Gun Liability Bill Falls in the Senate

C-Span

[brothers4thID]

The Gun Manufacturers Liability Bill just failed by a vote of 8-90. Now there are no worries about the AWB (for now!).

[Joe Brower]

Well boy howdy! Sure has been a busy week, hasn't it?

[JoeGar]

Just think if we had Lott!

Lott's brother is one of the big trial lawyers who skims cash from us with frivilous lawsuits.

[section9]

Excellent. They saddled the bill with so many poison pills that it went down in the Senate.

No worry about the AWB now!

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[TexasRedeye]

Dims let this die because they do not want the slippery slope of manufacturer's/distributor's liability limits in any way to become the law of the land. First guns, then McDonald', then, etc, etc, etc.

Trial lawyers WON this one.

The Dims saw this bill originally as a slam dunk to pass the pubbie Senate. So, the worst case had them getting the trial lawyers constrained but their favorite gun control AWB and Gun lock amendments added because the Dims knew enough Pubbies would vote with them to include them. Dashole has also stated there is currently no other legitimate bill being scheduled to which the amendments could be added as "germaine" for this senate year.

So the Dims voted against the underlying bill and the Pubbies voted against the Dims poison pills thus, everyone lost this round except the trial lawyers.

Will the pubbies try to bring a "clean" bill out again, probably. Will AWB restrictions/gun locks/gun shows be brought up again - definitely - over and over and over.

If I remember correctly though, DeLay has said that any bill containing AWB will never see the floor of the House for a vote!

[TexasRedeye]

Dims let this die because they do not want the slippery slope of manufacturer's/distributor's liability limits in any way to become the law of the land. First guns, then McDonald', then, etc, etc, etc.

Trial lawyers WON this one.

The Dims saw this bill originally as a slam dunk to pass the pubbie Senate. So, the worst case had them getting the trial lawyers constrained but their favorite gun control AWB and Gun lock amendments added because the Dims knew enough Pubbies would vote with them to include them. Dashole has also stated there is currently no other legitimate bill being scheduled to which the amendments could be added as "germaine" for this senate year.

So the Dims voted against the underlying bill and the Pubbies voted against the Dims poison pills thus, everyone lost this round except the trial lawyers.

Will the pubbies try to bring a "clean" bill out again, probably. Will AWB restrictions/gun locks/gun shows be brought up again - definitely - over and over and over.

If I remember correctly though, DeLay has said that any bill containing AWB will never see the floor of the House for a vote!

[KarlInOhio]

No worry about the AWB now!

Always worry about the AWB. Fineswine would try to attach it to a bill designating "Puppy and kitten appreciation day".

[TexasRedeye]

Geeeeez! Double posts - my sorry!

[TheBigB]

:-)

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/common/briefing/Enactment_law.htm#18

[SoDak]

One of the big winners in this mess is little Tommie Daschle. Tommie came out early in support of, and sponsorship of the liability protection bill knowing full well the AWB would get attached via amendment. As a result, the NRA (in a boldy moronic move) came out publicly in SD and told people to write a letter of thanks for the legislation to Tommie. Then, obviously, Tommie screws them to the wall with the AWB attached, and the whole thing goes down in flames. The result is that Tommies biggest contributors (trial lawyers) gets what they want, Tommie gets what he wants (the ability to run endorsement-like ads featuring the NRA playing to gun-loving SoDaks short on news savvy), and the Pubbies are holding the bag. My God, where the h&ll are the party leaders?

[BushMeister]

We must remember that even if civil suits against firearms manufacturers and dealers are thrown out or ruled against, the tremendous cost of contesting them in the first place endangers the continued existence of many in the industry.

The Brady Bunch has reason to be happy because they have retained their strategy of using civil suits as a weapon to attempt to crush firearms makers such as Bushmaster, which would be a huge victory for gun control. They still have that weapon in their hands, due to the failure of S. 1805.

