Correct: Gun makers say it's not their job to monitor who buys their product, or if they've been used in crime

Gun makers say it is not their job to monitor who buys their product, or if they have been used in a crime.

Correct: Gun makers say it's not their job to monitor who buys their product, or if they've been used in crime Glockss620x349

The Glock executive testified that he would keep doing business with a gun dealer who had been indicted on a charge of violating firearms laws because ''this is still America'' and ''you're still innocent until proven guilty''.

The president of Sturm, Ruger & Co was not interested in knowing how often the police traced guns back to the company's distributors, saying it ''wouldn't show us anything''.

And an executive for Taurus International Manufacturing said his company made no attempt to learn if dealers who sell its products were involved in gun trafficking on the black market.

''I don't even know what a gun trafficker is,'' he said.
Advertisement

The world's firearms manufacturers have been largely silent in the debate over gun violence. But their voices emerge from thousands of pages of depositions in a series of liability lawsuits a decade ago, before Congress passed a law shielding them from such suits in 2005, and the only time many of them were forced to answer such questions.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/world/glock-and-the-spiel-dont-blame-us-20130528-2n9ek.html#ixzz2UelGQQN1

Correct: Gun makers say it's not their job to monitor who buys their product, or if they've been used in crime

Correct: Gun makers say it's not their job to monitor who buys their product, or if they've been used in crime

Anarcho-Capitalist Categorical Imperatives

Via AnCaps: Law & Enforced Unnatural Order