Gov Pritzker signs law victims of gun violence to sue gun makers

Gov. JB Pritzker signs new law allowing victims of gun violence to sue gun makers

CHICAGO (CBS) -- A new Illinois law is making it easier for victims of gun violence to sue gun makers. Gov. JB Prtizker signed it into law Saturday afternoon.

Pritzker talked about the law while on stage at the Everytown for Gun Safety conference at McCormick Place. His appearance at the conference comes just one day after the state Supreme Court upheld another controversial law banning the sale of so-called assault weapons in the state.

That law also bans the sale and distribution of high capacity magazines and switches that can turn semi-automatic guns into automatic weapons.

The new move, the Firearm Industry Responsibility Act, bans advertising or marketing that encourages paramilitary or unlawful private militia activity. It bans advertising firearms to people under 18 and limits the kinds of imagery that can be used in ads. And it allows people to sue manufacturers.

www.cbsnews.com

I wonder if this can be challenged somehow. Here is their right to bear arms rule in their state constitution . . .

SECTION 22. RIGHT TO ARMS
Subject only to the police power, the right of the individual citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. (Source: Illinois Constitution.)

Not sure about that police power part, that sounds like it infringes on keeping and bearing arms. Seems like double talk, it doesn't fit the definition of a right you are born with. I thought that the state constitutions couldn't conflict with the federal one. Might be a supreme court case based on that so-called right to arms.

They sure have a lot of rights called out in detail in their Bill of Rights. I don't want to see our Michigan state constitution get monkeyed around with like theirs is.

I'll be looking for the TV commercials from the bullet-chasing attorneys here in Chicagoland.

"Were you or a loved one shot? Call me and we'll sue the daylights out of the gun manufacturer."

Can you tell from a security camera, or the bullet, who made the gun?

WHY does it take a governor to allow lawsuits? How does he have the authority to allow something that is forbidden by the Feds... just like suing Pfizer for vaccine injuries is forbidden?

Can a governor override the federal prohibition on suing pharmaceuticals too?

What a useless POS.
When can people start suing car makers for drunk drivers ?
Can I sue McDonalds if I get fat ?
How about Hershey if I get diabetes ?

I mean it's not like I had a choice. They made me drive drunk, stop at McDonalds on the way and eat a Hershey bar when I got home.

Only the person or persons committing a crime should be punished for a crime. A lawsuit of this nature by definition is punitive meaning designed to levy a financial punishment. In this case the maker of a tool designed as a protection device for American citizens to defend their life and liberty.

So, in Chicago, a criminal robbing some house gets shot by the homeowner and he can sue the gun company? When you make a law it applies to everyone, even those protecting themselves.

What kind of a leader do they have, how did someone without any legal experience get into that position. Most criminals do not have legal guns, and there are a real lot of illegal guns out there. I knew some people who sold illegal guns back in the seventies in Wisconsin, I asked one of the guys why anyone would pay more for a hot gun than they could get one legally at the gun store and he told me that many people cannot buy guns legally and those were his clients. I wanted nothing to do with that kind of handgun but apparently it is big business, most were stolen from people's homes or from businesses. I guess it is a thriving business. Some people also buy those kind of guns for protection because they live in bad neighborhoods and they cannot buy a gun because they got in trouble long ago...so they buy one at a high price to guard their families. Those people need protection too I suppose.

I like to examine both sides of the coin to make sure I am not making false beliefs...always been that way. I may not approve sometimes but that does not mean I am totally against something. There are multiple factors in all things to consider...but still I am not a supporter of people who have been in serious trouble or who are mentally unstable having a gun if they are a threat to others. Honest people who are not a threat to society should be able to own guns. But nobody needs a fully automatic weapon in society, they waste too much bullets.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

damn at the law suits that are going to becoming out of the hoods in chicago.wouldn't surprise me if gun violence goes up in the short term as people pay others to off that POS son, or slut puppy daughter.

ETA: bet ben crump opens up a office there.

