HB 6275 of 2022
Civil procedure: civil actions; civil liability for a person who sells, delivers, or transfers a firearm to a person prohibited from possessing a firearm; provide for.
Last Action: 6/22/2022 bill electronically reproduced 06/22/2022
HB 6275 of 2022
Civil procedure: civil actions; civil liability for a person who sells, delivers, or transfers a firearm to a person prohibited from possessing a firearm; provide for.
Last Action: 6/22/2022 bill electronically reproduced 06/22/2022
Don't let yesterday use up too much of today - Will RogersDISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, or official policies of Michigan Gun Owners.
(b) The person knows or should know that the individual is
13 prohibited from possessing the firearm under federal law or the law
14 of this state.
15 (c) The individual, or another individual who obtains
16 possession of the firearm, uses the firearm to cause the injury or
17 death of any other individual or to threaten or intimidate any
18 other individual
I would like to know the definition of "Should know" and it looks like it is written whereas if I sold someone a firearm that was totally legally to have it, if it were stolen or they gave it to someone I would be liable for any damages casued by another person.
Like and follow MGO on FaceBook
https://www.facebook.com/migunowners.org
DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, or official policies of Michigan Gun Owners.
This is a passel of dems that have written a proposed law that the common man has no way of being sure that they are complying with.
Life Member, NRA, Lapeer County Sportsmen's Club Disclaimer: I Am Not A Lawyer. Opinions expressed are not representative of any organization to which I may belong, and are solely mine. Any natural person or legal entity reading this post accepts all responsibility for any actions undertaken by that person or entity, based upon what they perceived was contained in this post, and shall hold harmless this poster, his antecedents, and descendants, in perpetuity.
Agree. That's clear as mud.I would like to know the definition of "Should know"
That's not how I interpret that.and it looks like it is written whereas if I sold someone a firearm that was totally legally to have it, if it were stolen or they gave it to someone I would be liable for any damages casued by another person.
I read it as: If you provide a firearm to a prohibited person, then they give it to someone else (or it is stolen by someone else) who subsequently commits a crime with it, you could be held liable.
Point being, if you had not given the firearm to someone you knew was (or should know, apparently) is a prohibited person, it would never have made it from that prohibited person to someone else who committed a crime with it.
Further proof one should only buy and not sell guns! And it may help appease spouses, too!
“See, honey, I have to buy this other gun but can’t sell off any of my existing ones. Liability and whatnot. It’s best this way.”