Jack Reed: “let me take a very few minutes because I do want to get on with the vote. First, the underlying legislation would deny…”

“let me take a very few minutes because I do want to get on with the vote. First, the underlying legislation would deny the attorney general of Texas the right to defend the people of Texas in court with a suit, I believe. Second, the legislature in Texas could not authorize suits. They could under my amendment. But more importantly, going back to the Washington sniper, none of the carve- outs, none of the caveats would reach that. I don't think it is a matter of dispute. Negligent entrustment has been defined in the bill as supplying a qualified product by seller for use by another person where the seller knows or should know. There is no allegation that the seller knew that the young person came in and shoplifted the weapon. In fact, he could argue that there was no sale involved whatsoever. It was shoplifting. But that was negligence because I think we all agree that gun sellers have an obligation to keep their weapons under control. With respect to negligence per se, that is an unexcused violation of some enactment or administrative law. There are many States in the country that don't recognize that as a theory of tort recovery. Again, you would have to show they violated the law, they violated an administrative rule. In the case of Bushmaster, the situation is such that I don't believe there is any relevant legislation that says that an owner has to do anything in a way that would give rise to this negligence, per se.…”