Congressman Hopes to Give Gun Violence Victims the Right to Sue

Amid the debate over whether Congress and the White House should move to reform firearm laws, one congressman wants to give victims of gun violence their own weapon: The right to sue.

Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), a former federal prosecutor, announced Monday that he plans to introduce a bill this session that would undo a 2005 law, which he says shields the gun industry from liability "when it acts with negligence and disregard for public safety."

Schiff's Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act would strip away immunity in state and federal court from civil liability for licensed manufacturers, distributors, and dealers of firearms, as well as their trade associations, in most negligence and products liability actions, Schiff said in a press release.

"Good gun companies don't need special protection from the law, and bad companies don’t deserve it," Schiff said in a statement. "Other industries across our country don't enjoy this protection under the law – from pharmaceutical firms to automotive manufacturers or even cigarette companies – and it's inexcusable for Congress to give the NRA and gun manufacturers a blank check."

Numerous cases around the nation have been dismissed on the basis of the 2005 law, called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, even when the gun dealers acted in a fashion that would qualify as negligent if it involved any other product, Schiff said. Victims in these cases are denied the right to even discover evidence and then introduce evidence of negligence.

Reforms to gun laws have become a topic since the mass shooting at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn., that included 20 children and six adult staff members who died from gunshot wounds.

President Barack Obama, in a press conference Monday morning at the White House, said he would be meeting with Vice President Joe Biden this week for a detailed discussion on what sort of "sensible, common sense steps that can be taken to make sure that the kind of violence we saw at Newtown doesn't happen again."

Biden and a task force of top White House staff, including Attorney General Eric Holder Jr., held a series of meetings with firearm victim groups and gun rights groups last week. Obama said during the press conference that he would support stronger background checks for gun buyers, keeping magazine clips with high capacity out of the wrong hands, and potentially banning assault weapons.

Obama said he could accomplish some reforms through executive action alone.

"I'm confident that there are some steps that we can take that don't require legislation and that are within my authority as president," Obama said at the press conference. "And where you get a step that has the opportunity to reduce the possibility of gun violence, then I want to go ahead and take it."

Comments

[Michael Caldwell]

A silly law offered by a grandstanding but ineffectual pol who, like the political hacks who used children as props (a favorite of democrats)in their "gun control" executive orders, want to be seen as doing something even while they do nothing. Does not the intentional wrongdoing of the shooter serve as an intervening action disrupting the chain of causality? A gun is an instrument intended to cause harm --when the shooter finds this necessary. It should come as no surprise that, when used by the dangerous loons whom Jimmy Carter's efforts prevented us from institutionalizing, guns tend to inflict fatal havoc!

[Doug]

There is no justification whatsoever to hold a manufacturer liable for the misdeeds of the consumer who purchased the product. As the law stands now it is possible to sue a manufacturer for faulty products and misconduct in distribution of the product.

Schiff is aiming to bankrupt firearms companies with frivolous lawsuits, which is why PLCAA was passed in the first place.

[Dissident]

"Good gun companies don't need special protection from the law, and bad companies don’t deserve it."

Yet, all Congressman, judges and prosecutors, no matter how corrupt or culpable, have absolute immunuty from suit by their victims. See any hypocrisy here, Representative Schiff?

[Ray]

There should be an aggressive effort to educate and encourage surviving victims and family of non-surviving victims to seek plaintiff representation, and sue ALL negligent parties and/or their estates(i.e., anyone who is negligent in allowing a weapon they are responsible for to get in the hands of a shooter. Example: Newtown. Wow was that mother negligent...in mnay ways!) Start hitting the gun owners in the pocket book and we'll see more "locked up" guns. Nothing worse than hiting somone in the pocketbook. Impute negligence as far as possible...and be very public about it! Soon, the guns will be under "fortress protection"! Trust me!

[Dissident]

Even if the law was adopted, most cases would be thrown out for lack of Article III standing since the injury is caused by the gunman, not the manufacturer,distributor, or dealer.

[Brooks White]

The problem with liability of either manufacturers, distributors or owners of these weapons, is that it would be insured. An alternative may be to ban the possession or use of these semi-automatic assault rifles with 10 round or more clips, except at licensed gun ranges or at hunting clubs (or sponsored trips). These weapons would be held as bailee's at the range/club and they would have strict risk management requirements. There would naturally be limited exceptions (law enforcement; repair shops; gun shops; etc.). It would apply to all existing owners and new purchasers. On sale the weapon would be shipped directly to the licensed range/club. There would be both criminal and a very high civil penalty, which could not be excused in bankruptcy, or insured. This would be no more restrictive than restricting free speech where there could be a public safety issue and still preserves the right to bear arms. While hand guns present a greater problem in terms of suicides and murders, these weapons are little more than status symbols and sends the wrong message about how as a society we feel about our children. Putting more fire power in schools would only mean more cross-fire.

[Wade Jackson]

The only thing the 2005 law protects manufacturers and sellers from is negligent or harmful acts perpetrated by individuals or third parties.

You can't sue Ford if someone is negligent in their driving and injures you.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/q/qualified-civil-liability-action/

[Lynn]

I live in a town that borders Newtown, CT and have been an advocate of stronger gun control laws well before the Sandy Hook tradegy. I do not think there will ever be a law passed that allows victims families to sue gun manufacturers but I applaud the attempt. There has to be an end to senseless deaths and violence at the hands of gun owners who are criminals or mentally unstable.