2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 113,046
- 53,552
- 2,290
Anti-gunners have fantasies about suing gun companies whenever a gun is used for a crime. Ignore the fact that the gun company didn't commit the crime .....some 3rd party did......
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was created to protect gun makers from deranged, anti-gun loons, who seek to use the legal system to ban guns.....gun makers can't be sued because some criminal low life used a gun in a crime.
Think along the lines of someone trying to sue a car maker because a toyota camry was used to run someone over, used to commit a bank robbery, or drive by shooting....
To educate the loons who want to ban guns about the PLCAA....we have the issue with the Sig Saur P320 pistol.
This pistol has now been shown to fire, even when it is in the holster and no one is touching it.
This is not covered by the PLCAA.....this is a defective gun, and if you are harmed by it...you can sue SIG SAUR
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act was created to protect gun makers from deranged, anti-gun loons, who seek to use the legal system to ban guns.....gun makers can't be sued because some criminal low life used a gun in a crime.
Think along the lines of someone trying to sue a car maker because a toyota camry was used to run someone over, used to commit a bank robbery, or drive by shooting....
To educate the loons who want to ban guns about the PLCAA....we have the issue with the Sig Saur P320 pistol.
This pistol has now been shown to fire, even when it is in the holster and no one is touching it.
This is not covered by the PLCAA.....this is a defective gun, and if you are harmed by it...you can sue SIG SAUR
