General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBiden wants to end gun maker liability protections. That could sink the industry, advocates say.
He wants to drive us out of business, said Mark Oliva, a director at a firearm manufacturer group.
April 9, 2021, 7:48 AM EDT
By Alex Seitz-Wald
WASHINGTON President Joe Biden would like some divine help on his gun control agenda, but his ask might be surprising.
And firearm makers warn the results could be dire for their industry.
During remarks announcing new executive actions to curb gun violence Thursday, Biden's speech took a detour as he imagined being able to ask God to immediately change one gun law, and it wasn't eliminating assault weapons or so-called "bump stocks."
He would have the almighty let people sue gunmakers.
This is the only outfit that is exempt from being sued. If I get one thing on my list (if) the Lord came down and said, 'Joe, you get one of these' give me that one," Biden said at a ceremony at the Rose Garden.
more
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-wants-end-gun-maker-liability-protections-could-sink-industry-n1263556
Thrill
(19,178 posts)Unreal.
The guy has become a Progressives dream President. Who saw this coming?
yardwork
(61,533 posts)Let the invisible hand of free enterprise decide. Why should any business have government protection from liability? At least that's what the Republicans are always saying, right? Down with government control! Let the market decide.
hack89
(39,171 posts)They failed and this was the pay back. I am always surprised at the ineptitude of US gun control groups - from the federal AWB to the present you would think they were a front for the NRA considering the end results.
dsc
(52,147 posts)they were in point of fact on the verge of winning.
hack89
(39,171 posts)they just don't seem to have their acts together enough to get across the finish line. The AWB was their biggest mistake - because of that, the NRA were very prepared politically to get the PLCAA in place.
dsc
(52,147 posts)they were literally on the verge of winning and then Congress changed the law. In a very real sense every single, solitary gun death is on their heads.
kcr
(15,313 posts)Why do they need special protections that other industries don't get? If they're following the law and making perfectly safe products, then what's the problem?
hack89
(39,171 posts)That is one of the six circumstances they can be sued for. You just can't sue them for the criminal acts of some third party. So I agree with you that if they are making and selling guns in accordance with all laws then they should not be sued. But that was not what the law suitswereabout.
mitch96
(13,869 posts)You could end manufacture and STILL have too many guns in the hands of wackjobs YMMV
m
CrispyQ
(36,413 posts)Go for it, Joe!
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)I thought they should have been driven out of business decades ago; I pray for their extinction.
FakeNoose
(32,556 posts)... and they have done nothing but abuse it. It needs to end.
They should be held liable, and if it puts them out of business - so be it.
marble falls
(56,996 posts)Bettie
(16,058 posts)the products you provide, it isn't a business that should survive.
634-5789
(4,175 posts)Voltaire2
(12,939 posts)I've read the 2nd many times, "build and sell arms" just aint in there.
So the gunz industry can just go fuck off.
intheflow
(28,442 posts)just selling hunting rifles and cylinder hand guns. No civilian needs automatic or semiautomatic weapons in their homes. Even if you take the 2nd Amendment at face value, the current state of US military might is not going to be deterred by your stash of AR-15s.
SYFROYH
(34,161 posts)If a manufacturer creates a mechanically safe and BATFE approved firearm, legally sells it to a distributor, who legally sells it to a dealer, who legally sells it to a background-check approved buyer and then that buyer commits a crime with the firearm they can be sued into oblivion even if it is a single round muzzle loader.
SYFROYH
(34,161 posts)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act
Gun manufacturers CAN be sued for "defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible in much the same manner that any U.S.-based manufacturer of consumer products is held responsible. They may also be held liable for negligent entrustment when they have reason to know a gun is intended for use in a crime."
Gun manufacturers CANNOT be sued for following the law precisely when manufacturing BATFE approved firearms and selling them legally to distributors who legally sell them to dealers who legally sell them to individuals who then commit a crime. Same for distributors and dealers.
And yes, the PLCAA was created when politicians revealed that the purpose of the lawsuits against gun manufacturers is to bankrupt companies.
HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo was quoted as saying that gun manufacturers that did not comply would suffer "death by a thousand cuts", and Eliott Spitzer said that those who didn't cooperate would have bankruptcy lawyers "knocking at your door".[7]
It's very simple, if you want gun manufacturers, distributors, or dealers to do something different, pass a law.
kcr
(15,313 posts)Gun companies aren't entitled to protections that other industries don't get. If they're following the law, then there shouldn't be any problem when they get sued.
SYFROYH
(34,161 posts)Although they do contribute to a victim fund.
The thing about civil lawsuits is that it's not always about following laws per see and emotions can override commonsense when siding for a plaintiff.
kacekwl
(7,010 posts)cause another run on gun purchases because of course they want to take your gun again. These frightened gun humpers will buy as many as they can at whatever price is set cause you know, don't tread on me, come and take it shit.