Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Gun Control & RKBA

jmg257

(11,996 posts) Mon Oct 31, 2016, 06:53 PM Oct 2016

Is this true? I know Hillary is for repealing the PLCAA, but...

"If a store is robbed by a criminal using a gun, or someone is murdered by a firearm, she wants the gun store that sold the gun or the manufacturer that made it to be held responsible".

http://www.fool.com/investing/2016/10/30/9-ways-hillary-clintons-gun-control-plan-could-cha.aspx

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Is this true? I know Hillary is for repealing the PLCAA, but... (Original Post) jmg257 Oct 2016 OP

Oh FFS......... pablo_marmol Oct 2016 #2

It does make that true Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #3

pablo_marmol

(2,375 posts)

2. Oh FFS.........

Reply to jmg257 (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2016, 07:09 PM

Oct 2016

Another "assault weapons" ban is listed, but no mention of actually enforcing the add-on when a criminal commits a crime with a gun.

The stupid -- it burns.

Duckhunter935

(16,974 posts)

3. It does make that true

Reply to jmg257 (Original post)

Mon Oct 31, 2016, 07:12 PM

Oct 2016

Even under the PLCAA, there are six exceptions where firearms sellers and manufacturers can and are held liable if the standards are met. Without that protection SLAAP suits that are designed to put them out of business defending baseless lawsuits will again be allowed to happen.

Reply to this discussion