The gun industry faces a growing threat of civil liability over gun violence despite a federal law intended to shield manufacturers from costly lawsuits.
New plaintiffs emerged from a rash of mass shootings. And gun-violence prevention groups have assembled more information about firearm distribution practices and criminal gun markets.
Cracks in the shield law’s immunity surfaced in the lawsuit that Sandy Hook families brought against Remington Arms over the school massacre.
In 2019, Connecticut’s highest court said that the families could pursue claims that Remington unscrupulously marketed its Bushmaster rifle to videogame playing, military-obsessed young men.
The government of Mexico is pursuing billions of dollars in damages from gun companies for allegedly arming cartels. Eight Democratic-led states have enacted laws making it easier to bring civil lawsuits against gun makers. And courts are weighing several lawsuits brought by families of mass-shooting victims.
The gun industry’s exposure to negligence and public-nuisance lawsuits was once assumed to be largely settled. Now, the issue looks destined for Supreme Court review.
In 2005, gun industry lobbyists persuaded a Republican-led Congress to pass a statute giving dealers, distributors and manufacturers broad immunity from a torrent of tort litigation.
Gun-control advocates and trial lawyers have spent years refining their legal theories and lobbying for new state laws to get around the federal statute’s constraints.
“It’s not this cloak of immunity that everybody originally thought it was,” said Philip Bangle, a senior litigation counsel with the Brady gun-violence prevention group.
The firearms industry says gun-control activists are defying Congress’s intent when it enacted the immunity law.
@DolphinBillRepublican1mo1MO
“All political power comes from the barrel of a gun. The Communist Party must command all the guns; that way, no guns can ever be used to command the party.”
--Mao Zedong
@JudiciaryJimmyGreen1mo1MO
Communist fear-mongering doesn't justify exempting any manufacturer from tort law. If a citizen believes a company's product has harmed them, they have a right to a trial.
Ironically, the "Freedom" Caucus has removed that right.
@JealousP4ndaMountain1mo1MO
I cannot wait until the US sues Mexico over all the deadly fentanyl they export to us - that kills over 100k Americans per year whereas only about 20k Mexicans are killed by all gun violence per year.
@P0l1t1calRodRepublican1mo1MO
Or the crimes that illegal immigrants commit after they have crossed the border from Mexico. Given the evidence of Mexico's past encouragement of illegal immigration to the US, if one accepts the liability argument, the case would be a slam dunk
@ISIDEWITH1mo1MO
How might holding gun manufacturers more accountable for gun violence change the way guns are marketed and sold?
@9LHW6N21mo1MO
It won’t, people ae the issue. All gun laws are an infringement on the second amendment
@9LHTLGNRepublican1mo1MO
Why should guns be banned when harm done with them is by mentally ill people? If you truly want less violence using guns you will ensure mental stability of those who might use a firearm to cause harm.
@ISIDEWITH1mo1MO
@ISIDEWITH1mo1MO
@NobleBobcatVeteran1mo1MO
If safety is so important to these legal experts, they would be seeking ways remove the indemnity shield of public officials who knowingly endanger the public by routinely releasing violent criminals.
@ISIDEWITH1mo1MO
The historical activity of users engaging with this general discussion.
Loading data...
Loading chart...
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
