In 2005, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). The law protects gun manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. The law was passed in response to a series of lawsuits filed against the gun industry in the late 1990s which claimed gun-makers and sellers were not doing enough to prevent crimes committed with their products. Proponents of the law argue that lawsuits will discourage gun manufacturers from supplying stores who sell guns that end up being used in violent crimes. Opponents argue that gun manufacturers are not responsible for random acts of violence committed with their products.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Discussions from these authors are shown:
These active users have achieved a basic understanding of terms and definitions related to the topic of Gun Liability
@B56992N1mo1MO
The only time I believe a lawsuit should take place in is when the person buying the firearm is underage, or if the person has a heavy criminal history. But, the manufacturer shouldn't get in trouble.
@B4XY8GV1mo1MO
I feel they should be able to only if the firearm dealer knew they had bad intentions or had a feeling they did but sold it anyway
@B477H4M2mos2MO
As long as the gun is being sold legally with all requirements needed to purchase the gun, then no. Once the gun leave the sellers hands its on the buyer.
If the gun was sold with the company having full knowledge of prior suspicious behavior or past criminal record and still sold the gun.
@B2Q5JCK4mos4MO
Yes, but only if the violence in question stemmed from a physical malfunction from the weapon's construction.
@9WMM3ZR8mos8MO
No, because there are laws that the business goes by. How would someone that works/owns a Gun store know someone’s intentions when they are purchasing this gun. They don’t know what they’re doing with it. Why should they be help responsible.
@9WHDZNY8mos8MO
i think if it harmed the victim on a mis fire or something wrong with the gun then yes you should have the right to sue. however, if you were attacked with a gun but another person then no because that's not their fault.
@9W963BQWomen’s Equality8mos8MO
I have mixed emotions on this one yes but also no and no because the firearms dealers arent the ones who pulled the trigger and theres a big chance that they didn't know the persons intentions of what would happen once they sold the gun to that person
@9W8R5QR8mos8MO
no they should sue the person that had the gun because a gun isn't dangerous until someone grabs it.
@9VNYRH38mos8MO
Only if the firearm was sold illegally and to someone who doesn't meet the requirements to purchase a firearm
@9T74GS99mos9MO
Dealers yes if they didn't use the proper evaluations, background checks etc. on the individual wanting the firearm
@9NC9Q9K1yr1Y
Yes, but only if dealers did not do any background checks or anything similar. In addition, manufacturers shouldn’t be held liable as it’s up to the dealer.
@9L8CSFV1yr1Y
it depends if the person who sold it knew the intentions of the person buying it was bad and they still sold it them they should be held accountable.
@9JGS8FP1yr1Y
Dealers should only be held responsible if they had any way of knowing what the buyer was going to do. If they had no information about the buyer's past crimes and were unaware, then dealers shouldn't be held responsible.
@9HH9VVX2yrs2Y
If someone plans to do harm with said weapons/guns. It is clear that the manufacturer or business selling these weapons are not taking much action to provide these weapons responsibly and thoroughly.
@9FLSRBG2yrs2Y
Yes, but only if the manufacturer is deemed to be negligent to the selling process.
@9FLK2D5Republican2yrs2Y
no because they cant tell someone how to use the weapon
@9DK3PG32yrs2Y
No, but there should be an investigation into the sale.
No because if they meet all the qualifications to have a gun then the firearms dealers cannot refuse to give them a gun also sometimes guns that are in violent crimes aren't even register to that person...
@9D4B6322yrs2Y
If they were selling them with no inspection of purpose, yes.
yes, but only if they are at fault for someone getting a gun who should have had their hands on on.
@96PHVVP3yrs3Y
No, they should only be held accountable for selling a firearm that's not in proper condition
@96FH9B83yrs3Y
The gun manufactures/ dealers have no responsibility of what somebody did with the gun but we should make it so gun laws or more restricted
@96FG4SQ3yrs3Y
@96F5D3R3yrs3Y
only if they sold it to a person that is metaly ill like they should know if they can haldel a gun
@96DZTVJ3yrs3Y
I would say no because it is not who makes or gives the gun other than there selling of the gun but. It is reliable in the person who fires the gun. So, no they should not.
@96C94WF3yrs3Y
No, the gun owner made the decision and is at fault. The dealer/manufacturer is just doing business.
