Author Topic: Senate votes to shield gun makers from lawsuits  (Read 971 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline JPSaxMan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1779
  • Gender: Male
Senate votes to shield gun makers from lawsuits
« on: July 29, 2005, 01:13:26 PM »
WASHINGTON - The Senate voted Friday to shield firearms manufacturers, dealers and importers from lawsuits brought by victims of gun crimes, a measure opponents said had been ordered up by the gun lobby.

The 65-31 vote passed a bill that supporters said protects the industry from financial disaster and bankruptcy caused by damage lawsuits.

"This bill says go after the criminal, don't go after the law-abiding gun manufacturer or the law-abiding gun seller," said bill sponsor Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho.

But Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., and other opponents said the gun industry needs no such special protection. "This bill has one motivation — payback by the Bush administration and the Republican leadership of the Congress to the powerful special interest of the National Rifle Association," he said.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., yanked similar legislation from debate last year when Democrats successfully attached an extension of the ban on assault-style weapons and the NRA dropped its support.

Republicans picked up four more Senate seats in last November's election, emboldening gun rights supporters to try again.

The House passed a similar bill last year but has taken no action on it this year.

Democrats won inclusion this year of a new requirement that each handgun be sold with a separate child safety or locking device, unless purchased by government officials or police officers. Any violation could be punished by the suspension of a dealer's license, a $10,000 fine, or both.

Gunmakers still face product liability
Craig said the bill does not block gunmakers and dealers from facing product liability, negligence or breach of contract suits.

Its opponents, however, say the bill effectively exempts gun manufacturers from liability. They also say dealers sometimes let weapons get into the hands of people the law says shouldn't have them.

Democrats tried and lost attempts to insert special provisions in the legislation that would let children and police retain the right to sue, along with another amendment that would have let individuals but not municipalities retain the right to sue.

"Should those whose actions lead to the death or injury of a child get a free pass?" asked Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., who sponsored one amendment.

Supporters of the liability bill said the changes would have gutted the bill.

The Senate also brushed aside a Kennedy amendment that would have banned hollow-tipped, so-called "cop killer" bullets.

The gun industry gave 88 percent of its campaign contributions, or $1.2 million, to Republicans in the 2004 election cycle. Gun control advocates, meanwhile, gave 98 percent of their contributions, or $93,700, to Democrats during that election, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
JP

Attorney: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in
his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?

Doctor: Did you actually pass the bar exam?

Proverbs 3:5 - Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding

Offline jh45gun

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4992
Senate votes to shield gun makers from laws
« Reply #1 on: July 31, 2005, 04:42:18 PM »
Thank God the Republicans have a Majority if it was the other way around and the liberals would be in power teddy, chucky and crew would be out for gun control issues big time. Even now they did every thing they could to weaken this bill. Jim
Said I never had much use for one, never said I didn't know how to use it.

Offline MGMorden

  • Trade Count: (3)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2093
  • Gender: Male
Senate votes to shield gun makers from laws
« Reply #2 on: August 06, 2005, 06:21:59 PM »
Quote from: jh45gun
Thank God the Republicans have a Majority if it was the other way around and the liberals would be in power teddy, chucky and crew would be out for gun control issues big time. Even now they did every thing they could to weaken this bill. Jim


Now lets hope they can keep the majority.  The Dems can easily mess this up if they get into the majority again.  

Now we just need to get the DMCA repealed (not gun related, but still a terrible law).

Offline FWiedner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1686
Senate votes to shield gun makers from laws
« Reply #3 on: August 07, 2005, 08:00:12 AM »
Any truth to the rumor that they buried within the details, the authority for the Attorney General to identify, define, and "regulate" AP ammumnition?

Any good hunting bullet is AP when compared to it's effectiveness against many brands of police body armor.  And that's really the determining standard, isn't it?

As the Robot used to say"  "Danger!, Danger!"

Simple fact.  No ammo, no guns.

 :shock:
They may talk of a "New Order" in the  world, but what they have in mind is only a revival of the oldest and worst tyranny.   No liberty, no religion, no hope.   It is an unholy alliance of power and pelf to dominate and to enslave the human race.

Offline Graybeard

  • Administrator
  • Trade Count: (69)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26941
  • Gender: Male
Senate votes to shield gun makers from laws
« Reply #4 on: August 07, 2005, 10:17:25 AM »
The sad part of this is that the bill is loaded with so many antigun clauses that it will likely do more harm than good if enacted into law. This seems to be the norm in Washington these days. The stupidity of the way Congress operates, half the new laws passed actually go into other bills as riders. Often onto bills having nothing to do with the admenments attached.

If this one passes with current amendments attached you can say good bye to all centerfire rifle ammunition within a few short years, as in the first time a democrap takes the office of President. It's a bad bill and needs to be abandoned by anyone who is pro gun.


Bill aka the Graybeard
President, Graybeard Outdoor Enterprises
256-435-1125

I am not a lawyer and do not give legal advice.

Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life anyone who believes in Him will have everlasting life!

Offline fe352v8

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • A Real Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 700
  • Gender: Male
  • Evolve or become extinct
Senate votes to shield gun makers from laws
« Reply #5 on: August 07, 2005, 01:43:57 PM »
I am not sure you would have to wait for “that other party” considering the importance that has been placed on limiting and or circumventing the Bill of Rights, and the restraints it places on governmental authority, by whom ever is in power.  It is important to remember that the Bill of Rights does not endow the people with their rights, it prohibits the government from denying those rights, which the people already possessed.

A careful reading of the Second Amendment will reveal no mention of ammunition.  This is a bad bill as written, and it is naïve to believe that it was unintended, by any involved in its’ writing.

Life is no joke but funny things happen

jon
life is no joke but funny things happen

jon

Offline JPSaxMan

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1779
  • Gender: Male
Senate votes to shield gun makers from laws
« Reply #6 on: August 08, 2005, 10:33:03 AM »
^^Ditto 8)
JP

Attorney: Now doctor, isn't it true that when a person dies in
his sleep, he doesn't know about it until the next morning?

Doctor: Did you actually pass the bar exam?

Proverbs 3:5 - Trust in the LORD with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding

Offline FWiedner

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1686
Senate votes to shield gun makers from laws
« Reply #7 on: August 08, 2005, 11:04:13 AM »
Consider that in April of 1775, British troops marched on the village and armory at Concord with orders to confiscate weapons, and more directly to sieze "powder and ball".

The military governor, General Thomas Gage, understood well that English Common Law enumerated a right for English citizens to possess arms, and he knew equally well that the intent of the law could be avoided by perverting the letter of the law.  He knew that by depriving the colonists of ammunition he would, for all practical purpose, control the guns.

Now we see the same type of controlling authority that General Thomas Gage attempted, dropped gratis into the lap of General Alberto Gonzales.

This is the Attorney General who says that torture isn't necessarily unconstitutional.  (Review that 8th Amendment Al...)

Anyone recognize that old familiar gleam in the eye of "the General..."?

 :shock:
They may talk of a "New Order" in the  world, but what they have in mind is only a revival of the oldest and worst tyranny.   No liberty, no religion, no hope.   It is an unholy alliance of power and pelf to dominate and to enslave the human race.