Why shouldnt the gun industry be liable for damage done by its products, just like anybody else?

[Jim Lane]

27. The answer is legislated standards, not litigation

In your Kars for Kids hypothetical, the obvious answer would be that there are laws setting a minimum age for driving. Those laws are made by the people's elected representatives, not a random selection of jurors. The legislators decide what the requirements should be, and those requirements are then published so everyone can know what the applicable law is. There are also minimum-age requirements for buying tobacco.

I'm no gun lover so I don't know the law here. If a 10-year-old walks into a gun shop, plunks down his cash, and asks for an AR-15, is it legal for the shop to sell it to him? If the answer is Yes, then that's the problem, and the law should be changed. If the answer is No, but the shop illegally sells the gun anyway, then, as I understand the PLCAA, the shop could be held liable for violating the law.

Even if the purchaser is an adult, the PLCAA allows the seller to be held liable for negligent entrustment. In one case, a woman's family warned the gun shop that she was mentally ill and shouldn't be sold a gun. The shop sold her the gun anyway and she murdered her father with it. The Missouri Supreme Court held, correctly in my view, that the PLCAA did not shield the gun shop from liability. (Source: "MISSOURI GUN SHOP AGREES TO PAY $2.2 MILLION TO SETTLE WRONGFUL-DEATH LAWSUIT")