I never vote for the asswipe. I asked him to vote in favor of Senate bill 397, The Protection of lawful commerce in arms act. This was his response;
Thank you for contacting me about S. 397, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. I appreciate hearing from you on this issue.
On February 16, 2005, Senator Larry Craig re-introduced The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in the 109 th Congress. This bill would retroactively provide liability protection for firearm manufacturers, dealers, and trade associations for criminal or unlawful misuse of a firearm by others. As he did during the last session of Congress, the Senate Majority Leader bypassed the Senate Judiciary Committee and directly placed S. 397 on the Senate floor calendar. On July 29, the Senate voted on the bill, and it passed by a vote of 65-31.
Several amendments were proposed during debate on Senator Craig's legislation. I considered each amendment based on its merits and voted on it accordingly. I opposed an amendment offered by Senator Kennedy which would prohibit ammunition for handguns and rifles that is "designed or marketed as having armor piercing capability." I was concerned that this amendment would ban some types of hunting ammunition. The Senate ultimately rejected the Kennedy amendment by a vote of 31 to 64.
After careful consideration, I voted against S. 397, as I did during the last session of Congress when the legislation was originally introduced. I oppose giving legal immunity to any one industry because such immunity may permit legal wrongdoers from avoiding accountability for their actions. I remain concerned that this bill could give the firearms industry special legal protections that no other industry enjoys. I am also concerned that this bill could override Vermont 's state laws setting standards for gross negligence and reckless actions. Lastly, I objected to the process by which this bill was considered; I believe that Senators and the public would have benefited if this bill had first gone through the Senate Judiciary Committee for fair and thorough hearings and debate.
As a native Vermonter, my experiences growing up hunting and fishing in the out-of-doors necessarily influence my approach to gun control issues. I have owned firearms since I was 14 years old and often enjoy target shooting with my friends and family in Vermont . I understand that the vast majority of gun owners in Vermont and around the country use and enjoy their firearms in a responsible and safe way, and I do not support efforts to ban the transfer of firearms between law abiding citizens.
Again, thank you for contacting me. Please keep in touch.
Patrick Leahy
UNITED STATES SENATOR
I responded to the dipshit with this;
Thank you for your response. I am sorry however that you chose to vote against the bill. This bill would not give blanket protection to the firearms community, they could still be held liable if negligence was proven. It would however protect them from frivolous lawsuits such as those in which a gun manufacturer is sued simply because a product they made was used to commit a crime. That would be like suing Ford motor company simply because a car they made was used to run down someone. I agree that people need to be held accountable for their actions but lets punish the actual perpetrators, not the manufacturers and suppliers of goods. Thank you again for your time.
He needs to go........ hopefully this comming election.