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
@B4TV7KX1mo1MO
they just make the guns its the persons responsibility of what they do to it, if I make you a sandwich is it my fault you decided to throw it?
@B3Z6PFN2mos2MO
Yes if they neglected to search into signs and patterns that would could lead to dangerous activity like various mental health and past
@B3VFHPC3mos3MO
They should be able to sue if the gun is made in a defective way such that it satisfies the elements for product liability
@B2C45G55mos5MO
Yes, only if the person who owned the gun and caused the violence had legal reasons not to own a gun but yet was given one. If the gun owner stole one or legally owned a gun suing should not be an option as it's not the dealer or manufacturer's fault for what the owner did with said gun
@9ZVTBVW6mos6MO
The company is not liable for gun crimes unless they willingly sold to someone they knew to be dangerous
@9Y573JN7mos7MO
Only if the gun itself had an issue causing I hurry OR the company sold to someone with a pervious history or criminal record of gun violence
@9XYZQ9Y7mos7MO
Depending on the situation, if it was an accident due to a faulty firearm, then yes. However, if it is an individual being retarded, then that individual should be the one sued.
@9XVJ75G7mos7MO
It depends on how bad the injury is and it also depends on if the person really knows what they were doing.
@9XH42BJ7mos7MO
No because the manufacturers should not be liable, but the dealers MUST have better authentication processes.
@9WRG68H7mos7MO
Victims should be allowed to sue negligent parents for raising a child or not reporting mental health standards for firearms. (Assuming it is a legally obtained firearm)
@9WP3SKJ7mos7MO
Yes and no because if dealers have all correct papers and is not doing anything bad and someone who buy a gun from them uses it for bad then no but if they don't have good paper work and sell gun to people with a bad background then yes they should be sued
@9VQ9SZW8mos8MO
It depends on what happened to them if it was a threat and not a firing then no if they were fired at and were not hit then no if they were hit it is up to them to decide it is not the company's fault it is the person who was wielding the gun.
@9TV3GTY8mos8MO
no, only dealers should be able to be sued if selling it to the person was illegal in the first place
@9TQSGRK8mos8MO
If you'r registered to own a gun and have a license for it and it gets stolen and you report it stolen but used to gun violence that isn't your fault
@9SGS95NJustice party member9mos9MO
If there could've been any awarness from the dealer/manufacturer that the customer would've done harm with the firearm, then it should be accountable.
@9SF42LF9mos9MO
If the firearms dealer was in competent about who they were selling to then yes they should be allowed to sue the firearms dealers.
@9RQSBH910mos10MO
Yes, only if the dealer or manufacturer has done something directly contributing to the crime (i.e. dealer sold a weapon to an unqualified person)
@9MRR2SC1yr1Y
no because all though they sold it unless you can find they dealer guilty of having some kinda malicious intent you can not doing anything besides his job but in the United States of America you more then likely could in fact I know you could because the government Is money hungry and they will openly listen to you to if you not just talking nonsense and pay court fees.
@9MMY3BY1yr1Y
Yes, companies or stores should have a couple day long investigation before handing over a gun. They should check a persons mental health status, if they've ever had a criminal record of violence, and require a person to give a document signed by a licensed therapist or psychologist with approval for the purchase.
@9MM9F75Republican1yr1Y
No, because they just make the guns, the actions being taken with the gun are on you, because you had a decision to not kill someone or do something bad with the gun.
Yes, but only dealers if the dealer had known something was wrong when selling it to the person, or knowing something was up. There can be some ways to prevent selling guns to people who intend to use the weapon for violence
@9LMXRC81yr1Y
Standard handgun or hunting rifle/shotgun, no. Assault weapons and weapons with extended clips or magazines, yes.
@9KML2931yr1Y
I mean they didn't cause the accident? So why would you sue them if they weren't even the one's pulling any triggers?
@9KHSS381yr1Y
This is difficult to answer. I think if the dealer had knowledge of a crime before it takes place then yes, there should be some responsibility on their end.
@9K6VDCZ1yr1Y
i hold no view in this question and have a neutral look at it its not my place to say whether someone should have the right to sue or not it depends on what they are sewing for it is a stupid reason then no they should not be allowed
@9HFQFWR1yr1Y
Yes, but only if the dealers and/or manufacturers purposefully gave the gun to the person to cause harm
If the person that was sold a gun a history of mental illness or something like that, the dealer should me liable
@9HDZ5P31yr1Y
It would overall be the fire arms dealers fault if they knew the person would use it for crimes but a manufacturer should never be sued because without guns would our military be able to fight no and they don't decide who gets them unless they manufacture and deal them.
