Ever since the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was signed into law in 2005, gun control activists have been looking for ways to get around it so they can keep using lawfare to bankrupt the firearms industry. Lately they've primarily tried to use public nuisance laws or statutes involving the marketing of products, but some gun control activists in Illinois are hoping that a new tactic will catch on.
In an op-ed at the Chicago Tribune, several doctors and Arne Duncan, Barack Obama's former Secretary of Education, have teamed up to pitch the public on a new bill, claiming that the PLCAA "protects the firearm industry from accountability" when their products are misused by violent criminals.
The Responsibility in Firearm Legislation Act in Illinois will change that. This act, introduced in the 104th General Assembly, creates an injury restitution fund, financed by firearm manufacturers, foreign and domestic, according to how frequently their products are recovered in events such as the River North mass shooting. When the RIFL Act is law, in order for finished firearm manufacturer products to be sold, imported or distributed in the state of Illinois they must contribute financially according to the harm and damage created by their products in our state.
The RIFL Act reinstates accountability for firearm manufacturers, providing a powerful financial incentive to innovate safer products, to reduce the harm they cause in Illinois, and to engage in suicide and violence prevention. The technology and the ability to quell firearm injury exists among finished firearm manufacturers, but it will not happen until our state ends the profitability of tragedies like the one in River North on July 2. Now is the time for our state to lead the rest of the country and our federal government.
This wouldn't "reinstate accountability" for gun makers. It would scapegoat them for the actions of criminals. Is there any similar legislation being proposed to penalize the alcohol industry? Pharmaceutical industry? Car makers?
Nope. It's only the firearms industry that's being singled out and blamed for the criminal misuse of their lawful (and constitutionally protected) products. And if passed, it would likely put a screeching halt to gun sales in the state.. at least until the law was thrown out by the courts. From the official synopsis of the bill:
Establishes a firearms manufacturer licensing program in the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation, with certain requirements, including that the sum of all fees for firearms manufacturer licenses shall be equal to the public health costs and financial burdens from firearm injuries and deaths. Provides that, beginning January 1, 2028, a manufacturer of firearms may not operate in this State without a license from the Department and that a manufacturer who violates this provision is subject to a civil penalty of up to $1,000,000 per month. Provides that, beginning January 1, 2028, a retailer may not sell a firearm to a consumer in this State from a manufacturer who does not have a license from the Department and that a retailer who violates this provision is subject to a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per violation, with certain requirements.
That's just a partial synopsis, but the actual bill is more than 100 pages long. Essentially, the state of Illinois would come up with an estimated total cost of "gun violence" in the state, and the price of a firearms manufacturer license would depend on both how many guns a particular company sells in Illinois, as well as how many of their firearms can be traced to a crime or suicide. This would not only penalize gun makers for the criminal misuse of their products, it would actually encourage the use of firearms in suicide because surviving family members would be eligible to receive money from the "RIFL Fund".
That's downright grotesque, but it's something the bill's authors and supporters either haven't thought about or find perfectly acceptable.
The authors of the Tribune op-ed claim "[n]o other industry in the United States is afforded the luxury of turning a blind eye to the public costs and impact their products have on society. Not the tobacco industry, not the automotive industry, not the pharmaceutical industry, not the construction industry, not the insurance industry, not even the chemical and nuclear engineering industry."
That's absolute nonsense. Gun companies can be sued for product defects, and gun sellers can be found liable for some crimes if they cut corners or violate the law when transferring a firearm. But that's not what the anti-gunners are asking for, even though none of the other industries they name are subject to the type of law they're demanding. Ford doesn't have to fork over money every time someone causes an accident, InBev doesn't have to cough up cash for every drunk driving arrest, and Craftsman doesn't have to pay a fee before it can sell a hammer because some small portion of their products are used in crimes.
Ultimately, the RIFL Act isn't about providing money to the victims of gun violence, or even holding gunmakers to blame for the actions of criminals. Its end game is a complete halt to gun sales in the state of Illinois by making it untenable for firearm companies to do business there. Thankfully the bill didnt get far this session, but the Tribune op-ed signals that the anti-gunners aren't giving up on their big idea, and we should expect a major push to enact the RIFL Act when lawmakers return to Springfield in January.
