Dem bill would let shooting victims sue gun makers, dealers

[Sousuke 1,214]

This bill shows just how out of touch lawmakers are.

http://thehill.com/regulation/267201-gun-dealers-could-be-sued-by-shooting-victims-under-new-bill

“In some jurisdictions, if your dog bites me, you are strictly liable. No excuses, it’s your fault, you pay,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), one of the sponsors of the bill.

“And yet for a gun, there is no liability at all,” he added. “Absolute immunity.”

The gun-control bill would repeal the controversial Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a 2005 law that protects the gun industry from lawsuits.

The gun lobby contends the existing protections shield the industry from frivolous lawsuits, but Democrats say the new legislation only targets irresponsible gun manufacturers and dealers that negligently sell firearms to criminals.

"This is not a bill that says, ‘Merely because you sell a gun that’s later used in a crime, that you’re somehow responsible or liable,’ ” said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who is sponsoring the bill in the House.

First comparing a dog ( a living breathing thing) with an inanimate object is absolute baka.

Second, Adam Schiff is being absolutely disingenuous. With or without this bill you may already sue a dealer/manufacturer if they broke the law and sold a firearm to a criminal. There are already test cases for this.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

This bill shows just how out of touch lawmakers are.

http://thehill.com/regulation/267201-gun-dealers-could-be-sued-by-shooting-victims-under-new-bill

“In some jurisdictions, if your dog bites me, you are strictly liable. No excuses, it’s your fault, you pay,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), one of the sponsors of the bill.

“And yet for a gun, there is no liability at all,” he added. “Absolute immunity.”

The gun-control bill would repeal the controversial Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a 2005 law that protects the gun industry from lawsuits.

The gun lobby contends the existing protections shield the industry from frivolous lawsuits, but Democrats say the new legislation only targets irresponsible gun manufacturers and dealers that negligently sell firearms to criminals.

"This is not a bill that says, ‘Merely because you sell a gun that’s later used in a crime, that you’re somehow responsible or liable,’ ” said Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who is sponsoring the bill in the House.

First comparing a dog ( a living breathing thing) with an inanimate object is absolute baka.

Second, Adam Schiff is being absolutely disingenuous. With or without this bill you may already sue a dealer/manufacturer if they broke the law and sold a firearm to a criminal. There are already test cases for this.

So if I split someones head open with an axe, is the axe maker libel. More liberal insanity, that will have zero effect on violence in America

[Expat1 971]

I hope we are not pretending that this bill is going anywhere but the trash can.

A bill to personally sue a judge for a suspended sentence or members of a parole board for an early release and hold them personally accountable for crimes committed by an already arrested, tried, and convicted criminal would go a lot further (with me anyway)

[Dashinka 23,409]

Maybe they will add cell phone manufactures for those that kill someone while talking on a cell phone in a car.

[Advanced Aardvark 82]

This bill is really not about gun violence at all. It is merely another gambit by the Trial Lawyers to provide themselves with another revenue stream.

[Boiler 43,829]

So the same way you can sue a Knife Manufacturer and Vendor if you were stabbed?

[lostinblue 1,989]

So the same way you can sue a Knife Manufacturer and Vendor if you were stabbed?

This will only apply to gun mfgs...Liberals use knives .. they don't want them put out of business .. only folks making guns.

[Robby999 1,024]

[Expat1 971]

It's a secret strategy by white people and the NRA to hold gun sellers accountable when police shoot black people

[smilesammich 10,727]

It's a secret strategy by white people and the NRA to hold gun sellers accountable when police shoot black people

probably best to go after the person who pulled the trigger.

[ExPatty 502]

There is so much confusion over this.

I believe that if you knowingly sell a gun illegally you should be held responsible, to some degree, to what happens with that gun. Most people agree; straw purchases are already illegal and people are prosecuted.

But if I legally sell a gun in good faith and you murder someone obviously I shouldn't be held responsible.

It's really a simple matter, but like all things with guns has gone full retard.

There are a small number of people who genuinely feel that if a gun is sold completely following the law and used in a crime the person who sold it should be held liable to a degree. Gun grabbers do not care how they get guns taken away, whether they need to lie to do so, they will tirelessly work at it regardless of method they need to use.

Edited January 28, 2016 by ExPatty

[Expat1 971]

probably best to go after the person who pulled the trigger.

I believe we agree on that