Blaming the nation's gun manufacturers for gun violence is a bit like trying to charge General Motors or Ford for vehicular homicide when a drunk driver crosses a center line and kills an innocent motorist. Just as GM and Ford are not responsible for the actions of the drunk driver, Smith & Wesson is not responsible for the actions of those crazed trench coat kids at Columbine.  We are now in an era when few of us seem willing to take responsibility for our own actions. Our president has led the way. He's set the example and tone for this attitude. Waco? That was David Koresh's fault. Ruby Ridge? Blame it on Randy Weaver, not the FBI sniper who fired a bullet between the eyes of Weaver's wife.

When Clinton's Justice Department vigorously pursued its lawsuit against the tobacco industry, it was in effect saying that smokers were not responsible for causing themselves to get sick with heart disease and lung cancer. It's easier to blame the tobacco manufacturers. Now, once again, that same approach has been used to extort through legal channels what could not be accomplished by the president legislatively.  Smith & Wesson admitted that lawsuits filed by the feds and several dozen cities and counties seriously threatened its ability to stay in business.

Legal fees alone could bankrupt even the nation's largest gun manufacturer. So, Smith & Wesson had few options. It was eventual bankruptcy, or yield to the Clinton lie. Now the pressure will be on other gun manufacturers to follow the Smith & Wesson lead. If they don't, S&W will certainly come to dominate the gun market, because even now, New York Senator Charles Schumer is proposing that the federal government only purchase guns from manufacturers that implement gun-safety standards with their products. Liberal city councils, mayors and state legislators will eventually introduce similar proposals.

Responsibility? Whatever happened to parents keeping their guns out of the reach of their children, or putting the fear of God into their kids?  My wife's father was a hunter and many of his guns were easily accessible by my wife and her siblings as they were growing up. What happened if you touched one of your father's guns? I asked. She said it was clear to her that she dare not do it. She never even wanted to find out her father's reaction. "I was scared to touch them," she said. "I knew his reaction and the consequences for me wouldn't be good."  That was in the '60s. In the year 2000, I guess it's easier to buy into the lie and blame someone else for our sins.

So, who wants to be next? General Motors? Ford?