The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act is, theoretically, a protection against frivolous lawsuits against the gun industry based on the actions of third parties. You can't sue Ruger because a gang-banger shot up your neighborhood with a Ruger.
But lately, some states have tried to go around it, while others are doing the opposite.
It's stupid that we've even reached this point, but the PLCAA is not just under fire from the next anti-gun Congress and White House; we have states essentially trying to ignore it.
But South Carolina is looking at doing the exact opposite, becoming the latest state to flip the anti-gun industry script.
While the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, passed back in 2005, was designed to do just that, many states have chosen to pass stronger laws to protect firearm industry members in their own states. South Carolina is the latest such state, with House Bill 4723 currently under consideration.
And the measure has garnered the support of at least one major gun-rights organization.
“A critical pro-Second Amendment bill has just been pre-filed in South Carolina, and we need your help to ensure it becomes law,” Gun Owners of America (GOA) wrote in an alert to members in the state. “House Bill 4723, the South Carolina Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, was recently introduced by Rep. Chris Wooten of District 69. This bill would strengthen South Carolina law by prohibiting so-called ‘qualified civil liability actions’ that attempt to hold firearm manufacturers, dealers, and sellers liable for a criminal’s misuse of their lawful products.”
Like similar laws that have been passed in several other states over the past few years, HB 4723 would protect law-abiding gun makers, sellers and owners from unfair and politically motivated lawsuits; stop anti-gun activists from abusing the courts with lawsuit schemes that place unjustified strain on the firearms industry; allows real lawsuits when there is actual negligence, a defective product or criminal wrongdoing from the company; and uphold he Palmetto State’s Second Amendment rights and the protections in the state constitution.
And just like the PLCAA, it's only happening because some people want to blame gun companies for things that are beyond its control.
If I'm a used car dealer, and I sell a Camaro to someone, am I liable because they then went out and got in a fatal wreck with someone? Obviously not. No one thinks I should be. They recognize that the driver was the problem.
Now, let's say I sell that Camaro and he intentionally runs someone over. Does that change anything?
No, it doesn't. Everyone knows cars are potentially lethal if misused, and the assumption is that people are buying them in good faith and intend to operate them appropriately.
But with guns, somehow, Glock is responsible for every single time a Glock is used illegally. They've been held responsible for a third-party-designed and built "full-auto switch" that was designed to fit their guns. They faced lawsuits, all premised on how they failed to completely upend their company, because of something they had no role in doing.
Remington was held responsible for Sandy Hook, even though the killer there stole the gun from his mother, whom he murdered first.
And the list rolls on.
PLCAA tried to stop that, and did for years. Then, states started trying to get creative and make laws that seek to go around federal law. South Carolina is trying to do the opposite, to strengthen those laws. This will help protect industry in the state, but also potentially attract new gun companies to the state, as they might want more protection from lawsuits than they get elsewhere.
And the absolute worst that happens is that you prevent stupid lawsuits that never should have happened in the first place.
