HR 9298 - The SHOTs Act  by Tom Reynolds

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) was enacted in 2005. The law prohibits frivolous lawsuits against manufacturers of firearms, ammunition and component parts for the unlawful misuse of legally-made and sold products. The law counteracted politically-motivated efforts that were designed to bankrupt the firearm and ammunition industry by running up legal fees to defend against lawsuits that have no merit.

The U.S. Supreme Court recently reinforced this when it rejected the $10 billion claim against U.S. firearm manufacturers for the criminal violence caused by narco-terrorists in Mexico.  (Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc., et al v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos)

Unfortunately, the law and Supreme Court rulings do no deter the anti-gun left.  For example: if there were a drive-by shooting from a Ford, using a Colt, would Ford be liable?   But under   HR9298  “reasonable” liability” standards the anti-gun left would like to hold Colt liable.

So, U.S. Representative Derek Schmidt (R-Kansas) has introduced H.R. 9298, the Stopping Harmful and Outrageous Torts (SHOT) Act.  It has a companion bill in the House, S. 4775.  It would protect against frivolous public nuisance lawsuits that have been allowed by 11 states* under S. 4775 “reasonable” liability” standards.

Under the SHOT Act, law-abiding manufacturers and retailers of firearms, ammunition and component parts would not be blamed for products that function as designed and would not be liable for “the harm caused by those who criminally or unlawfully misuse” their products

We can hope that S.4775 and H.R.9298 are quickly passed and signed by the President.  The anti-gun left would like nothing more than to neuter 2A by driving gun manufacturers out of business.

* California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Washington and Virginia.