Colorado lawmaker proposes liability law for assault weapons owners, sellers

KMGH ^ | Wednesday, February 27, 2013

[Red Steel]

Senate President John Morse proposed bill

DENVER - Sellers and owners of assault weapons could be liable for damages caused by shootings under a bill proposed by Colorado's Democratic Senate president.

The bill is being introduced in the state Senate on Wednesday. Colorado Springs Sen. John Morse says his goal is to make assault weapon owners and sellers responsible for what he calls dangerous weapons.

"The bill I envision... it will deem these guns as unreasonably dangerous," said Morse. "It will not ban them, it will just hold people strictly liable, strictly responsible for what occurs. The effect is that everyone in the chain will be responsible for the actions of that gun."

"It will only apply to military-style assault weapons, firearms that are not handguns, bolt action rifles or shotguns," said Morse.

Critics of Morse's bill say it's a backdoor way to ban assault weapons. Republicans have also said Morse's idea may conflict with a 2005 federal law that protects gun makers and sellers from liability for crimes committed with their products.

Morse says jurors would decide whether sellers or owners should be held liable in individual cases.

The bill is part of a package of Democratic proposals in response to recent mass shootings. Other bills call for universal background checks for gun purchases and a ban on high-capacity magazines.

[familyop]

"Morse says jurors would decide whether sellers or owners should be held liable in individual cases."

Colorado jurors. Anyone thinking about letting that bill pass had best think again. Consider the "first settler syndrome" in CO too (established residents on the Range doing anything they can to have others forced back off of the Range). Consider the regulations in general, too (regulations against building, tiny manufacturing operations and many other productive activities: communistic).

[familyop]

"Republicans have also said Morse's idea may conflict with a 2005 federal law that protects gun makers and sellers from liability for crimes committed with their products."

Everyone will know that as a class war attack. For the time being, many people can easily afford to buy $1,000,000+ coverage for each firearm and would much rather have that kind of situation--especially in CO (disarming all of the lower income trash). Any of you considering letting it pass, should think again on that, too.

The likelihood of a bond collapse, skyrocketing interest rates, debt repudiation and currency adjustment is very high in the very near future. There won't be many well-to-do folks after that except for a few remaining in high government positions ("essentials").

See the complete outlawing of all firearms ahead for everyone, including pistols (retaliation from outlawed voters). Also remember the ingenuity that remains in people who repair and build for themselves. Such people can find their legal way around just about any regulations.

[Red in Blue PA]

Notice how none of these laws affect the thugs and shooters in the inner cities?

[familyop]

"Nothing like trying to pass a law that has already been decided against in court."

It would further outlaw the Second Amendment right of non-wealthy folks long enough to disarm them (followed by political retaliations against all who could afford such big-premium insurance). Think about how much appeals cost now. I've seen good wealthy people officiously robbed of everything, which prevented them from appealing.

[Monty22002]

I say go for, but have poll taxes back first.

[familyop]

"That is what the registration is all about, making it easier to trace the owner of the gun and make him liable for any crimes that take place using his gun if it is still registered to him."

Great comment. Another thing to consider. Insurance companies already have access to quite a bit of private information, and police do use that. So do others. Yes, mandated insurance for firearms would be a gold mine of a registration system for political factions.

[ConradofMontferrat]

Let me know when this A$$hat passes a law that holds Rambo SWAT teams liable for kicking down the wrong door in the middle of the night.

And the moron judge who approved the move.

And the individual wannabe’s who did the deed. (especially the A$$wipe who gets “skeeerd” and shoots the dog.)

And the idiot DA who thought it was “A Good Ideeea!”

Till then bung face, keep your slimy fingers off my hardware.

(Not talking to you RS!)

[Doomonyou]

I gave all my guns a good talking to. They know to always hold my hand and when I put them down for bed in their rooms, they’re not allowed to come out until I come and get them.

I got mine trained too. I just say, "Stay!" and they don't move. Still working on the, "Come here!" part.

[Eva]

No, they are not going to confiscate the guns unless you cannot afford the insurance, then you will have to voluntarily turn in the guns. The more guns you own, the higher the insurance. Many people will not be able to afford to insure more than one gun.

[ez]

So when I refuse to insure my small cache of firearms, what will they do?

[RWB Patriot]

Hmm, what amuses me about stuff like this is that the people who push it would howl like banshees if it was suggested all homosexuals or all blacks should be punished for the actions of a few.

[RWB Patriot]

Hmm, what amuses me about stuff like this is that the people who push it would howl like banshees if it was suggested all homosexuals or all blacks should be punished for the actions of a few.

[Eva]

Tell you to turn in the guns if they are registered. My guess is that they will try to make the gun registrations expire, like a car registration. Then, if you fail to pay the registration fee, they will ticket you. At the time of the annual registration you will be required to show proof of insurance.

This is all conjecture, but it is from hearing the Democrats talk about the benefit of universal gun registration.

[MasterGunner01]

Perhaps the pols need term limits: tree, rope, assembly required, repeat. That really takes a bite out of crime. Politicians are America’s original and oldest crime syndicate.

[jim_trent]

> “It will only apply to military-style assault weapons, firearms that are not handguns, bolt action rifles or shotguns,”

I guess this means my lever-actions are on the banned list too, then.

[fattigermaster]

If they've seen Chuck Connors in The Rifleman, they know all lever actions are machine guns in disguise. ;^)

[familyop]

Here's what I was referring to in regards to their plans for gun control. Imagine the same mandated against all owners of firearms, and remember the incremental nature of some of our opposition's tactics.

Pennsylvania Democrat’s Gun Control Insurance
Flopping Aces ^ | 02-28-13 | CJ

Waters' bill would require every person licensed to carry a concealed firearm to purchase and maintain $1 million in 'firearm liability insurance.'"

[familyop]

Another point that is obvious to some of us: judicial-related folks of all kinds could make a killing from such laws. The lobby for it, thought stealthy and out of the limelight, is probably enormous.

[Red Steel]

Yes that same thought came to me today of Dems always throwing money to their lawyers by creating conflict... as usual.