Here’s The REAL Reason That Gun Manufacturers Have Immunity Laws


A large number of anti-2A people have the a bizarre idea that firearms manufacturers have some kind of special immunity from lawsuits that gun lobbyists (usually just labeled the NRA) put into place to make sure that mass murderers will still be able to buy guns to kill people with.

Now, you and I know that idea is wrong in so many ways (Does the NRA represent all legal gun owners? Is legal immunity about making it easier for criminals to do criminal things?), but the part that we’re going to talk about today is the idea that firearms manufacturers have some kind of special immunity that other manufacturers don’t have.

Now, to be honest, yes, there are laws in place specifically stating that immunity for firearms manufacturers, but all manufacturers have immunity from liability when an individual does something stupid or evil with their product. AnnieOakley writes,


The “liability shield” that gun manufacturers enjoy is actually materially no different than that enjoyed by essentially every manufacturer of every single consumer product in the country. 

AnnieOakley continues:

In laymen’s terms, [the wording of Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act] means that gun manufacturers cannot be sued on the grounds that a criminal used that company’s weapons to break the law in some way. For instance, if a man uses an ArmaLite rifle to murder a bunch of people in a mass shooting, then ArmaLite itself is shielded from liability for the shooter’s criminal misuse of that weapon.

It makes perfect sense: We are not allowed to sue Ford, for instance, if someone drives an F150 while drunk and kills a family in their minivan. Nor are we allowed to sue Dexter Russell if someone goes on a stabbing rampage with one of their knives. A company can’t possibly be held liable for the criminal misuse of its lawfully produced product.

And maybe you’re asking why a law was specifically put into place to state this about the firearms industry. The answer, according to AnnieOakley, is that anti-2A zealots target gun manufacturers, so, this law was put into place to prevent even these frivolous lawsuits from being filed, to allow firearms manufacturers to simply do their jobs without harassment.

If you’ve ever had an encounter with an emotional, irrational gun control advocate, then, you understand why this needed to be stated bluntly for everyone to see.



  1. Makes perfect sense why is a manufacture liable for the misuse ( or in this case UNLAWFUL use ) like anti-gunners say …

  2. It’s about time that somebody starts making sense of these things! If I use a craftsman ball peen hammer to dispatch anyone to the hereafter, can I sue craftsman because it was the object of injury? The answer is no.

  3. When this topic comes up I always remember the attempt in WA state back in the ’70s by a bunch of liars oops lawyers to get the ‘vicarious liability’ law passed. It didn’t happen since it was a blatantly obviously flawed scheme. IOW anyone with a lick of common sense realizes ya can’t hold a manufacturer liable for criminal misuse of their product. Hasn’t stopped that same bunch from trying though. Hence the need for PLCAA.

  4. Anyone with a working brain knows this ! But that leaves the Left out!!! Which is why it needed to be spelled out in very plain language !!

  5. It’s beyond me why gun control idiots think that laws will control criminal activities! All they ever do is hurt the law abiding citizens!
    Here’s another point! Who do you think gun free zones help? The criminal of course!
    Remove all gun free zones! The criminal will not know who or what he will encounter!

  6. Stop threatening to take my cordless DeWalt drill from me !!!I haven’t killed anybody by drilling a hole in their fore head ! ( yet ) ? Great, now my steak knife set is in jeopardy !!! Ha !

  7. It amounts to the same thing as what Mr. Tucker said in front of the U.S. Senate many years ago when he was put on trial for Fraud with his start up Auto Company that inevitably failed because he didn’t have the resources to fight Ford GM and Chrysler after he said they should be brought up on manslaughter charges! So because some idiot decided to run over a crowd of people as was the case recently, why are the Manufactures of the car that was used in that criminal act not be charged with a capitol crime? This whole fiasco just makes me super POED! When are the people in this country going to come to their senses and accept this is not a gun problem, it’s a people problem and on the note, we are not the only country dealing with this problem. Aren’t people aware of what’s happening in Myanmar, Afganistan, let’s look back at Ireland some years ago or Israel or Syria, southern Europe not that long ago and now in Ukraine, does it matter that it’s 2 military factions or any of the countries in central Africa fighting over whatever they’re fighting about. It reminds me of a phrase I heard in a movie. It’s like 2 fleas fighting over who owns the dogs back! Frivolous law suits are something the government needs desperately to put a rope on and tie down.

  8. Criminals by definition do not obey laws!
    Beef up enforcement!
    Make repeat offenders serve extra time!
    Get rid of the Soros backed district attorneys.

  9. Clod kicker; June 23, 2022
    My personal opinion and comment on this subject, will merely agree and support Annie Oakley’s comment!
    A lawyer’s job is to not only interpret the law but also, DEFINE THE LAW, e. g., 2nd Amendment, “a well-regulated Militia”. Their “job” would also include legally defining “well-regulated” would it not?
    How, you say? Well, how does one regulate any Militia? Their arms, ammunition, the body of the militia itself? Their equipment? Etc., etc., etc.
    The “LAW” in this country has somehow lost the true elements of its true meaning, Justice, Morality, and just plain old Commonsense!? Has it not…Since its inception from the written foundations of this country?
    As William Shakespeare quoted in a famous play he wrote, “Kill all the Lawyers!” Well maybe nothing that drastic but the principle is: get the law back to doing what is was originally MEANT to do!?
    That is enforce and keep the peace! Serve justice, and uphold the Constitution with the same morality it was setup and penned to do. That it is to be respected by all and not to be distorted by just a chosen few. The law should not be made malleable but be made ridged, durable and strong like a piece of tempered steel.
    Our country was originally setup for the PEOPLE to govern themselves! YES, govern ourselves! A strong governing body, (Us) with a weaker centralized government. What has happened? I leave that for you to figure out!
    Oh, and feel free to run all this by a fact checker. But please if anything is found incorrect. Please include the correction!!!

Comments are closed.