ShotGunWorld Shotguns

It is currently Tue Oct 27, 2020 1:36 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Pennsylvania appeals court rules PLCCA unconstitutional
PostPosted: Wed Sep 30, 2020 9:34 pm 
*Proud to be a*
*Proud to be a*
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2005 8:42 pm
Posts: 28237
Location: Missouri
To show what battles gun owners face from unlikely fronts, an appeals court in Pennsylvania has ruled the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Firearms in Interstate Commerce Act (PLCCA) entirely void, under the 10th Amendment. ... 2009290126

The plaintiffs son was accidentally shot and killed by another boy who “didn’t know the gun was loaded”. But evidently the pistol did not have a magazine safety, which the plaintiff argued would have prevented the accident. The defendant Springfield Armory raised the 2005 PLCCA ad obtained relief at the lower court level but the appeals court reversed and remanded to the trial court with instructions the entire PLCCA is unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment.

Using a 10th amendment argument is a a hallmark of “conservatives” to try and invalidate federal laws, but it hardly ever works.

You’d think there is an important interest of Congress to protect the seller of a lawful product in interstate commerce from liability except if the product is actually defective, and breaks or blows up.

Also there should be Second Amendment grounds to uphold the law.

I’d venture this case is far from over.

I have never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as a reason for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

 Post subject: Re: Pennsylvania appeals court rules PLCCA unconstitutional
PostPosted: Thu Oct 01, 2020 9:24 am 
Limited Edition

Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:04 pm
Posts: 432
This was a very strange ruling. The 10th Amendment is primarily what keeps Feds out of intrastate issues, and perhaps if the plaintiff were only suing the retailer that might work. But the plaintiff is suing an out-of-state business, making it pretty clearly an interstate issue.

Similarly, as pointed out, if a state court can invalidate a Federal law, that really opens the door to all kinds of mischief from taxes and selective service to environmental and traffic safety regs.

I don't know what the process will look like, but this case has a long way to go before it gets decided.

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]

Who is online

Registered users: 2lo8s, 870Slugger, ABLongbow, AlexDavis, avogunner, Bing [Bot], Blackdog56, brothernov, bullseye-69, casonet, chairman, cookoff013, Cseybert9, Degle, Denver1911, DooFighter, dpe2002, Dr Duk, Ed Usinowicz, Elmer Fudd, EricB, fredvon4, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, GunnerFrank, H2OFowler247, HoosierHunter07, HusqvarnaSweden, icyclefar, [email protected], jballance*, jmacgreg, jusanothajoe, lossking, mactownbob, MaineGunnah, Majestic-12 [Bot], Malcolm7, McFarmer, mddan, OBH Gun Club, ohio mike, Oldsalt, Pickman, PKW-Indiana, remdog1187, Riflemeister, Road Man, Scardog7, sera, Shed, Stoneke, strut64, Stuck-N-Kali, superskeet, Supertex1978, SWPAMike, T-Pee, Take-5-JB, twfran, Wheels70, Wheelspin,

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group    - DMCA Notice