The failures to make Law of the Senate-passed gun lock amdt. and the "gun show loophole" can be swallowed since they only continue existing conditions. As for the AWB ban extension, deep down, the Dems know that the AWB is a sham, except as a stepping stone to the total ban on semi-auto rifles they drool over. The Dems knew that they couldn't get their new amdts. through the House. The just wanted to kill S. 1805, and they succeeded.

Why not just filibuster S. 1805? Why engage in all the debated and amendments? It's all about positioning and compromising RINOs.

[Blessed]

Kerry is now on record as anti-gun. This can be used against him in PA and Ohio. He even made a speech.

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

Senate Republicans Scuttle Gun Bill

By JESSE J. HOLLAND
Associated Press Writer
Published March 2, 2004, 3:36 PM CST

WASHINGTON -- Senate Republicans scuttled an election-year bill to immunize the gun industry from lawsuits Tuesday after Democrats amended it to extend an assault weapons ban and require background checks on all buyers at private gun shows.
The National Rifle Association began pressuring senators to vote against the bill after Democrats won votes on the two key gun control measures. The 90-8 vote against the bill virtually ends any chance for gun legislation to make through Congress this year.
"I now believe it is so dramatically wounded that I would urge my colleagues to vote against it," said Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, the sponsor of the gunmaker immunity bill.
Democrats won close votes on their amendments to change the Republican legislation, a strategy aimed at pressuring the GOP-dominated House to accept the restrictions to gain passage of the gunmaker-immunity bill.

... < snip > (requires registration)
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/sns-ap-congress-guns,1,4283329.story?coll=chi-news-hed

[Travis McGee]

Out here in Cali, our AWB won't sunset.

:^(

[Cboldt]

They saddled the bill with so many poison pills that it went down in the Senate.

I posted on another thread, and repeat here ...

Do you know if/where there is a discussion of the positions of each Senator with regard to each proposed amendment, and the vote on the final bill?

My first impression (my first impressions are often crap) is that some Senators were in favor of the unamended bill (in favor of a flavor of lawsuit immunity), voted for extending the AWB and for the Gun-show provisions, then turned on a dime and didn't want to buy the package deal that they voted in favor of.

[Shooter 2.5]

Jees, I leave you people alone for a couple of minutes and this happens.

Looks like we have a new hit list for the primaries and the general election.

[BushMeister]

Thanks for the link that discusses conference committees.

[railsplitter]

Bill Summary & Status for the 108th Congress

---

NEW SEARCH | HOME | HELP | ABOUT STATUS

---

S.1805
Title: A bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others.
Sponsor: Sen Craig, Larry E. [ID] (introduced 10/31/2003) Cosponsors: 1
Related Bills: H.R.1036, S.1806
Latest Major Action: 3/1/2004 Senate floor actions. Status: Considered by Senate.

