[jsalcedo]

I pulled this off another forum, very interesting.





There has been a lot of comment here and in the media in
general on HB 1036, also known as the Protection of Lawful
Commerce in Arms Act, or the reckless lawsuit pre-emption act. I
finally went and read the exact wording of the bill, as passed by
the house. It can be found at
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c08:17:./temp/~c108sXRnZp::
which is the page I linked to from the official House of
Representative's web site.

I found several interesting things in this law that had not been
mentioned, or were improperly characterized by people here and in
the media.

The first is the case of the Washington area sniper and the
Tacoma gun shop that sold the rifle. Many people have claimed
that this law suit would be dismissed automatically and that is
simply not true. What is true is that Bushmaster would be dropped
from the suit since it did nothing wrong, but the store itself
would still have a suit allowed against it. The law specifically
says that a store can be sued for negligence, negligent
entrusting, or violation of a federal law. The store may then
make a defense that the rifle was stolen, and it would be a trial
base on how the rifle was obtained, decided by the jury. Lawsuits
like the city lawsuits against the manufacturers would be dropped.

The second interesting thing, and most important to me, is line
Section 2(a)(1) that says that Congress finds that the Second
Amendment protects an individual right. This line can help us in
many more cases than people think. We need to get this law passed
for this reason, even without considering the law suits.