Copyright 2022 All Rights Reserved.

August 18, 2022

Bill Filed Making Firearms Manufacturers/Dealers Liable For Injury/Death –

By John Kraft & Kirk Allen

On September 28, 2021

SPRINGFIELD, IL. (ECWd) –

Illinois State Representative Margaret Croke file HB4156 today, which would make firearms manufacturers and dealers (including people who legally sell firearms) financially responsible for injuries or deaths which results from the unlawful discharge of a firearm in the State.

Synopsis As Introduced:

Creates the Firearms Dealer and Importer Liability Act. Provides that the Act may be referred to as the Protecting Heartbeats Act. Provides that any manufacturer, importer, or dealer of a firearm shall be held strictly liable for any bodily injury or death if the bodily injury or death proximately results from the unlawful discharge of the firearm in the State. Allows any person, other than an officer or employee of a State or local governmental entity, to bring a civil action against any person or entity who violates the Act. Requires the court to award a prevailing claimant: (1) injunctive relief; (2) statutory damages in an amount of not less than $10,000 for each individual injured or killed by a firearm that the defendant manufactured, imported, or dealt; and (3) costs and attorney’s fees. Provides for various limitations.

This Bill, which will hopefully never see the light of day, also strips a plethora of defenses from any Defendant who is accused under this Bill should it become law.

It even strips a Court’s power to find it inconsistent with the Second Amendment unless certain strict conditions are proven.

But it exempts firearms/dealers/manufacturers if the firearm was originally distributed to government entities or government employees from suit if the firearm was originally distributed to them in their official capacity.

Croke is also a co-sponsor of the anti-First Amendment HB4151.

At least she is sponsoring them in numerical order…

 

 

SHARE THIS

Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on print

RELATED

20 Comments
  • Linda Andre
    Posted at 14:17h, 28 September

    Does that mean that auto companies would also be held responsible if someone is killed in or by a car??

    • Be Safe
      Posted at 08:31h, 29 September

      Great point. We should make gun ownership more like car ownership. You need to pass a test that you are qualified to operate a vehicle and renew that license every fee years. You should be required to keep liability insurance on your gun to pay for damages. There should be a register of who owns guns. And you lose the right if you conduct yourself in an unsafe manner or injure others. Great idea.

      • Austrailia is lost to the fascists
        Posted at 09:24h, 29 September

        Hello fascist prickster you idiot,
        Cars are not protected by a constitutional amendment but my guns are so when you send your goons to try and force the deathshot on my family i will deliver shots of my own.

        THE ONLY REASON WE ARE NOT AUSTRALIAN FASCIST LOCKDOWN FINAL SOLUTION DEATH CAMP IS BECAUSE OF OUR FIREARMS !!!

        • Triggered Much?
          Posted at 12:50h, 29 September

          Wow. You snowflakes meltdown so easily. Linda was the one comparing cars to guns. And maybe you should check out your Constitution again regarding the regulation of the militia. And what about my Constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

          Vaccines save lives. President Trump said so.

          • Lara
            Posted at 23:49h, 01 October

            Uh, the 2nd amendment grantees we can use and own guns.

            What about my right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? If you’re forcing vaccines on me, that’s inhibiting it. I think we can agree that life would be better if we just split the states. Or maybe you can go live in Commie Chicago, where guns are heavily regulated…and yet your deal Lori can’t seem to come to terms with that. Boo hoo.

            Also Trump is a part of the system, you doofus.

  • RORY STEIDL
    Posted at 14:31h, 28 September

    I’m sick and tired of these activist legislators trying to rid the USA of firearms while they do nothing to combat the underlying crime problem that is perpetuated not by legal firearms/owners/manufacturers but by felons who steal and sell firearms to the predators who use them on the streets. These irrational legislators are either foolish or perhaps they are crazy like a fox with a plan to abolish firearm ownership with their punitive legislation. It amazes me how far left this country has gone and how far some have allowed it to go for fear of being labeled “intolerant”, a “racist”, or any other falsely applied derogatory term they use to try to intimidate rational, law-abiding people.

  • Tony
    Posted at 15:48h, 28 September

    Clearly this means they’re going to go after gang gun dealers right? /s

  • Dave
    Posted at 16:11h, 28 September

    UNCONSTITUTIONAL INFRINGEMENT

  • Mags
    Posted at 17:08h, 28 September

    And why does this not apply to the Pfizer, Moderna, Johnson & Johnson and Astra Zeneca for the jabs? No liability for them?

