Gunmakers 'not liable' for shootings

Gun control: One of America's most divisive issues

Gun manufacturers cannot be held liable when their weapons are used illegally, the California Supreme Court has ruled.

In a decision seen as blow for gun control advocates, the court found that a gunmaker could not be sued over a 1993 attack when a man used one of their weapons, killing eight people and himself.

The California decision is in line with recent rulings by other US federal and state courts which have said makers of legal, non-defective guns cannot be sued for their criminal misuse.

Gun control groups want to sue manufacturers for what they see as negligence in marketing weapons used in crimes.

Assault weapon

The California case goes back to July 1993, when a mentally disturbed man, Gian Luigi Ferri, entered a law office in a San Francisco skyscraper.

He opened fire with a military assault pistol, TEC-DC9, made by Navegar Inc of Miami.

He killed eight people and wounded several others before turning the gun on himself.

Survivors argued Navegar was liable because it marketed the gun to appeal to criminals, and should have foreseen the weapon could be used in a mass killing.

Dennis Henigan from the Center to Prevent Handgun Violence, who argued on behalf of the victims, said Navegar should be sued.

"It was their decision to sell a combat weapon to the public and to promote it to the high risk users who intend to kill," Mr Henigan said.

Mass shootings have provoked calls for more gun control

"We would have no qualms against them if they just marketed it as a high quality weapon."

But Navegar lawyer Ernest Getto said there was no evidence of a connection between the company's legal activities and Ferri's criminal conduct.

He urged the court to prevent "the imposition of potentially boundless liability on those engaged in legal manufacturing, marketing and distribution activities when their products are criminally misused".

Product liability

The Supreme Court justices overturned a lower court's decision and ruled five to one that product liability did not allow for such lawsuits against gun manufacturers.

"The Legislature has set California's public policy regarding gun manufacturers' liability under these circumstances. Given that public policy, plaintiffs may not proceed with their negligence claim," the judges said in their ruling.

High profile shootings in the United States have led to increased calls for tighter controls on guns.

Among the anti-gun campaign's recent successes was a ruling in July by the New Mexico Court of Appeals that two gun manufacturers, Bryco Arms and BL Jennings, had a duty to make their handguns safe from foreseeable misuse by children.

But the gun lobby remains fiercely opposed to any kind of regulation.

Georgia has already passed legislation, backed by the National Rifle Association, that outlaws cities from suing gun firms. Another dozen states look set to follow suit.