What's next? Suing lock makers if a burglar breaks into your home? Suing knife manufacturers if your child gets cut while reaching in your kitchen drawer? How about suing manufacturers of floor wax if you slip and injure yourself on a newly waxed floor?

Removing personal responsibility from criminal actions just makes it easier to further enslave people.

crazy
crazy
america
lost
its
way
to common
sense

Good bye American apple pie

originally posted by: DAVID64
What a useless POS.
When can people start suing car makers for drunk drivers ?
Can I sue McDonalds if I get fat ?
How about Hershey if I get diabetes ?

I mean it's not like I had a choice. They made me drive drunk, stop at McDonalds on the way and eat a Hershey bar when I got home.

You wouldn't stand much of a chance on the things you did to yourself. But drunk drivers victims, one might be able to sue the manufacturer of the criminal alcohol beverage or the car manufacturer of the bad vehicle. When the crazies plow people down in the streets, one should be able then to sue the psycho automobile manufacturer I guess by these new laws.

As far as suing gun manufacturers, that would put a world of hurt on people being able to buy and own any guns.

There are approx. 645 (-/+ 10) gun manufacturers in the US.

Every year, [approx.] 117,345 people are shot. 76,725 people survive gunshot injuries. 34,566 are intentionally shot by someone else and survive. 24,569 die from gun suicide.

Even if you subtracted the suicides, that's approx. 92,776 people that would have cause for suing under this new law in Chicago if it were also adopted by all the states.

And in Chicago, there were approx. 3,300 shooting incidents in 2022. In 2021 there were 3561. Chicago alone could break the bank on all gun manufacturers in the US.

And what if the gun were used in Chicago but purchased and owned in a state that doesn't honor Chicago's bill? What about if the gun used was from a manufacturer already out of business? Is it at the city boundaries that the law is in effect? What about a shooting in Evanston for instance? Tough cookies for the victims living outside of Chicago?

The law is stupid and if they do that there is nothing preventing suing for damages from either the manufacture of the vehicle or alcohol if a person is injured or deceased because of an irresponsible driver. It's apples to apples.

yeah this one is getting struck down because it abridges the ability to get a weapon because its aimed to drive gun companies away and then unless you know how to manufacture one you have no way to defend yourself without a gun.

Can they sue the manufacturer of pillows if they are used to smother someone to death?
Or ropes, if used to strangle someone?
Imagine being hit on the head with a heavy figurine of Mickey Mouse...

It's kind of a stupid idea.
A gun is just metal arranged in a certain way. It takes a human to use it for good or bad.

Sue the criminal.

a reply to: StoutBroux

That was basically my point. When Ford makes a car and it leaves the factory, they have no control over how it would be used, so what makes guns any different ? It takes a human hand to fire a weapon, just like it takes a human to drive a car.
People choose to eat fast food or candy and it's not the companies fault they got fat.

The thing about those statistics is that they include ALL shootings.
Murder, robbery, self defense, police shootings, and accidental shootings. The gun grabbers love to use those to make the problem look worse than it is. Not saying it isn't bad, but those numbers can be deceiving.

a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

I don't see the issue here, the gun makers need to stop selling guns in the state period. Then the bullet manufacturers need to stop selling all bullets in the state. As the reality is, any new purchase after this law is signed is a direct liability. So if they stop selling, then the Police in the state can you sling shots to take people down. Further lets not forget, the US gov must now acknowledge that guns kill people, not people. Therefore, if they purchase any guns, ammo, etc, they are taking on liability in the state, so pull the national guard, close all military bases in Illinois, and move all equipment out of the state. Once all that is done, we need to acknowledge that every person carrying a gun, is a potential terrorist enabling a gun to kill people. Therefore we must confiscate all weapons. Lets start with the police and military still in the state. Once all this is done, then the state will truly be safe, after all, there would be no guns right?

or, you move out of state because of morons like this and the legislature passing bs laws, instead of fixing the issues they have.

You pick. Don't understand why someone would live in that stupidity.

