A former high school athlete who was shot in 2003 may sue the companies that made and distributed the handgun used in the crime under an appellate court ruling that gun control advocates say will keep irresponsible gun makers and sellers from taking advantage of a federal law shielding them from lawsuits.That makes perfect sense to me. How about you?
The ruling by the Appellate Division of the state Supreme Court reversed a lower court's 2011 dismissal of victim Daniel Williams' complaint, which accused Ohio gun maker Hi-Point and distributor MKS Supply Inc. of Ohio of intentionally supplying handguns to irresponsible dealers because they profited from sales to the criminal gun market.
"If a gun company knows or has reason to know that a dealer or distributor that is selling the guns is doing so irresponsibly and in some cases, illegally, they need to do something about it," Brady Center attorney Jonathan Lowy said Monday. "They can't just continue to blindly supply them, knowing they're going to be arming criminals and just pocket the money and look the other way."
Please leave a comment.
When General Motors can be sued for drunks driving their cars, this will make sense. By that point, the country will be so lousy with control freaks that it'll be a lost cause.
ReplyDeleteWatch the Brady Campaign ignore this when it comes time to whine about how the NRA got the industry blanket immunity. I’ll come back and cite this article when it happens. What do you think it will take for them to forget? Two months? Three months? After all, their website still pats themselves on the back for winning a 600K settlement against Kahr Arms, while at the same time saying the PLCAA gives manufacturers immunity.
ReplyDelete