California governor signs law allowing gun violence victims to sue firearm manufacturers for damages

Status
Not open for further replies.
The PLCAA protects gun makers from frivolous lawsuits, but not from lawsuits alleging negligence, defective products, criminal misconduct. It looks like the law was written to hold gun makers guilty of negligence if guns "end up in the hands of people who are prohibited from owning firearms.” That law is going to end up in court.
 
Aim1 said:
We'll see how far this goes.



https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/13/us/california-gun-law-victims-sue-manufacturers/index.html#amp_tf=From %1$s&aoh=16578415714504&csi=1&referrer=https://www.google.com&ampshare=https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/13/us/california-gun-law-victims-sue-manufacturers/index.html






View attachment 1089922
Click to expand...
Don’t like Gun Banner’s term “ Gun Violence”

They never refer to it as Drug Violence, Knife Violence, Car Violence, Government Violence, Hammer Violence

Hope the Gun Company start their own Law Firm and protect themselves with counter law suits,
 
one more thing… Hopefully, the supreme court of the United States of America will take a case about this and set a precedent!!!
 
Doesn't this violate Federal law? If so, how can it be legit? I'm sure there is some justification at the state level; I just do not understand it.
 
California Assembly Bill 1594 “utilizes an exemption to the federal statute that allows gun makers or sellers to be sued for violations of state laws concerning the sale or marketing of firearms,” according to the California news release.
Click to expand...
danez71 said:
There's the key.
Click to expand...

I foresee a challenge to the state law regarding the exact law regarding "violations of state laws concerning sale or marketing". Conduct of an individual is not a violation of the manufacturer regarding 'sale or marketing'. This sounds to me like too loose and designed to evade the protections of law.

But what do I know?

Well, I did know to move out of PDSR California as soon as I could.
 
lilguy said:
Marijuana is Illegal at federal level and legal in my state, Illinois.
Obviously states can go their own way at times on issues. Leave it to California to be on the cutting edge of creative antigun legislation.
Click to expand...

Well the constitution says otherwise, its called the supremacy clause. Now, that gets selectively ignored by certain political groups, but should be used to crush this type of legislation the next time a friendly administration is in Washington.
 
So, if someone buys a bag of peanuts and brings it within close proximity of a person with severe allergies, can the "victim" sue the farmer and the store for their reaction/death?
 
According to Newsom, you shouldn't have been swinging your nuts around in the first place!

You should also be a mind reader to know the people that are allergic to nuts flying at their face.
 
The Texas antiabortion law that the supreme court wouldn't rule on is a horrible way for any state to strip away pretty much any right you enjoy today. Hopefully the court will rule on it to put an end to other laws based on it.
 
The OP related to a recently enacted California law. The discussion has degenerated into general rants about other laws and courts in other jurisdictions doing other things. Further irrelevant responses are likely to produce an unsurprising result.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top