|
Anti-Gun Extremists Suffer Judicial Defeat
|
"...These reckless lawsuits are designed to circumvent the
legislative process... and harass the firearm industry..." |
|
Yesterday, the New York Court of Appeals joined the ever-growing list of
courts that have rejected reckless lawsuits against gun makers by
unanimously ruling that victims of firearm-related violence cannot sue
firearm manufacturers for the criminal misuse of a non-defective product
(i.e., firearms).
The suit, Hamilton v.
Accu-Tek, is one of dozens that
are heavily supported by the gun-ban lobby, HCI, its "educational" arm the
Center to Prevent Handgun Violence (CPHV), and many other anti-gun
organizations. These reckless lawsuits are designed to circumvent the
legislative process - where the anti-gun community has suffered countless
defeats - and harass the firearm industry either into bankruptcy, or into
allowing anti-gun organizations or bureaucrats to dictate how gun makers
design and market their products.
Thursday's ruling held that firearm manufacturers cannot be held liable
when their legally produced, legally distributed, non-defective products
are used by violent criminals. The court also stated that "Federal law
already has implemented a statutory and regulatory scheme to ensure seller
'responsibility' through licensing requirements and buyer 'responsibility'
through background checks."
Further, the ruling rejected the "reforms" to
the firearm industry proposed by the plaintiffs because of a failure to
show how such changes in manufacturing or marketing practices would reduce
the criminal misuse of firearms, and because the court found the proposed
changes would eliminate "a significant number of lawful sales to
'responsible' buyers by 'responsible' Federal firearms licensees...."
The
ruling also concluded that the suit's demand that manufacturers
investigate Federal firearms licensees for possible illegal activity was
"neither feasible nor appropriate," noting that "the plaintiffs' own law
enforcement experts agreed that the manufacturers should not make any
attempt to investigate illegal gun trafficking on their own since such
attempts could disrupt pending criminal investigations and endanger the
lives of undercover officers."
Robert T. Delfay |
"We are extremely gratified by today's ruling because the Court recognized
that by complying with the extensive statutory and regulatory scheme
established by Congress and administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco
and Firearms (BATF) federally licensed firearms manufacturers distribute
and sell their lawful products in a safe and responsible manner and help
to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals," said Robert T. Delfay,
president and chief executive officer of the National Shooting Sports
Foundation, Inc., the trade association for the firearms industry. "We
have long supported law enforcement's efforts to combat illegal firearms
trafficking and cooperate whenever and however we are asked to do so, but,
obviously, recognize that we have no law enforcement authority and should
not do things that jeopardize those efforts or put law enforcement
officers in danger," added Delfay.
This is just the latest judicial rejection of reckless lawsuits against
gun makers. Courts across the country have been throwing out similar
cases - including some filed by a cabal of anti-gun big-city mayors - and this
tactic is also being rejected by state legislatures. Just last week,
Indiana became the 25th state to enact a law that prohibits municipalities
from filing these suits, and Florida (see "A Look At The States") is
poised to put us over the half-way point.
There is also NRA-backed federal
legislation that calls for a national prohibition on reckless lawsuits
against the firearm industry - H.R. 123 - introduced by U.S. Representative
(and NRA Director) Bob Barr (R-Ga.). As the courts and legislatures
continue to reject this extortion effort by the anti-gun community, we
will continue to keep you updated.
Related Stories...
More Info About Reckless Lawsuits Against Gun-Makers
|
|