@964Q4283yrs3Y
Yes, we should hold gun manufacturers and salesmen accountable for the violence that their products bring on, just like we should hold cigarette companies and salesmen accountable for decreasing the physical and mental health of their customers.
@95NF6TL3yrs3Y
Yes, but only dealers and only if said dealers failed to recognize that it would be dangerous to sell a firearm to the individual who committed the violent act.
@95NDTB63yrs3Y
No, as long as it was a user error, and not faulty equipment at fault.
yes and n because yes because they should do a better job then to just hand over a gun to anybody and no because it not 100% their fault.
@95MQJR63yrs3Y
No, they didn't tell anyone to shoot anyone or go against the law
@94HCZ523yrs3Y
Depends on if it was obvious like if a man came in and bought an AR10 with TONS of ammo then that's suspicious and he shouldn't of let him get the gun without more questions
@9444S843yrs3Y
No, Dealers and manufacturers have no control over how their weapons are used, and should not be held accountable, unless sufficient evidence is shown to prove they had personal involvement in the inciting incident.
@93RGZ933yrs3Y
No, only dealers who illegally sold the firearm or government agencies if there was a failure to flag the criminal.
@8ZZFBNX3yrs3Y
Only if the Dealers Failed to do a proper background check
@8ZVWPGR3yrs3Y
It depends on the situation, but more often than not, no.
@8ZLB5QD3yrs3Y
Yes, especially if the person they sold it to wasn't mentally or physically eligible to use a gun.
only if the manufacturer or dealer did not follow proper protocol that could've lead to the violence.
Yes, if there is proof that the dealer did not take necessary precautions to sell the firearm that was used.
@8YVV6793yrs3Y
No, because the companies intending the weapons to be used for assaults, so the criminals should be held liable, not the company.
@8YF7SG53yrs3Y
Yes, if the dealer failed to properly vet the buyer via backgrounds checks and other safeguards.
No, gun manufacturers do not control who has them, and gun dealers should only be sued if they did not give a security check on who they were giving it to.
@8XKKKV54yrs4Y
This honestly depends on the specific situation.
@8X54RD94yrs4Y
Yes, if the weapon was attained without the proper legal measures.
@8WWNJW94yrs4Y
No, the manufacturers and dealers didn't do anything wrong.
@8WP6L7J4yrs4Y
yes if the person they solid it to didn't pass the proper background checks
@8WBM4WN4yrs4Y
No, unless the firearm dealer did not go through the standard protocol with the consumer then he should be sued or be considered criminally negligent and be arrested.
@8W7JGFM4yrs4Y
No because they wouldn’t know what the person would do with it once they have a gun.
@8W6Y8594yrs4Y
No, technically the dealers and manufacturers made the person go through all of the proper processing for them to get their hands on that weapon.
@8V2K8FR4yrs4Y
yes and no but mostly because it is all wrong i think if the manufactuors pushed more and funded stricter background checks done by the sellers
@8SXT67C4yrs4Y
Yes if they have a history of selling guns to violent idividuals.
@8RRYPGC4yrs4Y
If there is a law about background checks and the person passed then it is not the dealers fault, but if the person should have failed then the dealer is accountable.
@8RBP7HG4yrs4Y
Only the people responsible
They should be able to sue the person who inflicted gun violence on them.
@8QXGT5J4yrs4Y
The dealer could be held acountable.
only if they did not take the necessary actions before selling that person the weapon.
@8PNCV545yrs5Y
No, one cannot sue a spoon factory because they got fat from using their product
@8P4BM835yrs5Y
if the firearm was sold illegally than yes or they did not certifu or test the person trying to purchase then gun
Yes, but only the dealers if they failed to follow basic background checks.
@8P2RL5X5yrs5Y
yes if the person got them but wasn't suppose to be able to get one
@8NW6C835yrs5Y
Yes, but only the firearm dealer if the dealer failed to do any sort of background check or psychological test.
@8NLT6FS5yrs5Y
NO they shouldn't be responsible because someone for someone else
@8MTQHD35yrs5Y
Only if they did not preform proper background checks and psychological testing.
@8MMVPMY5yrs5Y
depends on how long it has been since the incident
@8MJXD375yrs5Y
They should be held accountable for how easy it was for someone to purchase a weapon without any background checks. They are partly responsible.
