WASHINGTON – President Joe Biden wants divine help on his gun control agenda, but his question may be surprising.
And gun manufacturers warn that the results could be dire for their industry.
During remarks about announcing new executive action to curb gun violence, Biden took a turn when he suggested that he could ask God to immediately change one gun law, and it was not the elimination of assault weapons or ‘stockpiles’ ‘not.
He would allow the almighty people to sue gun manufacturers.
‘This is the only outfit that is exempt from the summons. If I get one thing on my list – (if) the Lord comes down and says, ‘Joe, you get one of these,’ give me that one, “Biden said during a ceremony in the Rose Garden.
“Most people do not realize, the only industry in America, the billion-dollar industry, which cannot be sued, and has been released from the charge, are gun manufacturers,” Biden continued.
Biden, who has written and opposed gun laws in Washington for many years, refers to the Protection of Legal Trade in Arms Act (PLCAA), a 2005 law that largely protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from lawsuits when people use their products illegally, such as by shooting someone.
“He wants to get us out of here,” Mark Oliva, director of public affairs at the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the firearms trade group, said of Biden. “So it’s a very narrow proposal, and we’m taking it very seriously.”
The law is not as well known as other proposals such as the universal background checks or the ban on assault weapons. But the National Rifle Association calls the PLCAA ‘the most important legislation for guns in 20 years’ when the law was passed and gun control advocates have been trying to repeal it ever since.
While many gun control advocates would still put universal background checks at the top of their agenda, the removal of the PLCAA would also be there – although it does face a tougher climb in Congress, which is probably why Biden wanted supernatural help. .
“The protection is unique because it protects the industry from the intended use of their product,” said David Pucino, senior staff attorney at the Giffords Law Center, which promotes gun control. “The industry knows that if the victims got their fair day in court, the industry would lose.”
This law was introduced in response to a flood of lawsuits that the courts want to use to reduce guns, after a previous attempt to legislate in Washington and many state capitals ceased.
“These outrageous lawsuits that seek to hold a law-abiding industry accountable for the actions of criminals are a threat to jobs and the economy (s) jeopardize the exercise of constitutionally protected freedoms,” the bill’s sponsor at the time said. Sen. Larry Craig, a Republican in Idaho, said at the time.
Craig manages to stop the packs. Most litigation against the firearms industry is now dismissed, although the law provides for a few exceptions, such as for gun defects or if there are violations of other state or federal laws by the manufacturers.
‘The fact is that access to the legal system has forced the car industry to build safer cars with airbags and that has prevented the tobacco industry from marketing to children. And the result of that lawsuit was that American lives were saved, “said Nicholas Suplina, managing director of legislation and policy at Everytown for Gun Safety. “It really shuts down access to the justice system for people who want to hold the industry accountable for irresponsible practices.”
Suplina said, for example, that gun manufacturers can add safety features to prevent children from shooting themselves unintentionally or to steal weapons more difficultly, but there is little pressure on them to do so.
Kristen Rand, the legislative director for the Violence Policy Center, which promotes the control of weapons, said if the law is changed, complaints could probably be brought against gun manufacturers for the sale of weapons designed and marketed primarily for the killing of people, with military-inspired features and advertising.
‘The vast majority of rifles sold today are high-capacity semi-automatic pistols, assault weapons or really powerful rifles such as 50-caliber sniper rifles. There is very little market for traditional hunting rifles, ”said Rand. “You are removing PLCAA, you are opening up this whole world of mechanisms to hold the manufacturers accountable.”
However, the firearms industry and proponents of gun rights say the protection against litigation is not unique, but the opposition they face against anti-gun groups.
Biden was wrong, Oliva and fact checkers said the firearms industry alone could not be sued. Other industries, such as pharmaceutical manufacturers and airlines, have special immunity from certain types of lawsuits, and the gun industry has not gone completely unpunished.
“The gun industry can be absolutely sued,” said Oliva, of the trading industry group. “You just can not charge a gun dealer because someone abused a weapon. It would be like suing Ford because a drunk driver killed someone. ‘
In an ongoing, high-profile case in Connecticut, the courts have ruled that victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting can sue Remington over the way they marketed the military rifle used in the massacre, thanks to a state law causing one of the releases in PLCAA.
Proponents of arms control maintain that the protection of the firearms industry is unique, pointing out, for example, the massive settlements that pharmaceutical companies are now paying out for the misuse of their opioid products. And they note that the gun industry did well before 2005, when the law was passed.
But neither party thinks a change is likely. The repeal of the protection would be an unconditional issue for most Republicans in Congress and their allies for gun rights, and it is not even clear that all Democrats in Congress would be on board.
“It would be a very difficult battle,” Suplina said. “For us, background checks come first.”