Camain

a reply to: camain

First of all, stopping the sale of firearms in the state will do absolutely nothing. If someone wants one, they will find a way. Just ask all of the felons how they still obtain theirs.......like hunter Biden for isntance

Second, why should the law abiding citizens suffer for the incompetence of the law makers, who seemed to have been thrown down a flight of stairs at birth?

Everything you are saying here is an infringement on the rights of the law abiding citizens 2nd amendment, plain and simple. If you think all the guns should be confiscated, be my guest to give it a shot and let me know how it goes for you.

I'd say they need to start by gathering up all of those law makers and sending them over to Commiefornia, where they belong. Then, the citizens can proceed with trying to un-F the state they are left with.

originally posted by: camain
a reply to: MichiganSwampBuck

I don't see the issue here, the gun makers need to stop selling guns in the state period. Then the bullet manufacturers need to stop selling all bullets in the state. As the reality is, any new purchase after this law is signed is a direct liability. they stop selling, then the Police in the state can you sling shots to take people down. Further lets not forget, the US gov must now acknowledge that guns kill people, not people. Therefore, if they purchase any guns, ammo, etc, they are taking on liability in the state, so pull the national guard, close all military bases in Illinois, and move all equipment out of the state. Once all that is done, we need to acknowledge that every person carrying a gun, is a potential terrorist enabling a So if gun to kill people. Therefore we must confiscate all weapons. Lets start with the police and military still in the state. Once all this is done, then the state will truly be safe, after all, there would be no guns right?

or, you move out of state because of morons like this and the legislature passing bs laws, instead of fixing the issues they have.

You pick. Don't understand why someone would live in that stupidity.

Camain

Well it's a little late. There are an assumed 400M+ guns in the USA. Closing down manufacturing of guns and eliminating bullets would only prevent new gun owners.

SO to be realistic, what would you do that is constitutional and legal to stop people from shooting each other? Pass a law making it a crime to shoot someone if it isn't self defense? Good luck with that.

Norway, Finland, Germany, France and Denmark, all countries with heavy gun ownership, have a history of low murder rates. According to a 2014 United Nations report, Germany's murder rate of 0.8 killings per 100,000 inhabitants was identical to Luxembourg, where the law prohibits civilian ownership of handguns and gun ownership is rare [source: UNODOC, Kates and Mauser.

Hmmmmm, WHY is that???????????

It's not the guns. It's the people that generate violent crime. BTW, countries like Eritrea who outlawed firearms have over 4/100,000 gun deaths a year which is actually quite high. Why is that? Didn't the guns get the message? Chicago has the strictest gun laws in the nation yet the highest amount of gun deaths. Why?

Crime rates are in direct relation to shootings. Maybe they should actually enforce laws against all criminal behavior.

Or maybe put Xanax or something in the water in high crime areas. Better yet, Re-training to become obedient citizens like they do in NK. /sarc

They actually have to ENFORCE ALL LAWS against criminal behavior. Not just some writing on a piece of paper and that's it, problem solved.

The thinking that no guns equals no murder is quite naïve. In case some don't know, machetes are a main murder weapon in many countries where access to guns is prohibited by either law, availability or cost. Baseball bats, knives and poison are also very common weapons of murder.

Ideally, if you want no humans murdered, get rid of all humans. That's the only answer.

As a Chicago resident, this ruling won't do anything to stop gun violence. It doesn't really address the root causes.

There are several facts that are never addressed by gun grabbers:

First, most guns used in crime were obtained illegally. As such, restricting legal purchases of firearms does nothing to stop criminals. It just stops law abiding citizens.

Second, vast majority of gun violence is committed with handguns, not "assault rifles". Restricting the ability to purchase AR-15s and other variants of black scary rifles doesn't reduce gun violence since they typically are not the weapon of choice.

Third, most gun violence (both victims and perpetrators) are street thugs/gang members. Again, criminals who aren't following the law so making laws won't stop these guys from shooting each other.

The sad reality is that gun violence is largely a problem that is concentrated within the poor black communities. When you look at the demographics of the both shooters and victims it is clear this isn't so much a gun problem, but a problem of culture within this specific group. In Chicago, 80% of victims (and perpetrators) are black. The other 15% are Hispanic.

