Obviously false on its face. Like any other legal, legitimate business entity, the gun manufacturers are in business to make money for themselves and for their stockholders. This suit and this court seems to think that the guns are routinely given away on street corners (can you imagine the sign? "Free Guns! Thugs Only!").
This court made a local, emotional decision (that's what liberals and activists do) to a legal problem that their government won't solve (another liberal hallmark). I would hope that SCOUTUS doesn't even have to see this -- that the appellate level will give it the shredding that it deserves.
Correct. It is their job to sell as many guns as they can, as long as they comply with the law. The judge is saying, in an exact analogy, of automobile manufacturers, for example: "defendants have the power to control the purposeful creation and maintenance of an illegal secondary market by oversupplying the areas around Chicago with automobiles." This decision is insane. The only way anyone could even imagine that this decision serves any proper purpose is if they were to assume the obviously false proposition that handguns have no useful purpose.
As a formeer resident of Missouri, I often heard it suggested that the way to solve the crime problem in East St. Louis, Illinois would be to drive a delivery truck around downton ESL on a Friday night handing out free guns and whiskey.
I think it would work!