---

STATUS: (color indicates Senate actions)
10/31/2003:
Introduced in the Senate. Read the first time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under Read the First Time.
11/3/2003:
Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 363.
2/23/2004:
Motion to proceed to consideration of measure made in Senate by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S1448)
2/23/2004:
Cloture motion on the motion to proceed presented in Senate.
2/23/2004:
Motion to proceed to consideration of measure withdrawn in Senate by Unanimous Consent.
2/25/2004:
Motion to proceed to consideration of measure considered in Senate. (consideration: CR S1532-1554, S1559-1572, S1574-1582)
2/25/2004:
Cloture motion on the motion to proceed to consider the measure invoked in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 75 - 22. Record Vote Number: 16.
2/26/2004:
Motion to proceed to consideration of measure agreed to in Senate.
2/26/2004:
Measure laid before Senate. (consideration: CR S1612-1671)
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2620 Amendment SA 2620 proposed by Senator Boxer. (consideration: CR S1612-1616; text: CR S1613)
To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to require the provision of a child safety device in connection with the transfer of a handgun and to provide safety standards for child safety devices.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2621 Amendment SA 2621 proposed by Senator Daschle. (consideration: CR S1616-1620; text: CR S1616)
To clarify the definition of qualified civil liability action, and for other purposes.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2621 Amendment SA 2621 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2622 Amendment SA 2622 proposed by Senator Kohl to Amendment SA 2620. (consideration: CR S1620-1621; text: CR S1620-1621)
To amend chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code, to require the provision of a child safety lock in connection with the transfer of a handgun.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2622 Amendment SA 2622 agreed to in Senate by Voice Vote.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2620 Amendment SA 2620 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 70 - 27. Record Vote Number: 17.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2623 Amendment SA 2623 proposed by Senator Hatch for Senator Campbell. (consideration: CR S1623-1634; text: CR S1623-1624)
To amend title 18, United States Code, to exempt qualified current and former law enforcement officers from State laws prohibiting the carrying of concealed handguns.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2619 Amendment SA 2619 proposed by Senator Kennedy. (consideration: CR S1634-1639; text: CR S1634)
To expand the definition of armor piercing ammunition and to require the Attorney General to promulgate standards for the uniform testing of projectiles against body armor.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2625 Amendment SA 2625 proposed by Senator Craig for Senator Frist. (consideration: CR S1639-1641; text: CR S1639)
To regulate the sale and possession of armor piercing ammunition, and for other purposes.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2617 Amendment SA 2617 proposed by Senator Cantwell. (consideration: CR S1641-1649, S1655; text: CR S1641)
To extend and expand the Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation Act of 2002, and for other purposes.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2617 Point of order under the Budget Act raised in Senate with respect to amendment SA 2617.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2626 Amendment SA 2626 proposed by Senator Frist. (consideration: CR S1649-1655, S1655; text: CR S1650)
To make the provisions of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 permanent.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2617 Motion to waive the Budget Act with respect to amendment SA 2617 rejected in Senate by Yea-Nay. 58 - 39. Record Vote Number: 18.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2617 Amendment SA 2617 ruled out of order by the chair.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2626 Proposed amendment SA 2626 withdrawn in Senate.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2627 Amendment SA 2627 proposed by Senator Mikulski. (consideration: CR S1655-1659, S1662-1663; text: CR S1655)
To exempt lawsuits involving a shooting victim of John Allen Muhammad or Lee Boyd Malvo from the definition of qualified civil liability action.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2628 Amendment SA 2628 proposed by Senator Craig for Senator Frist. (consideration: CR S1659-1662; text: CR S1659)
To exempt any lawsuit involving a shooting victim of John Allen Muhammad or John Lee Malvo from the definition of qualified civil liability action that meets certain requirements.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2628 Amendment SA 2628 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 59 - 37. Record Vote Number: 19.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2627 Amendment SA 2627 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 40 - 56. Record Vote Number: 20.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2629 Amendment SA 2629 proposed by Senator Corzine. (consideration: CR S1663-1666, S1670; text: CR S1663)
To protect the rights of law enforcement officers who are victimized by crime to secure compensation from those who participate in the arming of criminals.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2630 Amendment SA 2630 proposed by Senator Craig for Senator Frist. (consideration: CR S1666-1670; text: CR S1666)
To protect the rights of law enforcement officers who are victimized by crime to secure compensation from those who participate in the arming of criminals.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2630 Amendment SA 2630 agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 60 - 34. Record Vote Number: 21.
2/26/2004:
S.AMDT.2629 Amendment SA 2629 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 38 - 56. Record Vote Number: 22.
2/27/2004:
Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1860-1873)
2/27/2004:
S.AMDT.2619 Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1860)
2/27/2004:
S.AMDT.2623 Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1860)
2/27/2004:
S.AMDT.2625 Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1860)
2/27/2004:
S.AMDT.2631 Amendment SA 2631 proposed by Senator Levin. (consideration: CR S1864-1865, S1867-1871; text: CR S1864-1865)
To exempt any civil action against a person from the provisions of the bill if the gross negligence or reckless conduct of the person proximately caused death or injury.
2/27/2004:
S.AMDT.2624 Amendment SA 2624 proposed by Senator Warner. (consideration: CR S1865-1866)
To improve patient access to health care services and provide improved medical care by reducing the excessive burden the liability system places on the health care delivery system.
2/27/2004:
S.AMDT.2632 Amendment SA 2632 proposed by Senator Lautenberg. (consideration: CR S1871-1872; text: CR S1872)
To require that certain notifications occur whenever a query to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System reveals that a person listed in the Violent Gang and Terrorist Organization File is attempting to purchase a firearm, and for other purposes.
2/27/2004:
S.AMDT.2633 Amendment SA 2633 proposed by Senator Lautenberg. (consideration: CR S1872-1873; text: CR S1872)
To exempt lawsuits involving injuries to children from the definition of qualified civil liability action.
3/1/2004:
Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1901-1928)
3/1/2004:
S.AMDT.2624 Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1901)
3/1/2004:
S.AMDT.2631 Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1901)
3/1/2004:
S.AMDT.2632 Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1901)
3/1/2004:
S.AMDT.2633 Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1901)
3/1/2004:
S.AMDT.2619 Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1901)
3/1/2004:
S.AMDT.2623 Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1901)
3/1/2004:
S.AMDT.2625 Considered by Senate. (consideration: CR S1901)
3/1/2004:
S.AMDT.2635 Amendment SA 2635 proposed by Senator Bingaman. (consideration: CR S1922-1928; text: CR S1922)
To modify the definition of reasonably foreseeable.
3/1/2004:
S.AMDT.2635 Amendment SA 2635 not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 28 - 59. Record Vote Number: 23.