    These people are out of control.

  • Dennis Finegan
    Posted at 20:45h, 28 September

    This is going too far, even for me. I don’t particularly like guns, but liability belongs with the user, unless the product is defective. Why doesn’t MAGS find out if the drug houses can be sued if they die. Probably not – why make drugs if you have to spend every penny defending yourself in court?

  • PK
    Posted at 22:44h, 28 September

    Its discouraging that an Illinois legislator would file such an obtuse bill, also referred to as the “Protecting Heatbeats Act.” If this bill were anymore unusual; or anymore illogical, ammunition (bullet) manufacturers and sellers would be saddled with their fair share of the ‘liability.”

  • Mags
    Posted at 09:19h, 29 September

    Hey Dennis – anyone who puts out a product claiming it is SAFE & EFFECTIVE needs to own it. Many people have been harmed by these experimental non-vaccines. It should concern everyone that they have NO LIABILITY.

  • Joe G
    Posted at 10:09h, 29 September

    Then I guess cigarette manufacturers and sellers should be held liable under the same logic.

  • Joe G
    Posted at 10:16h, 29 September

    How does one propose a law that negates a Constitutional Amendment?

  • Roger
    Posted at 12:12h, 29 September

    What about paper cuts? Asking for a friend…

  • Gregory Chase
    Posted at 12:23h, 29 September

    This woman should take the clot shot and then croke, I mean croak.

  • Frank Miller
    Posted at 18:56h, 29 September

    How to file a claim for public officials who violate the oath of office.

    https://austinmeetinggroup.com/mt-content/uploads/2021/01/20200806-amg-zoom-ray.mp3

  • Mags
    Posted at 19:09h, 29 September

    I am calling out the double standard of this WOKE legislator. Although I do believe that drug companies have far too much leeway as far as liability goes.

    People choose to smoke or not. People chose to drive cars or not. I do not believe that if people get harmed by choosing to do either that the mfg has any liability. Product recalls are an entirely different matter.

    If people choose to take the jab without informed consent, that liability falls to the person (organization) administering it as well as big pharma. If it taken under duress (as is the case with many) that also falls to the person(organization) administering it as well as BIG PHARMA.

    This WOKE legislator has a mental disconnect and mental deficiency when it comes to her elected duties.

    Are people waking up yet or not?

  • Diane
    Posted at 20:43h, 30 September

    What is wrong with elected officials???DEAR GOD IN HEAVEN . ITS NOT THE GUNS FAULT IT IS THE THE CYCHO BEHIND IT. IT NOT THE MANUFACTOR. If THESE IDIOTS THAT MAKE STUPID LAWS WOULD GET IN THE TRENCHES OF REALITY AND FIND OUT THE TRUTH
    INSTREAD OF GETTING PAID FOR THIER STUPIDITY!!!!! Things will get better?????? Daaa

  • William Stanley
    Posted at 13:05h, 03 October

    This broad wants to do away with guns altogether, this is just the beginning.
    BE SAFE:
    When I lived in Ill (70 years) I had to jump through hoops & wait months for a FED background check to be able to acquire & own a gun.
    And if I didn’t go by the laws, I had my right to own a gun taken away along with my gun
    But no check when I try to buy a car, which kills more people than guns ever have,
    BTW its up to the car buyer to get ins, by state law, but how many car drivers don’t have ins, & some don’t even have a drivers license
    I abided by the laws & background checks to own & keep a gun
    Cars kill more than guns, but I don’t see anyone trying to shut down car manufacturers or dealers who don’t have to have insurance to sell their product, or the state for selling weed.
    It is illegal according to FERERAL law to sell or use weed.
    People on weed cause auto accidents while under the influence, but I don’t see anyone trying to sue the state of Il for selling drugs, legal or not
    How about a law that makes the state responsible for drug related fatalities?

    Demanding gun manufacturers & dealers have ins because some stupid people misuse a firearm is not going to solve ANY problem,
    It’ll just make the illegal black market for guns more profitable & flourish
    Ins or not, there will always be some who disregard the laws, & misuse a firearm, car, drugs, that cannot be helped, but making manufacturers liable for the end user is ridiculous

$