Other State CA continues it's march, backwards.

[ma96782]

CA: Gun violence victims can sue firearm manufacturers

Since 2005 a federal law has protected gun manufacturers and dealers from lawsuits when the weapons they make are used in crimes. However, Newsom signed a new law Tuesday that according to his office, uses an exemption to get around the statute.

www.yahoo.com

Aloha, Mark

Read More

 

[Yarome]

A product causing direct harm due to defects or negligence on a mfg part is hardly the same thing as someones misuse of a product. Might as well start suing auto mfgs when someone runs over a pedestrian and toothbrush mfg's when an inmate shanks another inmate.

Kalifederation at it's finest. Smog-adle-brained toilet clinger.....

 

[titsonritz]

Just be presidential and ignore the court.

 

[arakboss]

Will they be able to sue the sellers of the firearms too?

 

[solv3nt]

They should be able to sue the government for failing to protect them as well. Each felon that the government decided wasn't in their best interest to keep them locked up, government is liable. Really, gun manufacturers should just refuse to sell anything to the state, including the cops.

 

[titsonritz]

Really, gun manufacturers should just refuse to sell anything to the state, including the cops.

Quoted for truth.

 

[nwslopoke]

They should be able to sue the government for failing to protect them as well. Each felon that the government decided wasn't in their best interest to keep them locked up, government is liable. Really, gun manufacturers should just refuse to sell anything to the state, including the cops.

How can people overlook the perpetrators who commit these crime over money? As been stated many times. Go after the courts (judge/DA) that keep these animals on the streets. Government can't cry, it's for your safety, then let these maniacs free.

 

[ma96782]

Now Imagine.....that Gavin is in that picture.

The trick is to NOT associate........People as being at fault/responsible for their lives.

Because?

Rrrrrrright......People VOTE.



Aloha, Mark

 

[GrayGoose]

Really, gun manufacturers should just refuse to sell anything to the state, including the cops.

Barrett chose to do exactly that. Other manufacturers should too.

 

[Yarome]

Barrett chose to do exactly that. Other manufacturers should too.

Imagine if all the major firearm mfg's got together and boycotted KAF. That would be funny as HE-double hockey sticks.

You don't want guns? We can help with that!

It might finally light a fire under the general publics rear breathing holes to get a clue and re-evalutate who they choose to put into office.

 

[bradsteen]

They should be able to sue the government for failing to protect them as well. Each felon that the government decided wasn't in their best interest to keep them locked up, government is liable. Really, gun manufacturers should just refuse to sell anything to the state, including the cops.

Gov sales are often what keep gun companies in business through slumps in public demand. Most gun companies couldn't afford to take that kind of hit.

Aside from that, if somehow gun companies were to entirely stop selling to the gov, the gov would probably start their own manufacturing efforts... all on our taxpayer dime.

 

[WAW44]

So here an article that talks a little more about what the law actually states: https://www.latimes.com/california/...llows-lawsuits-against-gun-makers-and-dealers

And you know what, I'm perfectly fine with people being sued for being idiots with firearms, turning blind eye on straw sales, careless storage, etc. You want to have nice things, then be an adult. This is CA just being clever and exploring the hole in PLCAA. That's how the game is played, and it's a good move.

The second aspect of the law, the abnormally dangerous standard is BS and I see it likely to be challenged as vague and unconstitutional when the first suit under this law goes to court.

 

[Tony617]

They should be able to sue the government for failing to protect them as well. Each felon that the government decided wasn't in their best interest to keep them locked up, government is liable. Really, gun manufacturers should just refuse to sell anything to the state, including the cops.

If that happens, I would expect shell companies to be setup in other states and the have the shell companies buy the guns and ship them to California. At least for non-federal agencies like the sheriffs, police, prison guards, etc.

 

[titsonritz]

Really, gun manufacturers should just refuse to sell anything to the state, including the cops.

Barrett chose to do exactly that. Other manufacturers should too.

I am going to make a point to buy a Barrett for this reason alone. Never thought I'd own one, but than I thought the same about NV and yet here we are.

I think when I get I am going to take picture of it next to my bareass and double one finger salute and send it to a few agencies that can no longer buy them or get support for their current high dollar weapons.

 

[ma96782]

So here an article that talks a little more about what the law actually states: https://www.latimes.com/california/...llows-lawsuits-against-gun-makers-and-dealers

And you know what, I'm perfectly fine with people being sued for being idiots with firearms, turning blind eye on straw sales, careless storage, etc. You want to have nice things, then be an adult. This is CA just being clever and exploring the hole in PLCAA. That's how the game is played, and it's a good move.

My underline. BTW.....the linked article is "subscription based".

So tell me?

How is it......the Govt's business to tell me how to store my own property (guns) within my home? Will I need a license? Will there be inspections too? Will I be subject to 24/7 surprise inspections to ensure compliance? How much will all this NEW Govt intervention cost? More police or a "special squad" of compliance officers? Will I need to have only a certain class of safe that is RATED/CERTIFIED, etc...... etc...... Will I go to prison because I left my home defense firearm out?

IMHO.......you've just opened an entirely new method to oppress the gun owning population. All in the name of SAFETY.

If you're comfortable with it. Than you can do it in your own home.

For me......"No thank you". IMHO.......it's "None Ya".

Aloha, Mark

PS.......for instance, consider "Smoking". Yeah.....it's been floated that smoking in a home with "children in it" is "Child Abuse". In child custody battles, some people have even used the smoking issue to gain an advantage over a soon to be ex-spouse. So, the Govt should also have the power to tell people where to smoke and how to store their smoking materials, on their own property? Of course it's in the name of SAFETY.