Colorado Democrats call for liability for makers of assault-style weapons

Ryme

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2013
Messages
26
Reaction score
3
Location
Denver CO
Source

Colorado Democrats said they will a introduce bill that would hold makers and sellers of assault-style weapons legally liable for any harm gunmen inflicted with them in a news conference Tuesday in which they called for a long list of tough new gun-control laws.

Party leaders made the announcement at a morning news conference in the West foyer of the state Capitol. Flanked by survivors and family of mass shootings at Columbine High School and at a theater in Aurora, party leaders touted their legislative goals as a "comprehensive" package of gun bills.

The Democrats did not release copies of the various bills.

Aside from the call for liability for makers and sellers of assault-style weapons, Democrats called for a limited-size ammunition magazines, fees for gun background checks, stricter training for concealed weapons permits and other prohibitions.

The call to hold liable makers and sellers of assault-style guns appears to be in conflict with a federal law passed by Congress in 2005, according to David Kopel, a University of Denver law professor and Second Amendment expert.

"The purpose of the (Protection of Lawful Commerce and Arms) act is to prevent firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable for crimes committed with their products," Kopel said in a recent e-mail. "However, both manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible."

A similar measure had been rejected by the Senate on March 2, 2004 after it had been combined with an extension to the assault weapons ban into a single piece of legislation.

The final bill passed only after an amendment was added that mandated safety locks on handguns and after the assault weapons ban renewal had been prevented from being added onto the bill.

Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper, who voiced support for universal background checks in his State of the State address, did not attend the press conference.

However, on Thursday Hickenlooper is scheduled to meet privately with National Rifle Association President David Keene. The NRA has voiced staunch opposition to any new firearms laws at the federal and state levels.

In a Denver Post article published Monday, even some Democrats voiced opposition to new gun laws.

"I'm not sure why Democrats here in Colorado and in Washington, D.C., think that more gun laws is the answer," said state Rep. Ed Vigil, D-Fort Garland. "Bans or extra requirements are not going to prevent crimes."

In the wake of recent mass shootings in Aurora and at an elementary in Newtown, Conn., a majority of state Democrats have voiced support for stricter gun laws. Meanwhile, Republicans have argued that such legislation is not the answer to preventing future mass shootings.

Since the legislative session convened in January, several rallies by supporters and opponents of new gun laws have drawn hundreds to the state Capitol.

And Democrats have already rejected a pair of Republican-led efforts to expand gun availability, including allowing teachers to carry guns in classrooms.

Staff writers Tim Hoover and Ryan Parker contributed to this report.

Kurtis Lee: 303-954-1655, [email protected] or twitter.com/kurtisalee

Read more: Colorado Democrats call for liability for makers of assault-style weapons - The Denver Post Colorado Democrats call for liability for makers of assault-style weapons - The Denver Post
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: Terms of Use - The Denver Post
 
Register to hide this ad
So when using this logic we will now be able to sue auto makers for injury/damage caused by car accidents, knife makers for cuts while chopping onions and paper-mills for paper-cuts? I found this absolutely ridiculous and from the comments which were hidden on both the Denver post site and Facebook page people are outraged.

Please fill this out - Ruger - Protect Your Rights
 
Boys,

They gonna end up taking a lot of back water on all this outlandish carrin' on!


.

It makes me happy when I see news of local county sheriffs saying that they will uphold the second amendment and not enforce federal laws that over reach. I don't have the links at hand, but I have already seen two, one of which is here in CO.
 
And let us not forget that McDonalds is liable for making you fat. :D

This is yet another example of spiteful buffoons lashing out in any way they can to say they're "doing something." The Aurora tragedy was not the result of a manufacturer's defect or breach of contract. There was no criminal misconduct save for the actions of a lone, deranged individual named James Eagan Holmes.

Simply put, the firearms used operated precisely the way they were intended, which was to discharge a projectile from the end of a barrel. The truth of the matter is that like any other piece of machinery, a firearm that expels a bullet doesn't really care what's in its path once the cartridge is ignited. Sadly, no good comes of this when said machine is in the hands of a nutter much less anybody with criminal intentions.

Laughably enough, courts have absolved Cinemark from any "duty of care" to the slain victims, yet tragedies like the one cited are somehow the fault of firearms manufacturers... Go figure. :rolleyes:
 
So when using this logic we will now be able to sue auto makers for injury/damage caused by car accidents, knife makers for cuts while chopping onions and paper-mills for paper-cuts? I found this absolutely ridiculous and from the comments which were hidden on both the Denver post site and Facebook page people are outraged.

Please fill this out - Ruger - Protect Your Rights

Hmmmmm ... I guess if it means we can hold them liable for everyone who gets killed because their wonderful laws failed to perform properly .....
we have em against the ropes boys ... if I can catch that one in under 3 minutes they are desperately throwing drafts out
 
colorado....hmmm...isn't that the state that just made dope legal?? :eek:
just saying....

If by dope you mean marijuana, then yes. I love this state, the people here (aside from this article) seem to have common sense. Legalize and tax and watch the money roll in. I guess we should leave that debate for another forum though.
 
Hey folks, are you sure there is nothing in the water the Dems are drinking? Could be some kind of radioactive anti-gun element? Because proposals like these have to come from somebody who is not mentally healthy. I’m trying to find an answer to this madness and I can’t find a logical reply. This is truly unbelievable.
 
Snip....

Laughably enough, courts have absolved Cinemark from any "duty of care" to the slain victims, yet tragedies like the one cited are somehow the fault of firearms manufacturers... Go figure. :rolleyes:

Tell me more about this. Is there a ruling somewhere?
 
If by dope you mean marijuana, then yes. I love this state, the people here (aside from this article) seem to have common sense. Legalize and tax and watch the money roll in. I guess we should leave that debate for another forum though.


you have apparently never worked in the field to know (i have) marihuana is the "gateway drug" for most addicts...don't believe that?ask any of them and you will find that to be an accurate statement...yes...you can legalize,tax and make your money...which drug is next?cocaine?heroin?who knows...maybe my state will be the next greedy one to tax and as you say "let the money roll in".....when thousands and thousands of additional addicts are created...who pays for that?your colorado govt.thats "watching the money roll in"?:eek:
 
you have apparently never worked in the field to know (i have) marihuana is the "gateway drug" for most addicts...

Probably best left as your "opinion" because as a retired fed and local drug task force officer, marijuana "in my opinion" is NOT a gateway drug. Addicts are......addicts and their general gateway drug was tobacco and then alcohol. Marijuana was just in the middle. It was already a class one (small fine not able to arrest) petty offense here for .999 oz. anyway. Probably best left for another arena anyway. ;)
 
Probably best left as your "opinion" because as a retired fed and local drug task force officer, marijuana "in my opinion" is NOT a gateway drug. Addicts are......addicts and their general gateway drug was tobacco and then alcohol. Marijuana was just in the middle. It was already a class one (small fine not able to arrest) petty offense here for .999 oz. anyway. Probably best left for another arena anyway. ;)


then your opinion is very differant from the users (addicts)
 
These sicko are willing to do anything in order to impose their wills on the people!
 
Back
Top