A Crack in Civil Society

The decision of the Republican-led Congress to protect gun manufacturers (including our own Massachusetts' firms) from litigation indicates that these politicians do not understand civil society. The right to litigate is fundamental to civil society. Instead of taking the law into one's own hands, we evolved into a social arrangement whereby disputes (including charges of harmful behavior) are decided upon according to the rule of law, within appropriate court room settings. By blocking the right of citizens to litigate (and to collectively, through the court process, determine the validity of claims), the Congress is sending a message that citizens who have suffered harm should, instead, take the law into their own hands. Duels are not legal, so that's pretty much out, too, but there is nothing to stop an aggrieved party, with no other alternative, from getting his or her hands on one of those guns and then shooting the executives he or she thinks is responsible for the harm. Without the right to sue, this alternative becomes a more likely response.

I should also point out that this set of congressional leaders are also cheery picking who they want to protect from litigation, which has all the appearance of more cronyism. They are not, for example, protecting internet service providers or telecommuncations companies from litigation related to unlawful use of their networks to download pirated software, movies, music, etc. Instead, they're trying to protect industries that have given them lots of $$$ and other perks. If they genuinely wanted to stop litigation (which I do not think is consistent with civil society, as indicated above), then they should attempt to pass industry neutral legislation.