Posts Tagged ‘guns’

First Lawful Commerce in Arms Act challenge

Eastern District of New York Judge Jack Weinstein heard the first challenge to the Lawful Commerce in Arms Act Monday. Tom Perrotta of the New York Law Journal reports that Weinstein was dismissive of the constitutional arguments, but possibly open to the plaintiffs’ attempt to expand an exception in the Act into a loophole that would encompass virtually all litigation against gun manufacturers. (NYC Claims Exception in New Federal Law Allows Gun Suit, Nov. 23). See also Nov. 9; Apr. 13, 2004.

Volokh on gun immunity law

Eugene Volokh eviscerates a Slate smear of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act:

The gun industry has been exposed to novel theories of legal liability, which don’t apply to other industries: If I’m hit by a 20-year-old driver who was drunk on Coors and driving a Ford Mustang, I wouldn’t be able to hold the alcohol manufacturer or car manufacturer liable — even if the manufacturer sold the Coors to a liquor store in a college town (so that the manufacturer must surely have known that some fraction of its products would end up in the hands of the underaged), even if the manufacturer knew that the liquor store had been suspected in past unlawful sales (but still was allowed by the state to sell beer), and even if I can persuade the jury that car manufacturers shouldn’t be able to sell really fast and powerful cars, especially to 20-year-olds, who are notoriously prone to speeding. Yet many of the gun manufacturer lawsuits were very similar to these lawsuits, and Congress was right to preempt them.

Read the whole thing.

One can expect the first constitutional challenge to the law on November 21, when Judge Weinstein will hear a motion to dismiss New York City’s lawsuit against gun manufacturers. (Tom Perrotta, “Judge Stays New York City’s Suit Against Gun Industry”, New York Law Journal, Nov. 9). We discussed the case Apr. 13, 2004.

Flimsy numbers behind Canadian gun suit

Prime Minister Paul Martin incorrectly blamed the United States for gun crime in Canada by using an unsubstantiated figure to assert that 50 per cent of this country’s gun crimes involve smuggled firearms, U.S. Ambassador David Wilkins said yesterday.

Mr. Wilkins said that Canadian officials admitted in meetings with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice this week “that that figure was just grabbed out of thin air.”…

The figure, which others have used previously, is not based on any statistical study that could be traced by The Globe and Mail, and police forces and other authorities said yesterday it is not verifiable.

“I know that figure of 50 per cent has been bandied about, but no one can substantiate that figure,” said Staff Sergeant Paul Marsh, a spokesman for the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.

As noted Oct. 24, Martin’s government says it is considering suing American gun manufacturers for failing to prevent the smuggling of their products across the border. (Campbell Clark, “Don’t blame U.S. for gun crime, Canada told”, Globe and Mail, Oct. 27).

“Ottawa may sue U.S. gun makers”

Raising the question: did we do this during Prohibition to Canada’s whisky distillers, when their products flooded into this country across both land and water borders? And if we didn’t sue, could there be a lesson in that about the need for nations to respect each others’ sovereignty?

Canada is looking into ways to sue U.S. gun manufacturers for the spread of illegal weapons into this country, the Toronto Star has learned….

The policy will also be seen as another shot by Prime Minister Paul Martin’s government across the bow of Canada-U.S. relations.

Government sources told the Star yesterday that Canada will be looking into “every legal option” to stem a tide of crimes involving weapons that make their way into this country illegally from the United States, whether they’re sold through the Internet or smuggled across the border.

That includes possible suits against U.S. manufacturers, launched either in the United States or in this country if the firm has assets here as well, the sources said. Though no precise estimates are available, Toronto police have said repeatedly that almost half the gun crimes committed in Canada involved illegal, U.S. weapons.

(Susan Delacourt and Les Whittington, Toronto Star, Oct. 22 (reg))

Florida self-defense

” When Florida passed a law in 1987 making it easier for citizens to get licenses to carry concealed firearms, opponents predicted that blood would run in the streets. ‘When you have 10 times as many people carrying guns as you do now, and they get into an argument and tempers flash, you’re going to have people taking out guns and killing people,’ one gun-control activist said.” But instead, Florida’s murder rate has been cut in half since then. “The warnings of gun-control advocates about that law were way off the mark. So when you hear them warn that another law concerning firearms will lead to unnecessary bloodshed in Florida, skepticism is in order.” The “stand your ground” rule is old hat elsewhere around the country, but the Brady Campaign doesn’t go around trying to scare tourists away from the many other states where it’s the law. (Steve Chapman, “Expanding the right to self-defense”, Chicago Tribune, Oct. 16).

Gun bill passes

Fourteen Democrats crossed the aisle (passing two Republicans going the other direction), and the bill (discussed Jul. 27) passed 65-31. (Mary Curtius and Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, “Senate Passes Bill to Block Gun Suits”, LA Times, Jul. 29).

Texas lawmakers modify zero tolerance

Good news for a change: a bill awaiting the signature of Texas Gov. Rick Perry would restore some discretion to school boards, reducing the chances that students will be expelled over inadvertent violations of zero tolerance rules. In particular, according to a newspaper report quoted at Zero Intelligence (Jun. 6),

If the bill becomes law, students still could face severe sanctions for serious offenses, such as bringing a weapon onto a campus or a school-sponsored activity off campus. But if the bill passes, administrators would be able to consider the student’s intent or lack of intent, disciplinary history, a disability that substantially impairs the student’s capacity to appreciate the wrongfulness of the conduct and whether the action was done in self-defense.

Both Democratic and Republican lawmakers took active roles in support of the bill. (Helen Eriksen, “Discipline bill on Perry’s desk”, Houston Chronicle, Jun. 4).

Grunow gun suit

Another big defeat for the gun-control-through-litigation movement: a Florida appeals court has upheld a trial court’s decision to throw out a $1.2 million jury award against gun wholesaler Valor Corp. over the murder of Lake Worth English teacher Barry Grunow, murdered by a student who had stolen a Raven-brand handgun distributed by Valor from his grandfather. See Dec. 13-15, 2002 and Feb. 4-5, 2003. (Sara Olkon, “Judges: Gun distributor not to blame in death of Lake Worth teacher”, Miami Herald, Jun. 1). More from Dave Kopel (Jun. 2) (Corrected Jun. 2 to fix erroneous description of relationship between gunmaker and wholesaler).