Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 8/1/2005 11:25:46 AM EDT
Okay I was thinking why couldn't we tack on a repeal of the machine gun ban to HR 800?

Like this:


A BILL
To prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages or injunctive or other relief resulting from the misuse of their products by others.


Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the `Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act'.

SEC. 2. FINDINGS; PURPOSES.

(a) Findings- The Congress finds the following:

(1) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

(2) The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects the rights of individuals, including those who are not members of a militia or engaged in military service or training, to keep and bear arms.

(3) Lawsuits have been commenced against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms that operate as designed and intended, which seek money damages and other relief for the harm caused by the misuse of firearms by third parties, including criminals.

(4) The manufacture, importation, possession, sale, and use of firearms and ammunition in the United States are heavily regulated by Federal, State, and local laws. Such Federal laws include the Gun Control Act of 1968, the National Firearms Act, and the Arms Export Control Act.

(5) Businesses in the United States that are engaged in interstate and foreign commerce through the lawful design, manufacture, marketing, distribution, importation, or sale to the public of firearms or ammunition products that have been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce are not, and should not, be liable for the harm caused by those who criminally or unlawfully misuse firearm products or ammunition products that function as designed and intended.

(6) The possibility of imposing liability on an entire industry for harm that is solely caused by others is an abuse of the legal system, erodes public confidence in our Nation's laws, threatens the diminution of a basic constitutional right and civil liberty, invites the disassembly and destabilization of other industries and economic sectors lawfully competing in the free enterprise system of the United States, and constitutes an unreasonable burden on interstate and foreign commerce of the United States.

(7) The liability actions commenced or contemplated by the Federal Government, States, municipalities, and private interest groups and others are based on theories without foundation in hundreds of years of the common law and jurisprudence of the United States and do not represent a bona fide expansion of the common law. The possible sustaining of these actions by a maverick judicial officer or petit jury would expand civil liability in a manner never contemplated by the framers of the Constitution, by the Congress, or by the legislatures of the several States. Such an expansion of liability would constitute a deprivation of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to a citizen of the United States under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

(8) The liability actions commenced or contemplated by the Federal Government, States, municipalities, private interest groups, and others attempt to use the judicial branch to circumvent the legislative branch of the Government by regulating interstate and foreign commerce through judgments and judicial decrees, thereby threatening the separation of powers doctrine and weakening and undermining important principles of federalism, State sovereignty, and comity among the several States.

(b) Purposes- The purposes of this Act are as follows:

(1) To prohibit causes of action against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms or ammunition products, and their trade associations, for the harm solely caused by the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearm products or ammunition products by others when the product functioned as designed and intended.

(2) To preserve a citizen's access to a supply of firearms and ammunition for all lawful purposes, including hunting, self-defense, collecting, and competitive or recreational shooting.

(3) To guarantee a citizen's rights, privileges, and immunities, as applied to the States, under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, pursuant to section 5 of that Amendment.

(4) To prevent the use of such lawsuits to impose unreasonable burdens on interstate and foreign commerce.

(5) To protect the right, under the First Amendment to the Constitution, of manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms or ammunition products, and trade associations, to speak freely, to assemble peaceably, and to petition the Government for a redress of their grievances.

(6) To preserve and protect the separation of powers doctrine and important principles of federalism, State sovereignty, and comity among the several States.

(7) To exercise the power of Congress under article IV, section 1 of the United States Constitution to carry out the full faith and credit clause.

SEC. 3. PROHIBITION ON BRINGING OF QUALIFIED CIVIL LIABILITY ACTIONS IN FEDERAL OR STATE COURT.

(a) In General- A qualified civil liability action may not be brought in any Federal or State court.

(b) Dismissal of Pending Actions- A qualified civil liability action that is pending on the date of the enactment of this Act shall be dismissed immediately by the court in which the action was brought or is currently pending.

SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS.

In this Act:

(1) ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS- The term `engaged in the business' has the meaning given that term in section 921(a)(21) of title 18, United States Code, and, as applied to a seller of ammunition, means a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to the sale of ammunition as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the sale or distribution of ammunition.

(2) MANUFACTURER- The term `manufacturer' means, with respect to a qualified product, a person who is engaged in the business of manufacturing the product in interstate or foreign commerce and who is licensed to engage in business as such a manufacturer under chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code.

(3) PERSON- The term `person' means any individual, corporation, company, association, firm, partnership, society, joint stock company, or any other entity, including any governmental entity.

