In the aftermath of the assault on a bank, Biden tweeted that “once again, our nation mourns after a senseless act of gun violence — Jill and I pray for the lives lost and impacted by today’s shooting.”
The president then leveled criticism at Second Amendment advocates who refuse to have their rights infringed upon. “Too many Americans are paying for the price of inaction with their lives.”
The horrific attack on Louisville’s Old National Bank was carried out by a bank employee, according to authorities. Louisville Metro Police Department Chief Jacquelyn Gwinn-Villaroel identified the shooter as 25-year-old Connor Sturgeon, who she confirmed livestreamed during his rampage.
Shots were still being fired when police arrived at the bank and encountered the gunman. Mayor Craig Greenberg described the incident as “an evil act of targeted violence.”
The shooting followed by just two weeks another deadly attack on a Nashville Christian elementary school that killed six, including three nine-year-olds.
At that point Biden said he had exhausted all executive action he could unilaterally take for more stringent gun control. The day after the Nashville tragedy, the president said he had “gone the full extent of my executive authority, to do on my own, anything about guns.”
Still, there was an immediate proclamation after the Louisville incident for more gun control. And Biden was hardly alone.
White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre used the Monday attack to push for a ban on so-called “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines, more stringent gun storage measures and the ability to file lawsuits against the firearms industry.
She referred to the measures with the term that anti-gun zealots love to bandy about when arguing against constitutional liberties — “common sense.”
That even though “common sense” lays the blame for shootings on the person who used the inanimate object in an evil and vile way. It is common sense to hold that individual responsible.
For the record, her comments came at roughly 2:15 p.m. on Monday. Louisville police at that point had released zero details of the type of weapon used or how it was acquired.
As for her claim that the ability to sue gun manufacturers is needed, a study by Breitbart poured cold water on the idea that the industry is immune from legal action. The basis for her assertion is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).
This wise legislation shields the industry from frivolous legal attacks over guns that were legally made and legally sold. It hardly affords blanket immunity. If a gun that was lawfully manufactured and purchased is used in a crime, PLCAA prevents actions against the industry.
More specifically, if a firearm is legally constructed, then distributed to a Federal Firearms License holder (FFL), and then sold with the implementation of a National Instant Criminal Background System (NICS) at the retail level, there is no liability for the manufacturer if it is misused.
This is a narrow legal definition and one that stringently governs the weapons industry.
Manufacturers are not shielded from lawsuits over defective products or their own criminal misconduct. Simply put, the declaration that gun manufacturers have “legal immunity” is false. Only if they conduct their business through very tight regulations are they protected from those who would attempt to bankrupt the industry through frivolous legal filings.
But once again, there is a massive rush to judgment by political leaders after a tragedy.
