Gun law to turn on makers
By Oliver Poole in Los Angeles
(Filed: 16/08/2002)
[url=http://news.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;$sessionid$HNYL1TIPUZJ1FQFIQMGSFF4AVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2002/08/16/wgun16.xml&sSheet=/news/2002/08/16/ixworld.html&_requestid=18592]click here[/url]

California has taken a step towards allowing shooting victims to sue gun makers, setting up a battle with America's powerful firearms lobby and opening the door to numerous lawsuits.

The state Senate voted to overturn a 1984 law that shields gunmakers from liability. The measure now goes to the state Assembly, where it is also expected to be passed, and then to the governor, Gray Davis.

The bill was tabled after a lawsuit failed against the Navegar gun company, which advertised that its weapons masked fingerprints and were "as tough as your toughest customer". A man killed eight people when he went on a rampage with a Navegar gun.

Supporters of the legislation hope that Mr Davis will sign it, in part because he was one of only a handful of assemblymen to vote against the 1984 law.

The gun lobby has already started efforts to defeat the measure. Chuck Michel, of the California Rifle and Pistol Association, said it was designed to "open the floodgates of frivolous litigation against the gun industry so they can litigate it to death."

I had heard that 50% of the cost of every product was to cover the cost of liability insurance. If this passes it will set a precedent. People will be able to sue car manufacturers because of the action af a drunk driver. Product prices are going to skyrocket.

I think I'll sue USNJoe for emotional duress from his posting this disturbing article. [whacko]

I may be missing something but I thought that Navegar (aka Intertec) was already out of buissness. I'm just glad it's only a state law, hehehe, preaty soon your not going to be able to buy anything at all in Cali because of the lawsuits.

Didn't Florida already have this law? I think someone sued the makers of the Tec-9 in that state.

I thought I read that Navegar got off.  The judge threw out the case or something.

Farkin retards!

I think i'll have to countersue marvl for posting that he is going to sue me for posting this disturbing article....[puke]

Someone with money and brains (two things that don't always come in the same package) needs to add onto the bill the right to:

1. Sue makers of alcoholic beverages, in cases where alcohol plays a role.

2. Sue car manufacturers in cases where cars play a role.

3. Sue anyone that makes a product of any type used in crimes, etc.

That way, the manufacturers would join together as a force and tell the other lawyers to fuck off.

As it stands, when ONE "bad" product is singled-out, nobody joins in the fight to get rid of the bad laws.

If you get everyone involved (ie. not just gun manufacturers) There would be more business outcry against frivolous lawsuits.

"This item is not to be sold, used in, or transported to the state of California."

Critical medical equipment might be the place to start this trend... [}:D]

This definitely is not good for Kalif.  It has passed the Senate, and is going to the house for re-approval. I think that it should pass with no problems. What an unholy alliance, the Dems want to ban guns and the trial lawyers want the money! What a great combination.

I heard the other day that all the lawyers in the US are going to ban together in a class action suit to sue all of the non-lawyers.  They are emotionally upset because they don't don't have ALL the money in the country.  They think it is not fair.  

Massachusetts went through this rigamarole the last couple years, but recently the tide has turned against the plaintiffs, at least here in Mass.

Every lawsuit to date has been dismissed.  They usually win at the lower level but get thrown out at the higher levels.  Most of the cities that filed lawsuits have dropped them because they cost too much to defend and no one has won on them.

California will be different though.  Hopefully the Federal lawsuit ban will be put in place before their repel of the state ban goes into effect.

While everyone in CA was crying and raising hell over the 5-cent bullet tax, this bill was gaining support behind the scenes. In fact, the author of the bullet tax (the tax bill died in committee), who is also the author of this bill, basically admitted that the bullet tax was a ruse used to draw attention away from this bill. This new bill passed in the state senate, but it still has to pass in the assembly and be signed by the governor (which is a sure bet.)

This is an extremely dangerous bill. I can see a case where smaller manufacturers will simply stop selling guns in this state. The larger manufacturers, those who can afford high-dollar liability insurance policies, will simply raise the price of their guns.

Time will tell. This could be grounds for a Second Amendment challenge as well.