Details

• Sponsor - Kennedy
• Proposed - July 27, 2005
• Congressional Record Link - SA1614
• Amends - S.397
• Amendments - None.
• Vote - Amendment did not reach Senate floor.
• Results - No change in law.

Synopsis

This amendment would have added an opening for lawsuits:

• "in any case in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product failed to maintain theft prevention measures."
• when the seller knows, or reasonably should know, the person to whom the product is supplied is likely to, and does, use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to the person or others.

Analysis

The first part of the amendment looks to be aimed directly at Kahr Arms that had a case where an employee was stealing pre-serialized receivers and other parts. It also opens up every other company to court time where they would have to prove their loss prevention methods.

The Negligent Entrustment  clause is wording common to at least half a dozen of these amendments. So, one more time, every firearm runs the risk of injuring a person and this would be an open ended invitation to allow lawsuits.

Only registered users can write comments.
Please login or register.

Powered by AkoComment 2.0!