(4) QUALIFIED PRODUCT- The term `qualified product' means a firearm (as defined in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 921(a)(3) of title 18, United States Code), including any antique firearm (as defined in section 921(a)(16) of such title), or ammunition (as defined in section 921(a)(17)(A) of such title), or a component part of a firearm or ammunition, that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce.

(5) QUALIFIED CIVIL LIABILITY ACTION-

(A) IN GENERAL- The term `qualified civil liability action' means a civil action or proceeding or an administrative proceeding brought by any person against a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product, or a trade association, for damages, punitive damages, injunctive or declaratory relief, abatement, restitution, fines, or penalties, or other relief, resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of a qualified product by the person or a third party, but shall not include--

(i) an action brought against a transferor convicted of an offense under section 924(h) of title 18, United States Code, or a comparable or identical State felony law, by a party directly harmed by the conduct of which the transferee is so convicted;

(ii) an action brought against a seller for negligent entrustment or negligence per se;

(iii) an action in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product knowingly violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product, if the violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought, including--

(I) any case in which the manufacturer or seller knowingly made any false entry in, or failed to make appropriate entry in, any record required to be kept under Federal or State law with respect to the qualified product, or aided, abetted, or conspired with any person in making any false or fictitious oral or written statement with respect to any fact material to the lawfulness of the sale or other disposition of the qualified product; or

(II) any case in which the manufacturer or seller aided, abetted, or conspired with any other person to sell or otherwise dispose of the qualified product, knowing, or having reasonable cause to believe, that the actual buyer of the qualified product was prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm or ammunition under subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code;

(iv) an action for breach of contract or warranty in connection with the purchase of the product; or

(v) an action for death, physical injuries, or property damage resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of the product, when used as intended or in a reasonably foreseeable manner, except that if the discharge of the product was caused by a volitional act that constituted a criminal offense, then such act shall be considered the sole proximate cause of any resulting death, personal injury, or property damage.

(B) NEGLIGENT ENTRUSTMENT- As used in subparagraph (A)(ii), the term `negligent entrustment' means the supplying of a qualified product by a seller for use by another person when the seller knows, or reasonably should know, the person to whom the product is supplied is likely to, and does, use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to the person or others.

(C) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION- The exceptions set forth in clauses (i) through (v) of subparagraph (A) shall be construed so as not to be in conflict, and no provision of this Act shall be construed to create a public or private cause of action or remedy.

(6) SELLER- The term `seller' means, with respect to a qualified product--

(A) an importer (as defined in section 921(a)(9) of title 18, United States Code) who is engaged in the business as such an importer in interstate or foreign commerce and who is licensed to engage in business as such an importer under chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code;

(B) a dealer (as defined in section 921(a)(11) of title 18, United States Code) who is engaged in the business as such a dealer in interstate or foreign commerce and who is licensed to engage in business as such a dealer under chapter 44 of title 18, United States Code; or

(C) a person engaged in the business of selling ammunition (as defined in section 921(a)(17)(A) of title 18, United States Code) in interstate or foreign commerce at the wholesale or retail level.

(7) STATE- The term `State' includes each of the several States of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United States, and any political subdivision of any such place.

(8) TRADE ASSOCIATION- The term `trade association' means any corporation, unincorporated association, federation, business league, or professional or business organization--

(A) that is not organized or operated for profit, and no part of the net earnings of which inures to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual;

(B) that is an organization described in section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and exempt from tax under section 501(a) of such Code; and

(C) 2 or more members of which are manufacturers or sellers of a qualified product.

(9) UNLAWFUL MISUSE- The term `unlawful misuse' means conduct that violates a statute, ordinance, or regulation as it relates to the use of a qualified product.

SEC 5. REPEAL

(a) Section 922(o) Title 18 US Code is repealed

Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:28:37 AM EDT
HR 800? elaborate
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:29:37 AM EDT
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:30:11 AM EDT
The House version of S 397.

Why not add some goodies to it?

All they would have to do is pass the House.

The Senate will prolly just go along with what the conference committee adopts.

Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:31:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By shotar:
Not going to happen.



Yeah.. Im thinking political suicide.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:32:14 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
The House version of S 397.

Why not add some goodies to it?

All they would have to do is pass the House.

The Senate will prolly just go along with what the conference committee adopts.




The Conference comittee will strip out anything the House adds, or else the full Senate will turn the whole thing down.

Not that I wouldn't want to see it tried.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:32:49 AM EDT
How so?

Virtually every anti gunner I know thinks machine guns are legal and non restricted.

Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:33:29 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/1/2005 11:34:07 AM EDT by Schulze]
edit, can't read, long day, whatever.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:35:57 AM EDT
I've often wondered what the antis would have to say if we attempted an NFA repeal.. they've portrayed all semis as "machine guns" anyway, where would they have to go?
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:37:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MMcCall:
I've often wondered what the antis would have to say if we attempted an NFA repeal.. they've portrayed all semis as "machine guns" anyway, where would they have to go?




See that's part of it.

They would HAVE to admit AR-15s are not automatic.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:38:20 AM EDT
Won't happen
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:42:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
How so?

Virtually every anti gunner I know thinks machine guns are legal and non restricted.




Literally EVERYONE I know thinks semi-auto AR15s are illegal for some reason...

Until they get a bit of an education, of course.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:43:00 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/1/2005 11:44:14 AM EDT by CRC]
Well it was a thought.

Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:43:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:
Won't happen



Faith man! Do you have it?
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:43:34 AM EDT
WHY DO PEOPLE WASTE TIME THINKING AND TYPING UP SUCH THINGS?
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:46:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Schulze:

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:
Won't happen



Faith man! Do you have it?



If this was 1975, yes. 2005 ,hell no. I doubt anyones ability to do the right thing these days.

Bam, there it is.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:48:26 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 47:
WHY DO PEOPLE WASTE TIME THINKING AND TYPING UP SUCH THINGS?



How do you think such things happen otherwise?
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:48:30 AM EDT
Lets get S397 to W's desk first, we can always focus on the MG ban once this is done.

Kharn
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:50:21 AM EDT
It won't happen with a republican in the white house and only a narrow majority in congress. With a stronger majority and congress, they could strong-arm such a bill to a democratic president.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 11:54:59 AM EDT
maybe they wont read it to close :)
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 12:09:59 PM EDT
bump lets try
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 12:15:50 PM EDT
Nothing ventured nothing gained. I think this is worth letters and phone calls and whatever else...
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 12:17:27 PM EDT
I'm up for this. Think we can talk GOA into backing us?
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 12:18:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Kharn:
Lets get S397 to W's desk first, we can always focus on the MG ban once this is done.

Kharn



I agreee. small steps
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 12:24:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By crashburnrepeat:
Nothing ventured nothing gained. I think this is worth letters and phone calls and whatever else...



+1. Nothing will ever happen if we don't try.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 12:45:57 PM EDT
You could try it....put it will never pass.
Work on the 1989 Import Ban first, then you can see how lifting the 1986 MG Ban would work out.

Plus I hate to say it but I bet there is a few MG owners that are quite pleased to see MG prices stay at market value, and might even oppose such a bill to protect their investments.

I would like to see S 397 or HR 800 pass by itself to protect the gun industry. I would hate to see it burn up because gun owning trap shooters and casual hunters do not support MG and Black Rifle owners.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 12:47:32 PM EDT
You mean allow new machine guns into the registry?

Call it the "Selected Firearm Registration Act."
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 12:51:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By UZI4you:
Work on the 1989 Import Ban first, then you can see how lifting the 1986 MG Ban would work out.




Agreed. Don't know if this is repetitive or not, but how about reversing Klinton's ban on the military surplusing ammo. I can barely aford to feed my AR with anything but Wolf!
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 12:55:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 47:
WHY DO PEOPLE WASTE TIME THINKING AND TYPING UP SUCH THINGS?

I have time to waste. Right now I am wasting my time telling you that you wasted your time by pointing out that he wasted his time.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 12:57:44 PM EDT
Think about the money .gov could make. I have 6 or 7 rifles I would gladly pay $200.00 to make FA.

AR 5.56
AR 9mm
AK 5.45
Ak 7.62
M1A
Glock 17
Sten Gun (kit)

Hell that's $1400 for the BATFE right now.

Link Posted: 8/1/2005 1:14:06 PM EDT
Let's try to slip in a repeal to a random law about to be enacted.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 1:19:40 PM EDT
We need this bill to pass into law first and foremost. If we get too greedy we lose.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 1:37:57 PM EDT
It would be great if a repeal bill was passed... Only problem is, you'd still need to go through the BATF to get your MG's...
They have enough trouble keeping up with the small volume of transfers as it is... Just imagine how long it would take if the '86 MG ban was lifted... You'd see wait times measured in years instead of months...
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 2:05:59 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/1/2005 2:09:47 PM EDT by CRC]
Well we can call Cliff Stearn's office and bug him to repeal the import parts bs at least.

It goes into effect on September 10th.

CRC
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 3:10:40 PM EDT
Lets do everything we can to get this to happen !

Damn guys, we gotta at least try!!!


