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
@9BZPST42yrs2Y
They should sue the person with the gun
@B5CVQBSRepublican3wks3W
If they gave them the gun illegally and they didn't have the requriements to get one then they should be sued.
@B46HJD22mos2MO
No, the manufacturers and firearms dealers are not the one pulling the trigger its the person using the weapon.
@B3X3G7S3mos3MO
It not exactly the manufacturers faults but they should make sure to background check the buyers and make sure they have an ID.
@B3S7YYR3mos3MO
No, due to it not being the fault of the dealers and manufacturers if another person uses a gun, but if it is a problem with the gun, then it would be a yes.
@B3CBM2V3mos3MO
Yes, if they know they were selling illegally, if it wasn't illegal at the time they wouldn't have known
@B3C4KF63mos3MO
I feel they cant sue the fire arm dealers because they weren't the ones who had hurt you, you should take the shooter to court instead
@B32H3CP3mos3MO
only if they knew something was wrong with the person who bought the gun or knew they were underage or wasn't in the right mindset.
@B2FHKHR4mos4MO
No unless the attacker got the gun from a gun dealer who did not do a thorough background and Id check.
@B29QZ3Q5mos5MO
People kill people, not the guns. unless there is a malfunction in said gun, then yes they should be able to sue
@9ZWKGK2Independent 6mos6MO
only if it was a clear mess up on the dealers part, proving that it was obvious he should not have sold that gun
@9ZTCNW56mos6MO
If they shot their selves by accident they should sue the company for not adding safety mechanics to the gun, but if someone else shot them, they should sue who shot them.
@9ZBXJFS7mos7MO
Yes, but only dealers where the plaintiff can prove there was some kind of wrongdoing done by said dealer.
@9XZQ2ZV7mos7MO
If the business sells a gun to someone who has intent to harm others or themselves or for illegal activity they should be held liable
@9XBD85G7mos7MO
depending on the way the dealer sold the weapon and how much research they did on the person they sold it to should provide an answer to the question
@9X9C4XG7mos7MO
I think it really depends if the company knew that person was gonna use it that way or if they knew they were a felon and still sold them a gun then yes
@9WFBS2W7mos7MO
Yes, it is our right to sue anyone for any reason, however only the manufacturer should be held liable if it is a manufacturing issue, and the dealer if they hadn't taken the proper restrictive precautions
@9VTXSJD8mos8MO
I believe that only the victim can sue the dealer not the manufacturers, because the dealer should do more intensive background checks.
@9VRRP838mos8MO
well in some cases the manufacturer docent know that there gun will be used violently or a teen may have stole the gun from there parent so yes and no
Depending on how much research was done on the purchaser. If it was a sale made carelessly then yes, but if a lot of background was done and cleared, the business had no idea of knowing the person would commit such a horrid act. Truly a situational question.
@9VNLKM38mos8MO
No, they aren't the ones causing it as long as the dealers are making sure the recipients are meeting the criteria of owning a gun
@9VNCRGC8mos8MO
If it is found that the firearm was sold under suspicious circumstances, or sold to a person(s) that for any reason shouldn’t have been able to have a firearm under the risk of being use for dangerous means, the victim of the firearm owner should be able to sue.
@9VLV9L88mos8MO
Yes the victims should be allowed to sue firearms dealers but not manufactures. If the firearm dealer had reasonable suspicion that the gun would be used to harm another person then they should be held reliable
@9V2WCYF8mos8MO
no, they didn't shoot you so it shouldn't be the makers getting the sue. it should be the man/women who shot you or their families
@9TX4YBH8mos8MO
Yes, dealers should be allowed to be sued but only if they didn’t follow the law in the sale of the firearm. Manufacturers should not be held liable for how the weapon is used.
@9TV3MLG8mos8MO
I don't believe that manufacturers should be punished for something someone did AFTER the firearm was purchased. This question should go deeper than that. I agree that manufacturers and dealers should be sued if there wasn't a correct background check before selling the gun, or there was a malfunction with the gun, etc.
@9TNQSCP8mos8MO
only if the seller was aware of the planned crime or are directly supporting the seling of firearms to suspicious persons
@9TDVDBQ9mos9MO
No, but manufactures should be held liable by increaseing the security while purchasing fire arms of ANY kind.b
@9RSRYQ7Libertarian10mos10MO
I think the losing party should be weighed in on some of the legal liability in paying back all fees and as well manufacturers should be in compliance with all gun laws and be held accountable for any negligence on their part
@9LMWMP71yr1Y
I think in the case of mis-fire on a gun then they should be sued but one its sold the person who misused it is liable.
