him [gestures to someone in room]…. Do I think that that gun dealer should be sued for selling me a legal product that he misused? [Shakes head no.] But I do believe that gun manufacturers and gun dealers should be able to be sued when they should know that guns are going into the hands of wrong people. So if somebody walks in and says, “I’d like 10,000 rounds of ammunition,” you know, well, you might be suspicious about that. So I think there are grounds for those suits, but not if you sell me a legal product. But you’re really saying…
Daily News: Do you think that the discussion and debate about what defines a legal product, what should be a legal product, hence AR-15s, these automatic military-style weapons…which is the grounds of this suit at the moment is that this should have never been in the hands of the public.
Sanders: Well, you’re looking at a guy…let’s talk about guns for one second. Let’s set the record straight because of…unnamed candidates who have misrepresented my views. You’re looking at a guy who has a D, what was it, D minus voting record from the NRA? Not exactly a lobbyist for the NRA, not exactly supporting them.
But it’s interesting that you raised that question. If you’ll remember this, if you were in Vermont in 1988 [gestures to Vermonter in the room], three people were running for the United States Congress. We have one seat, Vermont. Two of them supported assault weapons. One candidate, Bernie Sanders, said, in 1988, “No, I do not support the sale and distribution of assault weapons in this country.” I lost that election by three points. Came in second. And that may have been the reason, that I was opposed by all of the gun people, okay? So to answer your question, I do not believe, I didn’t believe then and I don’t believe now that those guns should be sold in America. They’re designed for killing people.
Daily News: So do you think then, with that in mind, that the merits of the current case are baseless?
Sanders: It’s not baseless. I wouldn’t use that word. But it’s a backdoor way. If you’re questioning me, will I vote to ban assault weapons in the United States, yeah, I will.