[TexasRedeye]

Totally on the mark with this one, SoDak.

That was my comment last week, remember Tommy Dashole's re-election is at stake here. He now has a great "Pro-Gun" endorsement for SD voters on his side.

I wonder how long it will take his web site to relfect this winner in SD.

Again, great post SoDak

[epow]

I can't believ ypou people are happy about this fiasco. This is exactly what the Dems and RINOs wanted. Now the big city mayors and anti-gun billionaires can go on with their scheme to sue the American firearms industry into oblivion for at least another year. If Kerry is elected they won't have to worry about their plan being stopped for the next 5 years at least. They don't reallly care if they lose every case, they plan to bankrupt the industry with legal fees for defending their frivolous lawsuits.

The AWB and "loophole" amendments would have been stripped out in the house-Senate conference committee and a clean bill sent back to the Senate for final approval. But even if that didn't happen the house could simply have killed an amended bill when it voted on the final version, and that was DeLay's intention all along. Now there is no chance for a lawsuit preemption law for at least another year. Neal Knox warned anyone who would listen that this was the antis strategy to kill the preemption bill, and he was right.

You guys are all cheering this vote, and you don't even seem to realize the ANTIS WON. There was never any real danger of the AWB being renewed as long as the pro-gun house could have killed it, and now the entire effort to protect the gun makers was wasted for this year. All of you who called your Senators asking them to torpedo the Senate version of the bill unless it was clean as new snow should be happy now, UNTIL IT DAWNS ON YOU THAT WE LOST because we allowed the antis strategy to succeed. The antis are looking at the long term and you guys are looking at the short term. It is still theorectically possible for the AWB to be be renewed by a new bill. It won't be renewed because it can't pass the house, but it could be renewed if the house wanted it renewed. But it is not possible to get another preemption bill through this year, and that means more millions of dollars that the firearms industry will have to tack onto their prices to cover another year of legal expenses.

You guys think we won, but we actually lost and the antis are right now laughing at our stupidity for falling for it. After most manufacturers out out of business and a new 1911 costs $10,000, if you can find one, maybe some of you will finally see what the antis are up to.