@9LM95F81yr1Y
buying a gun is a right for all, and the manufacturers just distribute them, its more sane to sue the person who shot you
No, you would not sue an airplane manufacturer for an airplane crash, you would not sue the manufacturer when having an allergic reaction to something obviously in a product. There should not be a different standard when it comes to the manufacturing of fire arms.
@9L36V261yr1Y
they shouldn't be allowed to sue gun companies if they make stricter gun laws and if the company follows the laws.
@9KQN69NIndependent1yr1Y
If a gun was sold without proper law following the dealer should be sued. Manufacturers aren't at fault unless the gun was faulty
@9KPD83MIndependent1yr1Y
They should be able to sue, but only if the firearms dealers skipped mandatory checks and regulations. And only be able to sue the manufacturers if something was illegal.
@9KN95CT1yr1Y
If this was allowed, then there should be some sort of way for businesses to do background checks before selling a firearm to someone or else they would be sued for something they have little to no control over.
@9KMH9V91yr1Y
If the dealer was aware that selling a firearm to an individual had a high chance of leading to violence and did nothing, they are liable to be sued
@9K887T41yr1Y
If the company knew the person they were selling the firearm to was mentally unstable than yes they should be able to sue them.
@9K5P8PR 1yr1Y
In a world where my previous stance on gun violence becomes law (require increased background checks & psychological evaluations), yes. In a world without it, no.
@9K3RPKY 1yr1Y
No unless the dealer did not do a proper check into the individuals background to see if they have charges, attempts, and or probation.
@9K3CXJL1yr1Y
no, its not the maker/dealer's fault that some trigger happy 17 year old angry at the world found daddy's gun and decided it was a good idea to go turn his school into a practice range
@9K2Q59B1yr1Y
Dealers and manufacturers shouldn't be held liable but should use various methods to ensure that the gun is being handed to someone mentally stable. If they are selling illegally, or weapons against the law, they should be held accountable. It really depends on the situtation.
@9JZ3H3Q1yr1Y
Yes, if the arms dealer failed to check if the perpetrator was mentally stable, or had prior criminal convictions.
@9JJXXFR1yr1Y
no, because it isn't there fault that they sold a gun to a person and they abused the use and did a school shooting
@9JH5CZG1yr1Y
No, because the dealers and manufactureres arent responsible for what people do with the guns they sell them.
@9J6MJPT1yr1Y
No because they made the gun doesnt mean that they shot you it should be based off you fired the gun at you
@9J2F74R1yr1Y
I think it depends if the dealer did proper background checks and everything but if they didn't I think they could possibly be sued.
@9H8XX4F2yrs2Y
no, because it's not the creator's or the shop owner's fault if some random person decides to use the gun that way
@9GW74SN2yrs2Y
Yes, because if the manufacturers/dealers are constantly getting sued they will most likely increase restrictions. Making it harder for unqualified people from getting guns.
@9GVP92G2yrs2Y
No, but they should be able to get the person who used the firearm against them in legal trouble (sue them, jail time, etc)
@9GP86FJ2yrs2Y
If the dealer sold the gun to someone they shouldn't have, and didn't apply as many rules to sell it, then they should be sued.
@9GKFDPP2yrs2Y
No, as long as the dealers and manufacturers sell the weapon legally if they sold it illegally then yes they should.
@9GHQHCV2yrs2Y
No, it is not the fault of either the dealer or manufacturer if the gun owner commits a crime with their product
@9GH4FTY2yrs2Y
No, it is not the fault of either the dealer or the manufacturer if someone commits a crime using their product.
@9GFDFDJ2yrs2Y
it's not their fault if their products are used for illegal activity but they should also be held accountable
@9DX79WD2yrs2Y
No, but nationalize all gun manufacturers and ban private sales.
@98GG9GX2yrs2Y
Yes, but all guns and ammunition
@8MYYVBV5yrs5Y
Only dealers, but this must come with an appropriate vetting process applied by dealers. They cannot be held liable in the current system.
@8DCT28G5yrs5Y
No. Gun manufacturers and dealers did not commit the crime and usually would not knowingly sell a firearm to someone who meant ill with it.
@9BY47TN2yrs2Y
Depends on how they ´ re sold. Like if the firearm was bought from some random person, then yes. but if theyre bought from a proper gun store, maybe not. It just depends on the circumstances.
@9B2MY482yrs2Y
yes, i think a teacher should be able to carry a sidearm on school grounds only if they have a good backroom check, It is only to be use on school grounds if there is harm to the school
@98ZYQHFWorking Family2yrs2Y
No, Manufacturers and dealers are only making and selling the guns, they do not fully know who would eventually get that gun. If a man were to be killed by a candlestick, should the candlestick manufacturers and dealers be held responsible for the man's murder? Anything can be made into a weapon, a gun is just a tool that can be used in a way that can be very harmful to others like many other objects, like a baseball bat, staple gun, barbed wire, rope, wire, or even electricity.
