PA Appeals Court rules Gun Makers can be sued

[85MikeTPI]

https://thehill.com/regulation/court...protection-law

A 2005 law protecting firearms manufacturers from civil liability is unconstitutional, a Pennsylvania appeals court ruled in a Monday filing.

[Mango]

Gustafson*s parents alleged that the semi-automatic did not have a safety feature preventing it from going off without the clip

That alone is problematic.

[EWTHeckman]

#$%%@# #$@%)(*& )(# )(*% @#$%!!!

And that is all I have to say about this flagrant lawlessness.

[PocketProtector]

The Commiecrat way.....Legislating from the bench

[Xringshooter]

OK then, lets start suing all the car, truck, motorcycle, UTV, et al for anything that happens when someone gets injured when in a mishap. How about suing a chainsaw manufacturer if someone injures themselves while using one? This is just stupid and these liberal judges who try to legislate from the bench need to go.

[PAMedic=F|A=]

Wait.

They ruled on the 10th amendment.

A court.

Remembered.

The.

10th.

Amendment.


This is fing huge.

[PAMedic=F|A=]

https://thehill.com/regulation/court...protection-law

A 2005 law protecting firearms manufacturers from civil liability is unconstitutional, a Pennsylvania appeals court ruled in a Monday filing.

Pennsylvania appeals court rules gun industry protection law unconstitutional

By Zack Budryk
September 29, 2020 - 08:03 AM EDT
Pennsylvania appeals court rules gun industry protection law unconstitutional
A 2005 law protecting firearms manufacturers from civil liability is unconstitutional, a Pennsylvania appeals court ruled in a Monday filing.

A three-judge panel Monday ruled the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) of 2005 violates the 10th Amendment, which states that all powers not specifically delegated to the federal government are the responsibility of states.

The 2005 law says companies shall not be held legally liable for harm caused by those who "criminally or unlawfully misuse firearm products or ammunition products that function as designed and intended."

After a Pennsylvania 14-year-old accidentally shot and killed his friend J.R. Gustafson in 2016, Gustafson*s parents sued both the gun manufacturer and the retailer where it was purchased. Gustafson*s parents alleged that the semi-automatic did not have a safety feature preventing it from going off without the clip. This, they argued, made the gun defective and both Springfield Armory and Saloom Department Store liable for their son*s death.

In a 63-page ruling, the panel wrote that *the only portions of the PLCAA that do not offend the Constitution are its findings and purposes ... and a few definitions,* according to CNN.

New poll shows Biden up 9 points in Pennsylvania
GOP asks Supreme Court to halt mail voting extension in Pennsylvania
The court also rejected the defense of the law as part of the federal government*s power to govern interstate commerce. A gun being sold across state lines at some point *does not give Congress perpetual authority to regulate any harm it may cause," he wrote.

The court rejected a Westmoreland County trial judge*s dismissal of the lawsuit, which cited the PLCAA. The case will return to the trial court as a result of the ruling.

"In finding that PLCAA is unconstitutional in its entirety, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania properly recognizes that states have the authority to hold negligent gun makers accountable in court, and to ensure that all victims have the right to seek civil justice against wrongdoers who cause them harm," Jonathan Lowy, the Gustafsons* lead attorney, said in a statement. Lowy is also vice president of the pro-gun control Brady Campaign.

[PAMedic=F|A=]

What is interesting is that a state court found the federal law unconstitutional.


Wonder what other federal laws we can find unconstitutional in Pennsylvania....

[father-of-five]

That alone is problematic.

The should have had a phoenix hp22. It has 2 of those urban sounding clip safeties.

[streaker69]

It would seem the 14yr old that was possession of the firearm is responsible for the death. Why aren't the parents suing him?