Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

jmg257

(11,996 posts)
3. "..that resulted in them owing $200,000 in legal fees". These poor people got very bad legal advice.
Fri Apr 1, 2016, 02:35 PM
Apr 2016

"The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) is a United States law which protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. However, both manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from 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 negligence when they have reason to know a gun is intended for use in a crime."

15 U.S. Code § 7901 - Findings; purposes
(a) FindingsCongress finds the following:
(1) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
(2) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the rights of individuals, including those who are not members of a militia or engaged in military service or training, to keep and bear arms.
(3) Lawsuits have been commenced against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms that operate as designed and intended, which seek money damages and other relief for the harm caused by the misuse of firearms by third parties, including criminals.
(4) The manufacture, importation, possession, sale, and use of firearms and ammunition in the United States are heavily regulated by Federal, State, and local laws. Such Federal laws include the Gun Control Act of 1968, the National Firearms Act [26 U.S.C. 5801 et seq.], and the Arms Export Control Act [22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.].
(5) Businesses in the United States that are engaged in interstate and foreign commerce through the lawful design, manufacture, marketing, distribution, importation, or sale to the public of firearms or ammunition products that have been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce are not, and should not, be liable for the harm caused by those who criminally or unlawfully misuse firearm products or ammunition products that function as designed and intended.
(6) The possibility of imposing liability on an entire industry for harm that is solely caused by others is an abuse of the legal system, erodes public confidence in our Nation’s laws, threatens the diminution of a basic constitutional right and civil liberty, invites the disassembly and destabilization of other industries and economic sectors lawfully competing in the free enterprise system of the United States, and constitutes an unreasonable burden on interstate and foreign commerce of the United States.
(7) The liability actions commenced or contemplated by the Federal Government, States, municipalities, and private interest groups and others are based on theories without foundation in hundreds of years of the common law and jurisprudence of the United States and do not represent a bona fide expansion of the common law. The possible sustaining of these actions by a maverick judicial officer or petit jury would expand civil liability in a manner never contemplated by the framers of the Constitution, by Congress, or by the legislatures of the several States. Such an expansion of liability would constitute a deprivation of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to a citizen of the United States under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.
(8) The liability actions commenced or contemplated by the Federal Government, States, municipalities, private interest groups and others attempt to use the judicial branch to circumvent the Legislative branch of government to regulate interstate and foreign commerce through judgments and judicial decrees thereby threatening the Separation of Powers doctrine and weakening and undermining important principles of federalism, State sovereignty and comity between the sister States.
(b) PurposesThe purposes of this chapter are as follows:
(1) To prohibit causes of action against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms or ammunition products, and their trade associations, for the harm solely caused by the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearm products or ammunition products by others when the product functioned as designed and intended.
(2) To preserve a citizen’s access to a supply of firearms and ammunition for all lawful purposes, including hunting, self-defense, collecting, and competitive or recreational shooting.
(3) To guarantee a citizen’s rights, privileges, and immunities, as applied to the States, under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, pursuant to section 5 of that Amendment.
(4) To prevent the use of such lawsuits to impose unreasonable burdens on interstate and foreign commerce.
(5) To protect the right, under the First Amendment to the Constitution, of manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms or ammunition products, and trade associations, to speak freely, to assemble peaceably, and to petition the Government for a redress of their grievances.
(6) To preserve and protect the Separation of Powers doctrine and important principles of federalism, State sovereignty and comity between sister States.
(7) To exercise congressional power under article IV, section 1 (the Full Faith and Credit Clause) of the United States Constitution.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Boohoo... GeorgiaPeanuts Apr 2016 #1
How does one get shot to death by a murderer who shouldn't have a gun due to "negligence" exactly? CalvinballPro Apr 2016 #5
If the store follows the law and legally sells a gun to a citizen they should not be liable... GeorgiaPeanuts Apr 2016 #6
Tell me, precisely, how a car meant for transport is like able to a gun meant for death? nt msanthrope Apr 2016 #7
A car can be used to cause death, remember the wife that ran over her husband GeorgiaPeanuts Apr 2016 #8
But that is not its manufactured purpose. You conflate purpose and use, at your logical peril. nt msanthrope Apr 2016 #9
Okay and your point? GeorgiaPeanuts Apr 2016 #11
Such nuance. nt msanthrope Apr 2016 #14
Is there something somewhere from the manufacturer that states... discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2016 #41
Right! fun n serious Apr 2016 #10
Indeed....now we shall defend the gunz. nt msanthrope Apr 2016 #12
We don't have to defend the gunz. the Constitution as it's interpreted defends the gunz Autumn Apr 2016 #19
I am glad to see this from you. As a gun onwer, I truly am msanthrope Apr 2016 #20
I own several, my favorite is a 30-30 . Autumn Apr 2016 #21
Not defending the gunz. Defending the LAW! jillan Apr 2016 #35
You are the model for the Bernie Sanders supporter. Spot on. nt LexVegas Apr 2016 #15
Yet the NRA gives money to Hillary Politicalboi Apr 2016 #2
They ignore that little fact. jillan Apr 2016 #31
"..that resulted in them owing $200,000 in legal fees". These poor people got very bad legal advice. jmg257 Apr 2016 #3
IIRC, it was a Colorado law that resulted in them owing fees, and the suit was (could have petronius Apr 2016 #32
It is hard to see how the company who sold him the ammo is at fault hack89 Apr 2016 #4
If Holmes purchased legally SheenaR Apr 2016 #13
It was clear to anyone paying attention TeddyR Apr 2016 #16
nobody passed special legislation to exempt Louisville Slugger from geek tragedy Apr 2016 #18
"Any kind of liability"? jmg257 Apr 2016 #22
did louisville slugger get any kind of sweetheart deal from Bernie Sanders geek tragedy Apr 2016 #23
Not sure - were people suing Louisville Slugger for criminal misuse of their bats? jmg257 Apr 2016 #25
how many thousands of Americans die because of baseball bats geek tragedy Apr 2016 #27
Not sure - yu might try CDC. Link provided for you. jmg257 Apr 2016 #29
CDC has been banned from studying deaths by the same general group of people geek tragedy Apr 2016 #30
That is pretty much true (gun related deaths/gun violence research). nt jmg257 Apr 2016 #34
In reality: discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2016 #36
As others pointed out TeddyR Apr 2016 #37
they said that Bernie personally promised them he'd come up with a comprehensive gun reform geek tragedy Apr 2016 #17
The on position where Bernie could show courage Trenzalore Apr 2016 #24
So the next time... discntnt_irny_srcsm Apr 2016 #26
They must have gotten very bad legal advice to end up in this predicament. Vinca Apr 2016 #28
If the retailer sold the bullets LEGALLY there is no there there! I am anti-gun but jeez this is jillan Apr 2016 #33
Why do Hillary and her supporters continue to exploit these poor people? beam me up scottie Apr 2016 #38
Pimping their daughter's corpse for minor political advantage. arcane1 Apr 2016 #39
So how come I got a re-call notice from Remington, re: safety flaw? Eleanors38 Apr 2016 #40
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Parents of Aurora victim ...»Reply #3