@98Z9G3V2yrs2Y
No, guns are only violent when in wrong hands therefore, the person in use of the gun should be 'sued' but only after the crime is committed. Guns are a since of protection and should be kept but used correctly.
@97YL7K43yrs3Y
No, because it's not the manufactures fault it's the person's fault.
@96WZN4S3yrs3Y
No, the manufacturers are selling them to people, not telling them to attack people
@96PYBFR3yrs3Y
No, firearm dealers and manufacturers didn't pull the trigger.
@96KZQWM3yrs3Y
depend on what the manufacture and dealer did.
@96K69YX3yrs3Y
No, they aren't responsible for what people do with the guns
@96JJZS73yrs3Y
This depends, i think that the dealer should be held responsible for it if they knew/suspected that the person was attempting to harm someone or was a danger to themselves.
@96HDGGC3yrs3Y
Yes, but only the dealer and that's if they sold it to them illegally
@96H4V8B3yrs3Y
Yes and No. They were the one whom gave the gun to the shooter but they didn't shot the victim.
@96FCMBW3yrs3Y
No, because after they sell the gun to the person it's not their problem anymore
@96F2MPBProgressive3yrs3Y
no becaus thare alud by law to do so are u gana su a mug comni if it brack and you cut you hand
@9678YKY3yrs3Y
If they knowingly sell for illegal purposes.
@965Q4YK3yrs3Y
I think that the only person or people that should be sued is the person who shot the gun because we need guns either way for protection but how would the people who make or sell the gun know what the person who will do with that gun
@963KJPN3yrs3Y
no, they should sue the government for allowing them a firearms licence
@95ZDWN6Independent3yrs3Y
no unless the dealer sold it to them illegally
@95Z8XJ43yrs3Y
if they knew the person was going to shooting others or sold the fire arm illegally they should be sued half the amount of money that was gained from the shooter from anything related to the court
@95JH7DH3yrs3Y
Yes, But only dealers as in the case of poor screenings as this could be help liable for negligence.
@9554ZS63yrs3Y
Yes, based on how the gun manufactures market these weapons.
@94WBXYP3yrs3Y
No, there is no single capacity where suing a manufacturer would do anything to help a victim of gun violence. It's frankly an immature way to enact revenge on a manufacturer of a tool- a tool that is also being used by people who protect the public every day.
@94PLMQLLibertarian3yrs3Y
no because it was not their doing
@94JN3QBLibertarian3yrs3Y
i dont have enough information to comment on the matter.
@947D92RWomen’s Equality3yrs3Y
I think it depends on where the gun came from. If it came from some place that sold it to the person and the person was taking on a false identity then no. But if the gun came from some place that knew they were selling it to a shady person than yes.
@947CXYP3yrs3Y
Yes but only the person they bought the gun from
@9476B8BRepublican3yrs3Y
no they should be able to sue the government for how easy it is to get a gun
@946Y3QPIndependence3yrs3Y
I honestly cannot imagine this happening to me or anyone I know. I do think that perhaps if this were a thing maybe the dealers/manufacturers would think before selling to someone. Another not so easy yes or no topic but nothing in politics is
@93LLXZZIndependent3yrs3Y
Yes, providing proof of negligence.
@93H7CN83yrs3Y
Yes, but only if the firearms dealer did not follow the proper guidelines
@93FLWSDLibertarian3yrs3Y
No because they didn't cause the victim to be victimized, the criminal did so sue the criminal.
@938B6QC3yrs3Y
Ban all guns and issue a federal mandatory buyback.
@92FHC6F3yrs3Y
No because the seller didn't know they was gonna do bad things with it.
@92CLT7Q3yrs3Y
No, would you sue a knife company if you're stabbed?
@929Z4263yrs3Y
Yes, but only dealers and if they knew who and why they was selling it fo because gun businesses dont always know if they are selling it for protevction or murder.
@929R6C73yrs3Y
Yes, but only because its a constitutional right, not because the manufacturer or dealer is necessarily guilty
Not unless the person sold it knowing the intentions of the person.
@928DDX43yrs3Y
No, because the business (most likely) didn't know the person's intention, they just sold the gun thinking it was for self-defense.
@928BR3K3yrs3Y
yes, as long as it was a defective product and it was not anyone's fault
@927PQKG3yrs3Y
No, one person's action should not represent a company's intended use of the firearm
Join in on more popular conversations.