@9H7TS4D2yrs2Y
Yes because if the background check was not thorough enough and they gave a criminal a gun, the dealers would be liable.
@9GYMX8G2yrs2Y
This is difficult to say. If the company showed obvious neglect in any way, then there should be repercussions for that.
@9GYG6ZM2yrs2Y
It depends on if the person who committed the gun violence got it legally. If they sold the gun to a competent adult who then gave it to someone who wouldn't have been able to get the gun or used it themselves, no. If they sold it to a teenager or someone who wouldn't have been able to get it, yes.
@9GXKBT6Transhumanist2yrs2Y
Same for the negligence one, but certain firearms like Automatics should be called into question even if negligence is not a factor.
If they didn't do any background checks or they are not running a secure business then yes otherwise no.
@9G9B85L2yrs2Y
Only if they sold to someone who is a minor or a gun that is illegal. If they did not know that the person wasn't mentally well then they should not get in trouble for that. It's hard to know what people are really thinking.
@9FP96LN2yrs2Y
If the gun company markets in a way that promotes violence or to at-risk demographics
@9FNBW3QIndependent2yrs2Y
No only the person who used the Firearms to harm ppl
@9FHZSTMProgressive2yrs2Y
Yes, if the firearms dealer didn't do a proper background check, psychological check, and give them training, they deserve to be sued. If they did and the trainee still went against, the law, the dealers aren't liable to be sued.
I think you should sue the person who bought the gun.
@9DPPLDSIndependent2yrs2Y
This issue should be left only to those responsible, who have more knowledge and the parties/victims involved in the issue itself.
@9D5V6R32yrs2Y
No, sue/charge the one who pulled the trigger and commited the crime, not the ones who sold and made the guns!
@9CJHBMK2yrs2Y
If the gun was purchased illegally, yes.
@9CJB7592yrs2Y
Yes, If they wrongfully sold them a gun, when they weren't allowed to have one in the first place.
@9BZM3FH2yrs2Y
No because its not the guns fault its the operator the gun never hurt anybody its an inanimate object its the person behind it that does the hurting
@9BYJXL32yrs2Y
Yes, but only dealers that are directly involved with the transaction, as they should have enough common sense not to allow this.
@9BYGVD62yrs2Y
No, a gun is only a tool and the manufacturers or dealers have no control over how people use guns.
@9BH27QTIndependent2yrs2Y
No, as long as the owner of the gun can legally buy the firearm it isn't the manufacturers fault.
@982L2BK3yrs3Y
I think the only way they should be able to sue the fire arm dealers is if they sold it to someone who has a criminal past
@974F4HQ3yrs3Y
no they shouldn't sue companies of guns, instead they should sue the person with the gun.
@96GPD4RProgressive3yrs3Y
No, that's opening a door that could lead to wrongful prosecution. They should definitely be regimented more than they currently are.
@96D472NRepublican3yrs3Y
Guns dont kill people, Crazy people with guns kill people
@95XHGMXLibertarian3yrs3Y
If the dealers didnt do extensive background checks
@95XH7D33yrs3Y
only if the firearm was purchased unlawfully
@95WRGCH3yrs3Y
No, the owner of the weapon and the person who used it should be the only people held responsible
@95PYP4M3yrs3Y
The victim of gun violence should sue the attacker or the attacker's remaining family, and receive medical coverage from them for the rest of their lives, just like how vehicle accident victims get treated. Suing the company is retarded, because the company is not responsible for how their products are used. There's people who kill with bats and axes, yet any surviving victim of said attacks don't sue companies that make bats or axes, now, do they? Good lord...
@95NCSPK3yrs3Y
Yes, but only if it can be proven that they practice or promote methods of selling firearms that could be considered negligent
@95JKW643yrs3Y
It depends what happened and what the situation is.
@92MWXB93yrs3Y
yes, only if the dealers and manufacturers said there is nothing the person can do
@92KZYQZ3yrs3Y
Yes, if it was sold illegally or for illegal activity.
@8ZYMRPW3yrs3Y
It depends on the length of the background check
@8ZXVKM33yrs3Y
If they are gotten through the black market or sold illegally.
@8ZHM4J63yrs3Y
As long as dealers and manufactures abide by law to give weapon they should not be sued.
