DENVER (AP) — Mass shootings in America have always raised questions about wrongdoing. A delayed police response outside an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas. The district attorney’s failure to prosecute the Q Club shooter a year before five were killed at an LGBTQ nightclub.
The finger of blame, however, rarely rests on the manufacturer of the gun used in the massacre.
Lawmakers in Colorado and at least five other states are considering changing that, proposing a bill to roll back legal protections for gun manufacturers and dealers that have kept the industry at arm’s length from the question of blame.
California, New York, Delaware and New Jersey have passed similar laws in the past three years.
Colorado’s draft version of the bill, which will be released Thursday, not only repeals a 2000 state law — which largely prevents firearms companies from being held liable for violence committed with their products — but also outlines a code of conduct that, in part, targets. how companies design and market firearms.
Colorado is joined by Hawaii, New Hampshire, Virginia, Washington and Maryland, which are considering similar bills.
While the firearms industry is still largely shielded from liability under federal law, a bill in Colorado would make it easier for victims of gun violence to file civil lawsuits, such as the one filed against Remington in 2015 — the company that made the gun used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. 2012 in Connecticut.
Last year, Remington settled with the family of a shooting victim for $73 million after the family accused the company of targeting younger, at-risk males in advertising and product placement in violent video games.
States that already have laws, but now face legal challenges or the threat of lawsuits from national gun rights groups, in part, because a federal law passed by Congress in 2005 has granted broad legal immunity to the gun industry.
“We may have forgotten how unusual and strange this is to provide this exception from responsibility,” said Ari Freilich, director of state policy for the gun control advocacy group Giffords, who argues that federal law allows the state some control over the legal responsibility of the industry.
This bill would “empower victims of gun violence to have their day in court and be able to show that the gun industry may have failed to take adequate precautions to prevent harm,” Freilich said.
Mark Oliva, managing director of public affairs at the National Shooting Sports Foundation, which has filed lawsuits against other states’ laws, said Colorado would be “ripe” for legal challenges if the bill passes. Oliva said that Coors Brewing Company is not responsible for its customers who drink and drive, so why should a gun business be responsible for what its customers do?
“The purpose of this bill is to expose the firearms industry to legal fees for wasteful lawsuits,” Oliva said. “You don’t have Second Amendment rights if you don’t have the ability to buy a firearm in a store to begin with.”
While the federal law remains intact, the Colorado bill’s sponsors argue it includes a carveout that gives the state some power.
The draft bill includes a provision for companies not to market or design firearms in a way that could “presumably” promote illegal conversions — for example, advertising semi-automatic rifles that can hold large-capacity magazines, which are illegal in Colorado.
Current Colorado law also requires plaintiffs to pay attorney fees if a case against a gun company is dismissed. The claim bankrupted the two parents of a woman killed in the 2012 Aurora theater shooting.
“One hope is to give Q Club victims … the ability to at least participate in the Colorado justice system,” said Rep. Sonya Jaquez Lewis, a Democrat and one of the bill’s sponsors. “Just like any other victim in any other civilian setting can do.”
Lewis said the bill would simply level the playing field with other industries, such as pharmaceuticals, that lack the legal protections of the firearms industry. Sponsors believe that this will not only pave the way for gun violence victims, survivors and their families to seek legal recourse, but the threat of civil lawsuits hanging over the industry’s head will force them to police themselves.
“We need actors in the industry to implement the law for themselves, and if there is an avenue for civil responsibility … (that) creates an additional incentive for them to implement the law that is already on the books,” said Rep. Xavier. Mabrey, a Democrat and one of the bill’s sponsors.
The bill will likely find Republican pushback in Colorado’s majority-Democratic statehouse. Republican Rep. Mike Lynch, the minority leader of the Colorado House, said he had not seen a draft of the bill and therefore declined to comment.
Colorado Senate President Steve Fenberg said, “I’m excited to see this legislation move forward, and I look forward to supporting it when it reaches the Senate floor.”
Gov. Jared Polis did not respond to specific questions from The Associated Press about his position on the bill.