Martin O'Malley
In reply to the discussion: Pushing Gun Plan, O’Malley Says ‘Draw Your Own Conclusions’ About Sanders’ Record. [View all]elleng
(140,187 posts)a law which prohibits suits against gun dealers and manufacturers for the harm caused by those who criminally or unlawfully misuse firearm products. It applies not only to federal courts, but also actions at the state and local levels.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
According to The Washington Post, the law has been used to successfully block lawsuits by families of victims, including suits against gun manufacturers for the way in which the guns are designed. The law will make it difficult for the victims and families of Sandy Hook to make claims against the gun manufacturer. At least one mother of a victim is claiming that the manufacturer of the gun used to kill the victims of Sandy Hook should have installed a safety device, called a biometric lock, which could have prevented the gun from being used by Lanza, since that device would prevent a gun from being fired by anyone other than its licensed owner.
In a press release issued when President George W. Bush signed this law, the NRA indicated that the purpose of the law was ending politically motivated lawsuits designed to bankrupt law-abiding American firearm manufacturers and retailers.
http://www.nra.org/...
And in discussing their efforts to get this law passed, in that same press release the NRA indicated:
"What we witness today is the culmination of a seven-year effort that included a comprehensive legislative and election strategy," stated Chris W. Cox, NRAs chief lobbyist. "We worked hard to change the political landscape to pass this landmark legislation
http://www.nra.org/...
In discussing this law, The Washington Post noted that with this law, the gun industry has protections available to it that are not given to other industries.
The liability exemption sets firearms apart from nearly every other industry. . . . Legal scholars say the breadth of the protections granted to the gun industry is rare for consumer product manufacturers.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...
Whether or not you believe in these types of lawsuits against products, it seems only fair that the gun dealers and gun manufacturers should be held to the same standards that apply to other industries. That they are not is an indication of the tremendous amount of power that the NRA has had in this country.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/02/01/1183784/-2005-Law-Gives-Gun-Manufacturers-and-Dealers-Protection-From-Lawsuits-Not-Given-to-Other-Industries
Posted to inform those without knowledge of the law.
from above: Governor O'Malley ripped the law, which a Republic Congress passed and which Mr. Sandersa self-identified independent socialist who caucuses with the Democratssupported. Mr. OMalley argued that it was a sell-out to the companies that make guns and lobbying groups like the National Rifle Association which advocate against regulation.
It wasnt until 2005 that Congress shielded gun manufacturers from the same sort of product liability responsibility that other products would have. Theres an ability and you can have standards and ways to make your product safer, in order to safeguard human life, you have a duty to do that. And so I believe this was nothing short of the NRA flexing its political muscle to shield the gun manufacturers, Mr. OMalley said when asked about the bill.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):