OPPOSE HOUSE AMENDMENT 1 TO HB 218 (GONG-GERSHOWITZ)

ALLOWS PRIVATE CAUSE OF ACTION TO BE BROUGHT AGAINST ANY INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY INVOLVED IN THE FIREARMS INDUSTRY BY USING OVERLY BROAD TERMS IN CONFLICT WITH FEDERAL LAW

House Amendment #1 to HB 218 provides a private cause of action against firearms manufacturers, importers, distributors and retailers for a wide variety of vaguely-worded things ... which basically comes down to mere participation in the firearms industry.

Nothing in these vague standards gives firearms industry participants guidance on how to avoid liability. Some examples include: (a) helping create a dangerous condition; (b) any gun design or marketing that might appeal to a minor; and (c) how one might identify a “straw purchaser.”

The apparent goal is to subject firearms industry participants to a flood of private litigation to financially cripple them with legal fees. The net result, if successful, would put out of business those who make and sell firearms; this would cut off any supply to law enforcement and members of the armed forces, as well as citizens who lawfully exercise their Second Amendment rights.

House Amendment #1 to HB 218 also conflicts with federal law that addresses such instances of liability. In 2005, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (“PLCAA” / 15 U.S.C. §§ 7901– 7903). The PLCAA provides broad immunity to gun manufacturers and dealers in federal and state court and prohibits a “qualified civil liability action” that results from the criminal or “lawful misuse” of firearms or ammunition.

PLCAA provides six exceptions to the blanket civil immunity: (1) actions brought against individuals who “knowingly transfer a firearm, knowing that such firearms will be used to commit a crime of violence” by an individual directly harmed by such unlawful conduct; (2) actions brought against a seller for negligent entrustment or negligence per se; (3) an action in which a manufacturer or seller knowingly violated a state or federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of their product, and the violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought; (4) an action for breach of contract or warranty; (5) an action for death, physical injuries or property damage resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of the product; (6) an action brought by the Attorney General to enforce the Gun Control Act or the National Firearms Act.

Similar legislation in six other states is under legal challenge for violating PLCAA.

House Amendment #1 to HB 218 is both unnecessary and in conflict with federal law.

OPPONENTS

Illinois State Rifle Association
Illinois Manufacturers Association Springfield Armory
National Rifle Association
National Shooting Sports Foundation

OPPOSE HOUSE AMENDMENT #1 TO HB 218