The Indiana Court of Appeals today ruled that the City of Gary's lawsuit against gun manufacturers may proceed to trial. The 3-0 Court ruling held that the 2005 federal "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act" does not shield the gun industry from liability for irresponsible sales practices that funnel guns to the criminal market.
Is it me or do the judges that say this law does not cover these lawsuits are not actually reading what congress passed?
GS1, I am not so sure. I do not think the law would shield this conduct. Was a lawsuit easier than the "reasonable doubt" standard in a criminal trial?
Was a lawsuit easier than the "reasonable doubt" standard in a criminal trial?[/quote:2xdc5k68] But what does the conduct of Indiana gun dealers have to do with the manufacturers? I am ready for some judicial impeachments. The judges in this country have decided they are our overlords.
The law says that clearly breaking a gun law means you have no protection. So I have no problem with the dealers getting in trouble. How exactly this allows the suit against manufacturers that sell to distributers that then sell to these unlawful dealers is what I am referring to.