LB
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 3:11:33 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:

Originally Posted By MMcCall:
I've often wondered what the antis would have to say if we attempted an NFA repeal.. they've portrayed all semis as "machine guns" anyway, where would they have to go?




See that's part of it.

They would HAVE to admit AR-15s are not automatic.




BINGO !

Its a win / win situation!

LB
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 6:18:32 PM EDT
btt
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 6:21:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
How so?

Virtually every anti gunner I know thinks machine guns are legal and non restricted.




Well, they are legal, but restricted as hell.

There is no machinegun ban except on those made after 1986.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 6:29:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 8/1/2005 6:29:51 PM EDT by JHMC79]

Originally Posted By Dragracer_Art:
It would be great if a repeal bill was passed... Only problem is, you'd still need to go through the BATF to get your MG's...
They have enough trouble keeping up with the small volume of transfers as it is... Just imagine how long it would take if the '86 MG ban was lifted... You'd see wait times measured in years instead of months...





I propose a bill to abolish the BATF and deny the retirement benefits of any employee thereof.

Some of the head honchos of the BATF could even be brought up on charges of obstruction of justice and denile of 2nd ammendment rights.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 6:33:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By WVHunter:

Originally Posted By UZI4you:
Work on the 1989 Import Ban first, then you can see how lifting the 1986 MG Ban would work out.




Agreed. Don't know if this is repetitive or not, but how about reversing Klinton's ban on the military surplusing ammo. I can barely aford to feed my AR with anything but Wolf!



how bout this.. repeal 86.. repeal the part about foreign guns.. raise the tax to .. say 2000 for mgs.. keep it 200 for silencers (or remove that rule altogether).. give a little take a little..

new mgs manufactured for civvies.. foriegn mgs ok for civvies.. gov gets 2 large for new toys.... 15k to 150k toys go WAY down in price...
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 7:09:39 PM EDT
$200 is retarded as is. $2000 is just plain fucking retarded. Give a lot, take whats owed without having to pay extra. Goooood idea.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 7:16:50 PM EDT
I think we ought to push the issue. I don't think we have much to lose.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 7:22:54 PM EDT

Originally Posted By CRC:
Well it was a thought.





Who do we need to call to at least bug? I mean, why the fuck not....
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 7:25:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By wkenneth1:
$200 is retarded as is. $2000 is just plain fucking retarded. Give a lot, take whats owed without having to pay extra. Goooood idea.



+100


LB
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 7:51:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By IchWarrior:

Originally Posted By CRC:
Well it was a thought.





Who do we need to call to at least bug? I mean, why the fuck not....


+1
I quit my job last week and I have two weeks before I move up to Mizzou.
I'm bored and really want buy an M16 on my 21st birthday.
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 9:31:52 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dragracer_Art:
It would be great if a repeal bill was passed... Only problem is, you'd still need to go through the BATF to get your MG's...
They have enough trouble keeping up with the small volume of transfers as it is... Just imagine how long it would take if the '86 MG ban was lifted... You'd see wait times measured in years instead of months...





so, put in a clause for reasonable tiem for transfers or the tax is refunded and transfer is allowed ahead immediately, somethign that sounds not too bad, like say 30 days?


Hell, our registry up here registers firearms in about 30 days give or take....... (not that I support registries of any kind)
Link Posted: 8/1/2005 10:03:25 PM EDT
There is already a bill pending in the house that speaks to the issue more directly.

Veterans' Heritage Firearms Act of 2005

I had lunch today with Gibbons' campaign manager and we talked about it briefly. I'm going to call his legislative aide in DC tomorrow to get an up to date status. THIS is the kind of bill that could be used as a vehicle to tack on some "goodies" to.

Instead of "dreaming" up bills, we should be aware of existing legislation and support them.
Link Posted: 8/2/2005 5:20:07 AM EDT
It's worth a try, no matter how unlikely. If we don't keep moving forward and attacking them, they'll have more leeway to dream up more legislation that will attack us. We need to stay on the offensive however we can.
Link Posted: 8/2/2005 6:57:01 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 47:
WHY DO PEOPLE WASTE TIME THINKING AND TYPING UP SUCH THINGS?



The anti's never give up, neither should we.



Link Posted: 8/2/2005 7:01:08 AM EDT
If I was a Congress Critter, I'd vote for it.
Link Posted: 8/2/2005 7:04:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 47:
WHY DO PEOPLE WASTE TIME THINKING AND TYPING UP SUCH THINGS?



If you think its a waste of time simply thinking of ways to restore your freedom you don't deserve any of it.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top