If a bartender sells booze to someone who already is drunk, he and the bar can be sued and held liable if the intoxicated patron hurts someone.

But if a gun shop clerk sells 1,000 rounds of ammunition to someone for use in a semi-automatic weapon that later is used in a mass shooting … well, what can you do?

Because too many members of Congress are clients of the gun industry-controlled gun lobby, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act of 2005 immunizes the gun industry against civil liability to a degree not enjoyed by any other enterprise.

So, for example, the courts quickly dismissed a lawsuit by the parents of a teenage girl who was killed in the 2012 mass shooting at an Aurora, Colorado, movie theater. They contended that the gun shop that sold thousands of rounds of ammunition to killer James Holmes had failed to use reasonable safeguards to prevent dangerous people from obtaining guns and ammunition. But the federal law fulfilled its purpose, ensuring that such cases never are heard on their merits.

That is just one example. The law includes only very narrow circumstances under which a gun manufacturer or dealer could shoulder liability for unsafe products or practices.

Rep. Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, has introduced a bill to repeal the 2005 law in favor of the same sort of liability standards that apply to all other types of commerce. Congress should do so to increase accountability and, consequently, help to diminish gun violence.