first published on September 2, 2016 by Matt Silvey
Maura Healey, the Attorney General of Massachusetts, is in full on offensive mode and is single handedly, using the power of the state she represents, to take her personal war on guns to the gun manufacturers. Not long ago, as a resident of the opposite coast, I had never heard her name, but when she decided to superstitiously reinterpret her state’s “assault weapon ban” and came out with her own, unclear enforcement guidelines, guidelines that demonstrate her lack of actual knowledge of firearms, which have since had to be “clarified,” which the clarifications only added more confusion, her name became known across the nation, at least to those of us who understand and respect the Constitution.
In her next frontal assault on law abiding gun owners, she decided to go after the gun manufacturers. On her behalf, the State of Massachusetts is demanding that both Glock and Remington turn over all sorts of legal documents because she asserts that the guns they manufacture are unsafe. What is she using as evidence to support her clueless assertion? According the article in the Boston Globe, she is using three separate instances where three different people did dumb stuff with guns, and two of those people are cops. Healey is trying to say it is somehow the gun’s fault (that it functioned exactly as it was designed to), which in her mind makes the gun unsafe, and thus the manufacturer needs to be investigated.
(If you prefer to watch vs. read, the following video sums up this article.)
So, what examples is Healey using as “evidence” that the guns are unsafe? Let’s take a look.
Not a single one of these incidents is an example of a problem with the gun. Conversely, they are all perfect examples of unsafe handling or storage of a firearm, which is end user error.
What’s next, suing Ford or GM when some user of their product misuses it? Are all manufacturers now on the hook for the misuse of their products by end users? When is the state going to start suing car companies for drunk driving deaths?
I just don’t get it, I really don’t. As a cop, if I were to intentionally arrest someone on charges that I know are bogus, I would be fired and face federal charges (false arrest / civil rights violations) and not to mention civil lawsuits. Why is the attorney general of a state, who is supposedly the “top cop” of the state, not held to those same standards?
Folks, this is seriously how deranged these anti-gunners are, and sadly, we the people keep electing them…
If we don’t turn things around soon, I fear the country my children may inherit.