Until politicians and communities are willing to address this issue head on, there will never be a solution.

How about just make private sales of guns restricted or something that will prevent legal owners from selling their weapons to criminals. Perhaps if you sell a gun, without being a business, you have to report the serial number and who you sold it to?

I don't know the best awnser but clearly criminals are easily obtaining guns and its not from going to the local gun store.

originally posted by: Turquosie
How about just make private sales of guns restricted or something that will prevent legal owners from selling their weapons to criminals. Perhaps if you sell a gun, without being a business, you have to report the serial number and who you sold it to?

I don't know the best awnser but clearly criminals are easily obtaining guns and its not from going to the local gun store.

Private sale of guns

The following is a part fo a story from the following link.

www.foxnews.com...


“The majority of firearms used in criminal activity are obtained illegally,” said David Chianese, a correspondent at Law Enforcement Today, published author and former NYPD detective. “Stricter or additional gun laws do not reduce gun violence.”

A 2019 survey conducted by the Department of Justice (DOJ) found that some 43 percent of criminals had bought their firearms on the black market, 6 percent acquired them via theft, and 10 percent made a retail purchase – 0.8 percent purchased a weapon from a gun show.

SO that leaves 40 or so percent that start out as LEGAL and get stolen,or sold by criminals acting liek legal sellers.

originally posted by: yuppa

originally posted by: Turquosie
How about just make private sales of guns restricted or something that will prevent legal owners from selling their weapons to criminals. Perhaps if you sell a gun, without being a business, you have to report the serial number and who you sold it to?

I don't know the best awnser but clearly criminals are easily obtaining guns and its not from going to the local gun store.

Private sale of guns

The following is a part fo a story from the following link.

www.foxnews.com...


“The majority of firearms used in criminal activity are obtained illegally,” said David Chianese, a correspondent at Law Enforcement Today, published author and former NYPD detective. “Stricter or additional gun laws do not reduce gun violence.”

A 2019 survey conducted by the Department of Justice (DOJ) found that some 43 percent of criminals had bought their firearms on the black market, 6 percent acquired them via theft, and 10 percent made a retail purchase – 0.8 percent purchased a weapon from a gun show.

SO that leaves 40 or so percent that start out as LEGAL and get stolen,or sold by criminals acting liek legal sellers.

I just ran across this from the Jerusalem Post. It was an inventory of arms they confiscated from the Arab criminals that sound a lot like the poor urban African Americans here in the States. Arab on Arab gun violence, I'm sure the government of Israel doesn't make it easy for Arabs to own guns legally. Notice the 362 improvised firearms in that total. Who can stop a gun-smithing enthusiast from owning a gun, even if it is a zip gun?

On July 10 the Israel Police announced that it had seized 1,535 weapons – 962 pistols, 362 improvised firearms, 163 rifles, and 47 shotguns – since the beginning of the year in 1307 different busts. This means that the police confiscated 285 illegal firearms in July alone.

The proliferation of illegal firearms is often cited as one of the contributing factors to the rising homicide rate in the Arab sector. Around 144 Arab community members have been killed since the beginning of the year, many connected to organized crime. According to the Abraham Initiatives, by June 89% of fatalities in Arab sector were from gun violence. 2023 is shaping to be the most violent year on record for the community.

www.jpost.com

originally posted by: nugget1
What's next? Suing lock makers if a burglar breaks into your home? Suing knife manufacturers if your child gets cut while reaching in your kitchen drawer? How about suing manufacturers of floor wax if you slip and injure yourself on a newly waxed floor?

Removing personal responsibility from criminal actions just makes it easier to further enslave people.

What's changed? If you break into my house, trip and fall because I left something on the stairs and get injured, you can sue me. There was a site called Overlawyered.com. It went into things like this. Some kids broke into a water slide park and got hurt while playing on the slides. Their parents sued and won.

This is an end run around the 2nd Amendment. If they can't prevent us from owning guns, they will make it so that there are no guns to own.

By any means necessary.