Last week we reported that several anti-gun attorneys general were opening up "anti-trust investigations" into firearm manufacturers that have refused to cave in to the pressure of anti-gun reckless lawsuits designed to bankrupt them (see FAX Alert Vol. 7, No. 13). Now, California, Florida, and Massachusetts have stated they will also investigate possible anti-trust violations by gun makers that have chosen not to follow Smith & Wesson's (S&W) lead of selling out to the Clinton-Gore Administration (see Special FAX Alert 3/20/00). The manufacturers insist that those firearms dealers and distributors that have decided to show their objection to S&W's capitulation by rejecting S&W products are doing so without encouragement from other gun makers. RSR Group, Inc., a Florida-based wholesaler of firearms, and one of the larger in the country, has stated it will no longer carry S&W firearms. However, spokesperson Beatriz Atorresagasti says, "We're [RSR] not even advocating that anyone stop buying S&W products." NRA is simply keeping our members apprised of every detail and every development on this front, in the knowledge that they will come to their own informed decisions as to what courses of action they
But lawmakers around the country are beginning to listen to the experts and to their constituents who are telling them to back initiatives that hold criminals strictly accountable for the misuse of firearms and that protect citizens' Second Amendment rights. In 1999, 14 states adopted NRA-backed lawsuit preemption legislation to block tax-payer-funded junk lawsuits against lawful gun makers. So far, in 2000, this legislation has been signed into law in Utah and Kentucky and is awaiting gubernatorial signatures in Idaho, Colorado, and Virginia.
And one more gun maker has publicly stated that it will stand firm and refuse to sign on to the anti-gun Clinton-Gore/S&W agreement. Sturm, Ruger & Company has joined the ranks of Beretta USA, Browning, Glock, Inc., and Taurus Firearms, Inc., in rejecting the deal made by S&W. Even the anti-gun Washington Post expressed concerns over circumventing the legislative process in an editorial on April 2 called "Government by Lawsuit..." The Post commented that using the courts to force agreements like the one signed by S&W is "prone to abuse," and is "generally speaking a bad way to make policy." Noting that the federal government has virtually unlimited resources it can bring to bear against any target it chooses, including "law-abiding companies that it happens to dislike," the editorial asks "where is the line between legitimate governance and extortion?"
=+=+=+=+ | ||||||||||||||||
