First, it sounds like we're talking about civil liability, not criminal prosecution. Second, in the automobile example, it sounds like the bar is pretty high. If you allow somebody to drive your car, and you know they are not legally allowed to operate a motor vehicle because they have no license, that's gross negligence. It doesn't sound like the same liability exists if you loan your car to your roommate who has a valid license.surprise_i'm_armed wrote: ↑Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:53 pm If you negligently let a non-licensed person drive, and they get in a wreck, you are at fault for "entrusting" them with the vehicle.
I don't know if those 35 other states require a license, like a FOID, to possess a firearm. If so, then the situation sounds analogous to the motor vehicle liability. Texas doesn't require a license to possess a firearm, so the motor vehicle analogy is flawed from the start in Texas. It would be like being liable for loaning a neighbor a chainsaw after a hurricane, and they use it to massacre people instead of clearing storm debris.surprise_i'm_armed wrote: ↑Wed Nov 28, 2018 9:53 pm 35 other states have ruled that, just like a vehicle, if you negligently entrust someone with a firearm, and they commit a crime with it, you are at fault for letting them have the gun.
We do have a law (46.06) that prohibits giving a handgun to somebody if you know he "intends to use it unlawfully or in the commission of an unlawful act" and the same section prohibits giving a firearm to somebody you if you know they're a felon or intoxicated. IANAL but I don't see anything that prohibits a civil action against you by a crime victims, if it was illegal for you to provide the gun he used in the crime.