[RockChucker]

Not bad?

How about this:
``(A) IN GENERAL.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a person who has lawful possession and control of a handgun, and who uses a secure gun storage or safety device with the handgun, shall be entitled to immunity from a qualified civil liability action."

So, unless we lock our guns up in our homes, we are responsible for an ant of a 3rd party who, for instance, stole the weapon and caused damages, injury or death?

[Dead Corpse]

Yep. There is no clause for fines/inprinsonment for simple non-compliance by the consumer though. Heavy fines for a dealer/manufacturer that doesn't include one at point of sale or transfer. It also gives $6 million to the Consumer Product Safety Commission over three years to set the "standard" for a locking mechanism.

Not what we needed added to this Bill and is poison enough to warrent calls to our Senators wanting this removed from the Bill.

[DBrow]

If someone steals your gun, you obviously did not store it securely (it was stolen) and once stolen, you do not have control over it, lawful ownership notwithstanding.

So this amendment means that you are liable for third (or fourth or...) parties who get their hands on your gun.

What a fine tradeoff so that Smith & Wesson can dismiss lawsuits!

The antis have longed for a strict personal liability law, and they tacked one on to this bill.

After a few very public trials, what do you suppose this will do to affect your homeowners liability insurance?

[cc2k]

RockChucker wrote:

---

So, unless we lock our guns up in our homes, we are responsible for an ant of a 3rd party who, for instance, stole the weapon and caused damages, injury or death?

---

And under the law we have today, if someone steals your locked gun and disables the lock and uses it in a crime, you might get sued by the victim for negligence in allowing the locked gun to be stolen and for using an ineffective lock.

While this new law isn't great, it could be an improvement over what we have today.

I'm not sure I would oppose S.1805 based only on this amendment. If they can keep it clean from other poison pill amendments, this might be the best we can get. I do wish they would vote on S.1806, with no amendments, for a straight up or down vote first, though. If it passes clean, then I think that woudl be doing better than the amended bill at this point.

[DBrow]

``(II) at the time access was gained by the person not
so authorized, the handgun had been made inoperable by use
of a secure gun storage or safety device; and

I retract, if I may, my previous post. If you store in a safe or use a lock in good faith you are not liable.