@8MJWSYJ5yrs5Y
No, Victims should sue the person who did the violence, gun sellers are not accountable for what someone does with said gun.
@8LY9S2R5yrs5Y
No, it is not the manufacturer's fault that the person who purchased the gun was violent with it.
@8LBBZ5Z5yrs5Y
Yes, but only if it’s because they didn’t check the persons background that should have been checked.
@8L4HPB65yrs5Y
No, the guns didn't do it the criminal did.
@8L3TTWC5yrs5Y
If something bad or wrong happens then yes you should be able to sue them for what they have done. Because what they have done was wrong if they hurt you.
@8KZFPJ45yrs5Y
Are they going to sue car manufacturers if they are hit by a car on purpose?
@8KSQVZRIndependent5yrs5Y
No, because it is not the manufactures and dealers fault that you bought a firearm. Now if the gun went off on accident, and that could be proven with factual evidence, then I believe the person who is being charged should have the right to press charges against the manufactures.
@8KSBCDQ5yrs5Y
That depends on how the gun(s) were bought
@8KRFXNT5yrs5Y
no, they are not responsible for their products causing harm, they are supporting our 2nd amendment rights.
@8KDKHZK5yrs5Y
Only the people who shot them not the dealer.
@8KDHQFZ5yrs5Y
No, because it's not the dealers/manufacturers fault that the victim was hurt with their firearm, it was the person fault who accidentally or purposefully fired the gun.
@8K5NGL35yrs5Y
Not all people obtain their guns legally. Most people who commit violent crimes with guns, obtain them illegally and it can be hard to trace where the gun came from.
@8K598C35yrs5Y
no, it's not the guns dealers fault the person made that choice.
@8JPSJCM5yrs5Y
Yes. Do what you want. I could not care less.
@8JLYPSP5yrs5Y
No but they should be able to sue the person who inflicted them unless it was self-defense
@8J4KNY45yrs5Y
no, because it not the manufacturers or the dealer's fault.
@8J2V5VC5yrs5Y
No, because the make them they did shot the gun.
@8HXGDCT5yrs5Y
No, unless the background check wasn't as thorough as it should have been. That would be the dealers fault.
@8H2TC3L5yrs5Y
If it was sold to someone under age
@8H24CQP5yrs5Y
No, victims of gun violence should never be allowed to sue firearms dealers unless they were a victim of their own gun that they purchased from a company backfiring and harming them, which I'd still say they shouldn't sue the manufacturer because it was their choice of gun, not the manufacturer's choice. Along with that, if a victim of gun violence is shot by somebody, that is the fault of the perpetrator, NOT the fault of the company for giving the perpetrator the gun.
@8GJW59TRepublican5yrs5Y
Depends on what had happened
No, the gun cannot shot by itself. It is not the gun doing the killing, it's the person behind it. The gun is just an object. The person that has the gun is what makes it a weapon or not.
@8FZYT475yrs5Y
No, the manufactures didn't shoot the gun they only made it.
@8FYJY9V5yrs5Y
Yes if the seller sold the gun to the buyer and they go do something wrong with it they should be held accountable I think people should be background checked before they are allowed to purchase a gun.
@8FLKH6F5yrs5Y
Again a complicated issued.
1) Anyone who shouldn't be in possession of a gun and wants one, will find a way to obtain one.
2) People who are law-abiding citizens will comply with any required background checks.
3) Ultimately anyone suspected or charged with an act of gun violence is responsible for their actions. They willingly and knowingly pulled the trigger.
4) Only in the event it can be proven that a firearms dealer or manufacturer was negligent in not performing a valid background check should they be sued.
5) Again... the person pulling the trigger is the one who should be sued.
@8F3PRXH5yrs5Y
Yes, if they were negligent and didn’t follow proper vetting procedures
If they did not do a good enough background check
@8CFRGXP5yrs5Y
Yes and no. If the dealer went through the process correctly then no but if they didn't then yes.
@8C9TGBY5yrs5Y
Yes and no. Depending on what the situation is. If the dealer went through the process correctly then no but if he/she didn't the yes.
@9BWP2R32yrs2Y
guns don't kill people, people kill people. and only people can be their own downfall.
@9B2RC3W2yrs2Y
depends if they sold it illegaly
@99ZYY6Q2yrs2Y
only if that firearm dealer is the cause for it if not then no.
Join in on more popular conversations.
