The PLCAA; Is Bernie following the wrong leader?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

HRC from CNN: http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/26/opinions/keane-gun-liability-hillary-clinton/

Attempting to draw a contrast to her opponent Sen. Bernie Sanders, Clinton said, "It was pretty straightforward to me that he was going to give immunity to the only industry in America. Everybody else has to be accountable, but not the gun manufacturers."

PLCAA simply blocks baseless lawsuits that attempt to hold firearms industry companies liable for the criminal actions of third parties who misuse the industry's lawfully sold products.

The debate was not the first time Clinton has prevaricated about the law.

Bernie Sanders from BuzzFeed: http://www.buzzfeed.com/evanmcsan/sponsor-of-new-gun-bill-welcomes-sanders-support-to-correct#.utnX874Pn

Bernie Sanders said Saturday night he supports a new bill in Congress aimed at lifting special liability protections for gun manufacturers. Sanders supported the special protections in 2005.

CHARLESTON, South Carolina — Bernie Sanders said Saturday night he supports repealing a 2005 bill he voted for that has been at the center of gun control-centered attacks on Sanders by Hillary Clinton.

[SusanCalvin]

1. I'd have to do more research,

Or get some kind soul to give me some links, but on the face of it I am a tad troubled, consistency-wise. But my knowledge in this area is admittedly superficial.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

3. The law summarized by wiki

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) is a United States law which protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. However, both manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible in much the same manner that any U.S. based manufacturer of consumer products are held responsible. They may also be held liable for negligence when they have reason to know a gun is intended for use in a crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protection_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act

[eomer]

29. There is a lot of misinformation on this topic.

Here is the text of the current law, PLCAA:
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/s397/text

And here is the text of the bill that has been proposed:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/332/text

This is the main provision of the currently proposed change:

(a) In General.—An action against a manufacturer, seller, or trade association for damages or relief resulting from an alleged defect or alleged negligence with respect to a product, or conduct that would be actionable under State common or statutory law in the absence of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, shall not be dismissed by a court on the basis that the action is for damages resulting from, or for relief from, the criminal, unlawful, or volitional use of a qualified product.

The effect of this change is a tweak of the law, not a repeal as is often being reported. And the tweak is to make the law explicit about something that was always the intent: that lawsuits are not prohibited if the lawsuit alleges negligence or defect.

This proposed change is not anything particularly big. It is fixing something in the original law while keeping its intended effect in place. The controversy about it is an attempt to spin up a contrived criticism out of essentially nothing. In other words, par for the course for the Clinton campaign since the actual substance of issues isn't on their side.

[SusanCalvin]

30. Thank you. nt

[Duckhunter935]

31. thank you

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

32. Thanks

Much appreciated.

[gejohnston]

2. especially since

when HRC was calling him an NRA sellout, Bernie's poll numbers improved in New Hampshire and Iowa. Coincidence or gun owning Democrats?

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

6. Just the facts

Knowledge is power.
Power is liberating.
Liberty = freedom + responsibility, IMHO.

[99th_Monkey]

4. Bernie has read the current bill, and has his reasons --given how it's written-- to support it now.

The guy's a straight-shooter, if you'll pardon the pun, he does things for good reasons he can
and probably will give tonight, while he's not explaining how his sing'e payer plan saves struggling
American households $1000s of dollars over the way things are now.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

7. We'll be waiting n/t

[99th_Monkey]

8. Me too. nt

[JonLeibowitz]

5. I think part of it might be the media story -- they are only too happy to keep plugging away at him

The PLCAA is a good bill. But the media likes its narrative of a "mixed record", even when that consists of principled stands on sensible gun safety legislation. I have to say I am disappointed with his abandonment of the PLCAA, but the media loved the gun debate with a faux difference between Bernie and Obama.

I'm so fucking disappointed with American politics and media, that a reasonable position in the gun debate is vilified. HRC is disgusting me.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

9. To be honest...

...I've been delaying reading what HRC has said about the PLCAA. I have yet to hear an argument with any logic that counters the act.

[Snobblevitch]

10. This issue was raised in tonight's Democratic debate.

HRC was disingenuous in her point made to Sanders.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

16. Imagine that

A candidate saying something disingenuous about an opponent. How...............political.
I'm not sure I accept either candidate is fully expressing their intended actions.

[stone space]

11. Fuck the PLCAA and Fuck the NRA. (nt)

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

17. Just another content free expletive interjection.

[DonP]

24. Makes you wonder which particular NRA people he finds that attractive?

Maybe he has a Ted Nugent fixation?

Or does he get excited about Wayne's ties?

Well, he's on vacation again, so we may never know.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

25. I guess time flies when you work hard to offend folks.

[Eleanors38]

34. With all that "fucking" going on, I think I'll lay low for a while.

[DonP]

35. I think he has a serious thing for Wayne and his ties.

[stone space]

12. Why do arms manufacturers attack the families of gun victims and try to bankrupt them?

That's immoral.