@8ZCVG573yrs3Y
Yes, as long as there is evidence that they were involved with the selling to the individual
@8Z3MWRM3yrs3Y
Yes, but only if they fail to ensure the weapon should have never been given to the individual.
@8YSLZCG3yrs3Y
Yes, only if the arm was sold to the person who harmed them illegally
@8YPHR5H3yrs3Y
No it is not their fault that the person who bought the gun made that choice. The seller didn't know the intentions that the buyer had for the gun. There should be background checks though. You should know the past of the buyer, and if they have a history of gun violence.
@8YF67HG3yrs3Y
The dealers and manufacturers should only be held liable if they were knowingly or intentionally selling guns to be used for illegal purposes
@8YCYZB53yrs3Y
Yes, if the dealers fail to do an extensive background check to the best of their ability to ensure that the buyer is of sound body and mind
@8Y2RY2W3yrs3Y
Only if the dealers did not take proper precautions for selling the weapon.
@8Y2QQKLIndependence3yrs3Y
Only if they didnt make sure the person they where selling to was mentally fit to have a gun
@8XRWW8B3yrs3Y
Yes, in the case that a manufacturing defect caused the injury
@8XRWCD2Republican3yrs3Y
only if the loosing party did not make sure that they were a safe person to have the gun.
@8XRSPVB3yrs3Y
A victim should only be able to sue the company that sold the gun to the suspect but the victim should not be able to sue just any company.
Only if they did not use the proper background checks before giving them the gun
@8XQJD5Z3yrs3Y
Yes, if the manufacturers did not take the proper background/safety checks needed.
@8XHYPRZ4yrs4Y
yes, if they harmed them.
@8XHQ5Q7Republican4yrs4Y
No, It is not the manufactures fault that someone mentally ill/ distrubed got ahold of a gun, but should make the restrictions higher.
@8XF7Y8H4yrs4Y
The gun doesn't kill, PEOPLE KILL!!! Sue the killers family but the manufacturer only offered a gun. A persons intentions will define the use of the gun they buy.
@8XB9ML9Republican4yrs4Y
No, if the company has done proper background and mental health checks then they should not be eligible to be sued.
@8X7H2HV4yrs4Y
No, safety precautions should have been carefully explained.
yes, but not if the violence was not purposeful
@8X3RPQK4yrs4Y
No, but firearms dealers should be investigated
@8WX54PG4yrs4Y
No, It was the person who fired the gun choice to shoot the gun. it wasn't the manufactured the gun choice.
@8WWTLM94yrs4Y
No, government is responsible for allowing gun violence to happen this easily by letting firearms be bought and carried.
@8WWMRB94yrs4Y
No, but they should be able to sue the person that did that to the victim
@8WSK8LJ4yrs4Y
They should sue the people who used the weapon against them
@8WQ9DYM4yrs4Y
no but only if the gun was sold from that shop and they aren't willing to tell them who they sold them to
@8WNNB6X4yrs4Y
honestly this could be a yes and an no answer because it really depends on the situation
@8WNHYZD4yrs4Y
Yes, Only if the gun violence involved the dealer directly
@8WG752Q4yrs4Y
No only sue the one that handle the gun
@8WDSRWR4yrs4Y
if the firearm dealer sold the gun to the person knowing they had bad intentions or a record, then yes.
@8W3ZRLL4yrs4Y
No, I feel like it is the victims' responsibility to treat the gun as careful as possible
Yes, if the dealer does not do good background checks, I believe this is negligent.
@8TXSMZ5Republican4yrs4Y
Only if they did not check or background check the person enough. If they did not get enough information about the buyer.
@8TXRWXW4yrs4Y
So only for the medical bills
@8TT3XY84yrs4Y
Yes but only in the case of a negligent sale.
@8TRGK7S4yrs4Y
No. People need to understand the GUN didnt kill the person, the one HOLDING the gun did this. Even if they didnt have a firearm, they could still find a way to do what they wanted with other devices.
@8THJ9JXRepublican4yrs4Y
No unless a dealer knowingly sold a firearm to a criminal. Or did not do the proper background check.
@8TFSYBB4yrs4Y
Why would they sue them instead of the family of the suspect?
@8SXFWFHWomen’s Equality4yrs4Y
No, the gun manufacturers should not be held accountable. They should sue the person who caused the violence.
Join in on more popular conversations.
