Posted on 07/30/2005 8:01:40 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
In a vote of 65-31, the Senate Friday passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (S.397), a measure designed to shield gun makers, dealers, and importers from lawsuits filed by crime victims.
The bill's sponsor, Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho), said the bill "says go after the criminal, don't go after the law-abiding gun manufacturer or the law-abiding gun seller." Critics, like Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.) accused the GOP and the Bush administration of using the bill as a "payback" to the National Rifle Association.
The NRA applauded the Senate's passage of the measure, calling it "an historic vote in Second Amendment history."
"When it comes to something as fundamental as the Second Amendment, the American people are determined to protect this freedom. That's what happened in the United States Senate today," said NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre and chief lobbyist Chris Cox in a statement.
The NRA said the bill will "put an end to politically motivated predatory lawsuits." The group called the measure's passage "a groundbreaking step forward for law-abiding firearm manufacturers, retailers and owners in this country."
"The 'Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act' is a vital bill that will save the centuries old, law-abiding, and highly regulated American industry that has persevered under the burden of these predatory lawsuits," said LaPierre and Cox.
"The success of this bill was so critical to national security interests that it prompted the Department of Defense to issue a strong letter unequivocally urging passage," they added.
Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA) also praised the Senate for acting "responsibly in an effort to stop frivolous legal actions that have been mounted over the past few years by anti-gun rights politicians to deliberately bankrupt legitimate firearms manufacturers."
"These legal actions, backed by extremists in the gun control lobby, have no other purpose than to financially devastate the gun industry, and opponents of this legislation know it," said CCRKBA Chairman Alan M. Gottlieb in a statement.
Democrats failed to attach amendments that would give police and children the right to sue or let individuals sue, but not municipalities.
"Should those whose actions lead to the death or injury of a child get a free pass?" asked Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), sponsor of one amendment.
Gun control advocates blast bill as 'terrible public policy'
Gun control groups, like the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, condemned the Senate's action.
"This is a day in America when the little guy lost out to powerful special interests. The Senate has passed legislation that, if passed by the House and signed by the President, will lock the courthouse doors to gun violence victims," said Brady Campaign President Michael Barnes in a statement.
"The legislation, if allowed to become law, will give the most irresponsible gun sellers in America a license to act more recklessly than ever before. It removes the one threat facing those gun sellers that look the other way and help supply the criminal market -- that they will be taken to court and held accountable," said Barnes.
"One irresponsible gun dealer says it 'lost' over 200 guns, some of which ended up killing people. That dealer gets immunity. One dealer sells 12 guns to a customer paying cash, police officers are shot with one of the guns, and that dealer gets immunity. This is nothing short of insanity," added Barnes.
Barnes pledged that gun control activists would "continue to fight to prevent this bill from becoming law, and we will fight even harder if it becomes law." He called the measure "terrible public policy."
"High Five" to the NRA members present and also to those who value the right to bear arms and the rest of their freedoms. Whenever attempts are made to back-door one freedom the rest are endangered also.
The only thing stopping me from buying a new 9mm is the cost. Maybe this will help.
I cannot see how other industries would not now be protected in similar fashion as a result of this decision
I hope. I am in the auto industry. I am very surprised that some lawyer hasn't tried suing auto makers for people who get killed in vehicle accidents.
Of course they did try in the Ford and Firestone fiasco.
I forget which part of the constitution covers smoking. The stupid government still subsidizes the growing of tobacco, exports are up.
Now, if they could only do the same for bartenders......
The democrats still want you to be able to sue the shoe lace industry too, just think of all of the injuries caused by people not being able to tie laces properly. The manufacturers must be held accountable
BTTT
And another to Gun Owners of America members as well.
Whenever attempts are made to back-door one freedom the rest are endangered also.
The GOA raised hell, rightfully IMO, about the gun lock provision that the NRA calls inconsequential. They used the seat-belt analogy, wherein at first you couldn't be stopped just for not wearing one - now look where the bureaucrats took it.
I suspect the same with the dealers' gun lock requirement. How to be enforced? Why, the police will have to inspect your firearm/home to make sure you used the damn thing. (Mandating that gun owners use them will be the next "inconsequential" step.)
Herb Kohl of Wisconsin has had a personal campaign forcing all handgun sales to include a "trigger lock". Which is kind of ridiculous since most dealers already throw in a lock and some newer guns have an internal lock. My question centers on the "spur triggered" Derringers, North American Arms mini-revolvers, and some of the smaller Cowboy action revolvers (32's & 38's w/ birds head grips??). If the gun doesn't have a trigger guard, how do you fit a trigger lock? If the Kohl amendment has passed w/ the legal protection bill we have just thrown a sub-set of small firearms into a legal black hole since you can't ship it with what now passes for a trigger lock (it won't work) and the market is too small to interest anybody developing one!
Please tell me they stripped out the Kohl amendment, otherwise, it looks like in winning we lost again. Remember, the grabbers are all about incrementalism, they'll knock 'em down one at a time if they have to.
Regards,
GtG
Where have you been since the '60s. Ever hear of Ralph Nader and GM? Unsafe at any speed? The ambulance chasers tried it with Jeep, claiming the design was inherently unstable and would roll without provocation.
In general, the auto industry was big enough to afford the legal talent to protect itself from lawsuits including those with merit (Pinto gas tank). The gun manufactures are not that large a segment of the manufacturing sector.
Regards,
GtG
I've NEVER used a gun lock. It defeats the purpose of gun control (hitting what you're aiming at).
This is the NRA's bill and by the time it hits the president's desk the amendment may not be attached to the bill. It has to go to the House where there are more pro-gun legislators by percentage than the Senate.
They haven't tried it yet because they felt they'd probably be laughed out of court. Instead, they went after the far poorer, but more politically powerful, gun manufacturers. Guns and cars are legally indistinguishable since both are entirely legal and useful products that can be criminally and negligently misused causing serious, often fatal, injuries.
If the predatory litigators had gotten their way with the gun industry, they'd have had powerful precedents they could have then turned against all other industries that manufacture products which, when misused, can cause serious harm. That actually covers almost anything, since almost anything, definitely including a computer, can be used as a weapon or to inflict serious, illegal harm on another person. When the Senate passed this bill it protected the entire American economy from a devastating, self constructed legal firestorm.
Even worse, long shoe laces must be restricted because children can use them as strangling cords.
...When the Senate passed this bill it protected the entire American economy from a devastating, self constructed legal firestorm.
-----
I hope so.
Do think that John Edwards is scratching his head today?
Better check this out!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1456859/posts
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.