[branford]

14. Why does the Brady Campaign

pressure their employees to bring knowingly frivolous claims against firearm and ammunition dealers and manufacturers for the criminal misuse of their legal products when such claims are expressly barred by federal and state statutes and relevant common law jurisprudence concerning products liability, and then deceptively play the innocent victim when they inevitably lose?

What's immoral is intentionally abusing the judicial system for political purposes, the very reason why statutes like the PLCAA and state equivalents became necessary, but don't let actual facts get in the way of your misleading moral tirade.

http://blogs.reuters.com/alison-frankel/2015/04/24/ammo-dealers-want-aurora-massacre-victims-parents-to-pay-their-legal-fees/

https://www.linkedin.com/in/lonnie-phillips-72200a16

http://onlygunsandmoney.blogspot.com/2015/04/well-this-sheds-new-light-on-things.html

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

21. The pro-control reaction to the results of such lawsuits are like...

...farting in a vestibule and blaming the homeowner.

[Puha Ekapi]

22. Not only that...

...but the Brady Bunch then stuck the plaintiffs with the legal bills, even though they (the Brady Bunch) were the engine driving the frivolous lawsuit.

[Duckhunter935]

26. I know, that is the sick part

But the family admitted on Rachel Maddow that they continued knowing they would lose for political purposes.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

33. Barratry

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barratry_%28common_law%29

Barratry (/ˈbærətri/ BA-rə-tree) is a legal term with several meanings. In common law, barratry is the offense committed by people who are “overly officious in instigating or encouraging prosecution of groundless litigation” or who bring “repeated or persistent acts of litigation” for the purposes of profit or harassment. It is a crime in some jurisdictions. If litigation is for the purpose of silencing critics, it is known as a strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP). Jurisdictions that otherwise have no barratry laws may have SLAPP laws.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

18. Why does anyone file a frivolous lawsuit and expect no reaction...

...when it doesn't (and shouldn't) go their way?

Why did you ask such a disingenuous question?

[stone space]

19. It wasn't frivolous. But you knew that already. (nt)

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

20. Yes it was/is and...

...what's with you making the disingenuous accusations?

[hack89]

23. They knew the law would not allow the suit. It was in black and white. nt

[Duckhunter935]

27. and it really was

[beevul]

13. Hillary should talk to her husband.

"Everybody else has to be accountable, but not the gun manufacturers."

Ahem:

Statement on Signing the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994
August 17, 1994


I am pleased to sign into law S. 1458, the "General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994." It is before me today as a result of bipartisan support in the Congress, and the hard work of many who have labored long to achieve passage of such legislation. The result is legislation that accommodates the need to revitalize our general aviation industry, while preserving the legal rights of passengers and pilots. This limited measure is intended to give manufacturers of general aviation aircraft and related component parts some protection from lawsuits alleging defective design or manufacture after an aircraft has established a lengthy record of operational safety.

In 1978, U.S. general aviation manufacturers produced 18,000 of these aircraft for domestic use and for export around the world. Our manufacturers were the world leaders in the production of general aviation aircraft. By 1993, production had dwindled to only 555 aircraft. As a result, in the last decade over 100,000 wellpaying jobs were lost in general aviation manufacturing. An innovative and productive American industry has been pushed to the edge of extinction. This Act will allow manufacturers to supply new basic aircraft for flight training, business use, and recreational flying.

The Act establishes an 18-year statute of repose for general aviation aircraft and component parts beyond which the manufacturer will not be liable in lawsuits alleging defective manufacture or design. It is limited to aircraft having a seating capacity of fewer than 20 passengers, which are not engaged in scheduled passengercarrying operations.

In its report to me and to the Congress last August, the National Commission to Ensure a Strong Competitive Airline Industry recommended the enactment of a statute of repose for general aviation aircraft. The report indicated that the enactment of such legislation would "help regenerate a once-healthy industry and help create thousands of jobs." I agree with this assessment; this is a job-creating and jobrestoring measure that will bring good jobs and economic growth back to this industry. It will also help U.S. companies restore our Nation to the status of the premier supplier of general aviation aircraft to the world, favorably affecting our balance of trade. Therefore, as I sign into law the "General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994," I am pleased to acknowledge the bipartisan work done by the Congress and by all the supporters of the general aviation industry.

WILLIAM J. CLINTON

The White House, August 17, 1994.

NOTE: S. 1458, approved August 17, was assigned Public Law No. 103-298. Citation: William J. Clinton: "Statement on Signing the General Aviation Revitalization Act of 1994," August 17, 1994. Online by Gerhard Peters and John T. Woolley, The American Presidency Project. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=48984.

[branford]

15. Another interesting and comparable statute is the

Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986.

[Duckhunter935]

28. but we have always been told

Only gun manufacturers are the ones that have protection.