Ammo For Sale

« « TSA Failure | Home | Operational Requirements for an Infantry Hand Weapon » »

Emergency Powers

In Arkansas, a bill to prohibit the government from regulating guns during an emergency. And it prevents municipalities from suing gun makers. Not sure I like the latter bit.

4 Responses to “Emergency Powers”

  1. Standard Mischief Says:

    First, it clarifies the prohibition against any city, county, town, or other local unit from suing any firearms manufacturer, dealer, or trade association except for breach of contract or warranty.

    What fault do you find in this? It prohibits nuisance junk lawsuits, right?

  2. John Smith. Says:

    Sounds like an all around winner to me… Unc it does not prevent individual citizens from suing gun companies just the cities or counties.. They have no business suing anyone other than their own residents…

  3. Gunstar1 Says:

    Georgia has had the city/county lawsuit prohibition for a while now. Below is the opening paragraph (my emphasis) from the decision of a lawsuit that was dismissed based on the law.

    Sturm Ruger & Co., Inc. v. City of Atlanta, 253 Ga. App. 713 (2002)
    http://www.georgiapacking.org/caselaw/sturm-rugervcity-of-atlanta.htm

    On February 4, 1999, the City filed a complaint alleging that it had suffered harm and incurred significant expenses because the defendants, fourteen gun manufacturers and three trade associations (gun manufacturers), had manufactured, distributed, marketed, promoted, and sold firearms which were defective, unreasonably dangerous, and negligently designed. The complaint alleged, for example, that the firearms were unreasonably dangerous because they could be fired by unauthorized users, including children, criminals, and mentally unstable persons, because they were not distributed with adequate warnings as to the risks or instructions for proper storage, and because they failed to adequately warn all foreseeable users, including unintended users, that an undetectable round of ammunition could be housed in the firing chamber, thus allowing the gun to be fired even when the magazine had been removed.

    Basically, the city of Atlanta tried to sue 17 companies because they sold a product that functioned exactly as designed… it fires a bullet when the trigger is pulled.

    That is the kind of crap the Arkansas bill will prohibit. If the gun does not perform as designed, then a city can sue. If it does perform as designed, even if the city thinks that design is bad (such as the gun not being able to read a persons mind to determine if they are mentally unstable or a child), then the city cannot sue.

    Most of the time the companies win these lawsuits anyway. However, the companies loose millions of dollars and the city is using taxpayer money to try to drive the companies out of business. In the above case, it took 3 years to dismiss a lawsuit that the city was prohibited from filing in the first place.

    Though I am not sure exactly why it is currently needed in Arkansas, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act from 2005 covers it already (federal and state court including any subdivision thereof).
    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/uscode15/usc_sup_01_15_10_105.html

  4. Jimmy Says:

    Most of the gun-related bills in AR aren’t getting much press right now, such as HB1723. I found it while riffiling through recently filed bills (trying to make myself sleepy) and it’s titled, ” AN ACT REGARDING TECHNICAL CORRECTIONS TO FIREARM STATUTES.” The big win there (for me anyway) is a specific defense for CCW licenseholders dropping their kids off at school. I can’t tell you what a pain that is to work around.
    http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/assembly/2011/2011R/Bills/HB1723.pdf

Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.

Uncle Pays the Bills

Find Local
Gun Shops & Shooting Ranges


bisonAd

Categories

Archives