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
This situation depends on who purchased the weapons and from whom and how the weapons were used. Certainly, the federal government needs to regulate the sell of guns more closely in order to limit the accessibility and quantity of guns owned both legally and illegally by US citizens.
@8XYPD3W3yrs3Y
No because they didn't sell it to kill innocent.
@8XSNJSY4yrs4Y
yes, Depending on whether or not the company provides the right kind of background check, phycological review, and proper training was established.
@8XQMMK34yrs4Y
Yes, if there was improper background checks
@8XPVH334yrs4Y
Yes, only if the seller/manufacturer was negligent in selling a weapon to a reasonably dangerous person.
Yes, if it is found that the selling of the firearm was illegal, or otherwise not taken seriously.
@8WSX8NQ4yrs4Y
Depends if they sold it to them without an alliance
@8WSX3YY4yrs4Y
both the people who used the gun and the one who sold it to them
If it is from them that the gun was obtained yes
@8WLN6Z74yrs4Y
If there is an adequate reason to sue them, then yes, absolutely.
@8WHVCDV4yrs4Y
Yes, if the dealer wasn't responsible in background checking/verifying the person who bought the gun wasn't going to use the weapon for such purposes. The manufacturers, not as much.
@8WHNCFZ4yrs4Y
If given to a minor or someone who is not elligable to own a gun, then yes, otherwise no
@8WHN7XP4yrs4Y
If it is used illegally and with reason
yes, only if a full background and other tests were not done properly
@8W3SG9R4yrs4Y
Depends if they went through an ID check and all of the requirements to get the gun. If the fault is on the owners then it shouldn't be thru the firearm.
@8VZWXHL4yrs4Y
Yes, as long as there was proof the dealer/manufacturers did not do their job correctly when it comes to background checks, gave liability of the firearm to someone who isn't allowed to have one, etc...
@8VYM6HD4yrs4Y
Yes, but only if they didn't take the necessary precautions when selling the weapon.
@8VKSBJXIndependent4yrs4Y
If the gun was sold without checking ID.
@8VGS5YF4yrs4Y
if they didn’t go through some sort of gun training and all
@8V62W234yrs4Y
yes, only if the firearm was bought or used illegally
@8TXCSFJ4yrs4Y
That’s a hard no. A shovel is not responsible for the digging of a ditch. A gun cannot be responsible for a death. Both are only tools.
@8T2X2PS4yrs4Y
No, the person that bought and used to gun for violence should be able to be sued.
@8SXRWKBRepublican4yrs4Y
No, the only person who should be sued/charged is the shooter.
@8S47L2Y4yrs4Y
they should see how deeply they did a background check or if they did one at all and if they didnt do one then they should be able to sue the dealer
@8PSRFW7Independent4yrs4Y
It should depend on how badly they were injured and whether the person with the the gun legally or illegally go the gun
@8PNVHZR5yrs5Y
Yes, but only if the gun illegally
@8P9TYBD5yrs5Y
No, unless it is actually the dealers or manufacturers themselves
@bentran5yrs5Y
No, the firearm company is not liable for the actions of the user. The liable party here is the person who put the victim in harms way, and that would and should be brought to criminal court
@8HH6JCKRepublican5yrs5Y
I think the person who did the act should be sued
@8D378S45yrs5Y
Yes, they should be partially liable for the death of victims of gun violence. The rationale being they facilitate and encourage the purchasing and usage of guns, through various ways including advertising.
@97S47493yrs3Y
Yes, but only if the dealer failed to do proper checks on who they sold the firearm to.
Only dealers if they didn't follow all safety precautions and paperwork before selling the gun.
The manufactures just produce the weapons. If it is sold and owned by someone, they can't control how the gun is being used. But if the weapon itself from the factory has a major fault that can kill, then you can sue them.
@8XQWMMD4yrs4Y
I think the dealers should do a back round check on everyone buying a gun no matter what.
@8WJZHLF4yrs4Y
If they are liable, i.e. no proper background check, then yes
yes but only if they failed to check the users history/red flags
@8WJPWQD4yrs4Y
Yes, but only if the processes to buy the gun were not followed.
@8VYNKL54yrs4Y
Depends on the circumstance. If the dealers/manufacturers took all precautions necessary, then no, but if they ran no background checks or any precautions then yes.
@8S65NPJ4yrs4Y
I feel as if a fir arm shouldn't be sold to anyone who not mentally stabled and that needs to be made sure of before the purchase is allowed .
Join in on more popular conversations.
