On the recordJuly 22, 1998
let me only make a few comments as it relates to what Senator Chafee has said, because I think it is important that we understand the reality of some of what he has portrayed. The pit-bull argument sounds not only exciting, it sounds horrifying. Now, there is a little thing in law called, in this instance, the first bite. In other words, if it is known that the dog is dangerous, then there is a responsibility. If it is not known that the dog is dangerous and the dog has never shown dangerous tendencies, then the owner is not liable, and that has stood up in court. But if the dog is known to be dangerous, and the dog is chained in the backyard, and the backyard is fenced, and the gates are locked, and a child crawls in the range of the dog that is chained and is injured, the owner is not liable. But what the Senator is saying is, if you have a gun in your house and your house is gained access to by someone, oh, yes, if the door is open and a child invites another child in, and that child finds a gun and misuses it, then, of course, the owner of the gun is liable. I don't believe that is the pit-bull argument. And I don't think it can be, because the owner may have put the gun away, and did in this instance. What if the owner had it locked up but the child of the owner knew where the key was? Now, who is liable there?
Source
govinfo.gov




