Little-known gun fact led NRA puppets to exempt manufacturers and dealers from gun crime liability

[ProgressiveEconomist]

Last edited Sun Jan 17, 2016, 08:59 PM - Edit history (1)

Note: Reposted here as suggested by GD moderator who locked the original thread as "off-topic".

The Democratic debate in Charleston tonight promises to explore the bloody policy implications of several important votes Bernie Sanders has cast on gun issues. The most alarming and bizarre of these votes (for the so-called PLCAA in 2005) effectively exempted gun manufacturers and dealers from accountability for selling guns used in crimes. Why did the NRA insist on such a measure and pressure the politicians they supported to vote for it? 

In 1995, Northeastern U prof Glenn Pierce took a close look at ATF data obtained through a FOIA request. He found a very disturbing pattern that could have led to severe crackdowns on gun marketing: 57 percent of guns used in crimes traced back to just 1 percent of gun dealers. See, for example, 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/23/AR2010102302996_2.html?sid=ST2010102304311

This statistical pattern seemed to show that a tiny fraction of gun dealers might be specializing in running guns to criminals. Since criminal gangs like those who dominate some neighborhoods in Chicago continually must dump and replace crime guns that could be used as evidence against them, such gangs could constitute especially lucrative repeat customers for unscrupulous dealers.

Before Bernie's 2005 vote, manufacturers who supplied high-crime gun dealers in principle could be held accountable in some states. But because of the PLCAA, such accountability now is virtually impossible everywhere.

IMO, a main reason Bernie has so little support among urban Mayors and other representatives of large numbers of minority voters is that he has blood on his hands from his PLCAA and other pro-NRA votes. Guns are used in both suicides and homicides, but African-Americans are five times more likely to die from firearm homicides than from firearm suicides, while whites are five times more likely to die from firearm suicides than from firearm homicides. 

Let's see whether NBC moderators hold Bernie accountable for his reprehensible record on gun legislation. I doubt they will.

[lunamagica]

1. K&R. Sadly, I also doubt they wll. eom

[TCJ70]

2. One problem...

...if there is wrong-doing happening and the dealer or manufacturer hide it, they aren't protected by the PLCAA. From the Wikipedia summary of the PLCAA:
"The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) is a United States law which protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. However, both manufacturers and dealers can still be held liable for damages resulting from defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and other actions for which they are directly responsible in much the same manner that any U.S. based manufacturer of consumer products are held responsible. They may also be held liable for negligence when they have reason to know a gun is intended for use in a crime."

[ProgressiveEconomist]

5. So the PLCAA did not make

it almost impossible to hold dealers and manufacturers accountable for highly suspicious statistical patterns of concentrated crime gun sales? Then why was it the NRA's top legislative priority?

[TCJ70]

8. Nope...

...as for why the NRA thought it was important, who knows? I don't own any guns or am in that world at all.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

9. Click through the link in the OP

[dsc]

4. on the second one, if they know it is happening and don't do anything

they sure as hell are. They can, and many have been, arrested for tolerating a public nuisance. But, the gun manufacturers know exactly and precisely how a person who buys 100 copies of the same exact type of gun are going to use those guns. No one collects rare saturday night specials.

[Duckhunter935]

12. yes, the ATF

Not to mention the FBI who runs NICS. I am sure the government tracks numbers and gun types if they do not individual users.

[dsc]

14. I am pretty sure they don't

and in point of fact are forbidden from doing so.

[Duckhunter935]

17. they can not keep

records to final seller but I am sure they are allowed and do track weapons shipments to retailers. The ATF also has the right to inspect all FFL holders. Of course they are way understaffed and that needs to be fixed. Prove me wrong in this and I will be happy to retract it.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

7. You're missing the main

point. It's marketing massive quantities of arms to shady dealers that the PLCAA protects in a way that no other industry gets immunity.

If a school district found that most cigarettes seized from elementary school students came from one particular store, what would happen to that store owner?

[aikoaiko]

10. About that hypothetical store, the local police would send in a minor to buy cigarettes in a sting.

[ProgressiveEconomist]

11. But one fully-documented

violation could result in only a wrist-slap for one clerk.

[Duckhunter935]

13. closer would be alcohol

they would lose their alcohol license, just like the firearms dealer will lose their FFL.

[dsc]

15. something that can't be done to gun stores

yep the feds are banned from stinging gun stores.

[Duckhunter935]

18. can you link to this law?

[Duckhunter935]

16. a nice read

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42871.pdf