Bump Stock Makers are being sued now

[RiskyBusiness]

better chance of suing Wynn Hotel for not reacting to the DAM SECURITY GUARD SHOT BEFORE THE MASS SHOOTING EVEN BEGAN!

Something is way wrong.
A guy launches over 200 rounds in the hallway.... I know Wynn has good armed security....and nothing
http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...010-story.html

lol okay buddy so you expect hotel security to deal with a situation for a swat team?

[bsg]

no surprise.

[mossy]

surprised it took this long....at least the manufacturers had time to assemble good legal teams and plan a defence of their products. it's gonna be fun to watch this one play out in the courts. good luck to slide fire, they are going to need it. guarantee you that more than a few youtube videos filmed by idiots will be used as evidence. Hickock45 had the right idea, remove them all before lawyers can collect them and use them as evidence.

[Yellow Wing]

Isn't this like the Newtown lawsuits against the rifle manufacturers? Those went no where.

[mossy]

Isn't this like the Newtown lawsuits against the rifle manufacturers? Those went no where.

rifle manufacturers are shielded, ammo manufacturers are shielded, not so sure about stock manufacturers though. if it is found that accessory manufacturers are shielded just like ammo and rifle manufacturers it will set a interesting precedent. if its found that they are not protected then the door is open to sue manufacturers of triggers, scopes and any other accessories that attach to a firearm.

[Mark49]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-l...-idUSKBN1CF2IC

just like many here said, here comes the lawsuits against slidefire and other unnamed bump stock makers.

You'll not be able to count all the many lawsuits that will be filed. To many attorneys and out of court settlements awaiting.

[dustoff31]

you would think the plaintiffs' lawyers would advise them of that PLCA Act and that suing the stock makers would be an uphill battle.

suing the hotel and the concert venue would have better chances.

The lawyers are going to make money, but like everybody said the PLCA of 2005 shields them from lawsuits.

I don't know that PLCA will help in this case.

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.

Slide fire is not a firearms manufacturer or a firearms dealer. Nor is a bump stock a firearm.

Either way, as has been mentioned the lawyers will make money.

[dwalker]

rifle manufacturers are shielded, ammo manufacturers are shielded, not so sure about stock manufacturers though. if it is found that accessory manufacturers are shielded just like ammo and rifle manufacturers it will set a interesting precedent. if its found that they are not protected then the door is open to sue manufacturers of triggers, scopes and any other accessories that attach to a firearm.

Same reason Magpul has never been (successfully) sued.

[God Bless America]

Ban the people that file lawsuits. Problem solved

No dogs, no fleas!

[ChuckDizzle]

will be hard to prove intent

Intent is irrelevant in strict products liability.

[onelonehorseman]

Intent is irrelevant in strict products liability.

Wouldn't that have more to do with products causing damage/injury due to malfunction or poor design (defective baby cribs, hover board batteries starting fires, etc)?

[Dezrat]

Pretty informative review of the PLCAA from an attorney as it addresses the Slidefire Lawsuit.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jlc5AGoGp0

PLCAA specifically stipulates that manufacturers or sellers of "Component parts of a firearm" are also protected under it. If the Slidefire can be classified as a component part of a firearm it is protected under PLCAA.