Its an improvement

The New York Times has published another idiotic anti gun editorial, but this time with a twist. Instead of blindly trumpeting the lies of the gun banners, the Times has used some interesting wordsmithing to get its point across while still protecting its credibility.

This extraordinary shield, written to the diktat of the National Rifle Association, is so sweeping that it would have barred the D.C. sniper settlement and other valid negligence claims, according to legal experts stunned that any industry could ever win such blanket immunity.

See that, its got to be the final straw for the gun banners. Even the Times won't listen to them anymore. Sure, like the good party members they are, they will print the lies, but the Times apparently is no longer willing to put them forth as their own.

This is a smart strategy on the part of the Grey Lady, cause those legal experts are wrong. The bill expressly doesn't apply to suits arising from a situation like that of the Bullseye Shop where the owners violated the law.