Suing Firearms Manufacturers
BY Herschel Smith
3 years, 5 months ago
NYT.
ALBANY, N.Y. — New York State lawmakers passed legislation on Tuesday intended to allow civil lawsuits to be brought against firearm manufacturers and dealers, an attempt to circumvent the broad immunity gun companies currently enjoy under federal law.
The bill, passed by the Democratic-controlled State Legislature, is the first of its kind in the nation to specifically classify the illegal or improper marketing or sale of guns as a nuisance — a technical classification that state lawmakers say would open the gun industry to civil liability suits in New York.
The approach, if successful, could prompt other states to follow suit as many cities grapple with rising gun violence. Indeed, Gov. Phil Murphy of New Jersey has already indicated he supports a similar proposal.
The move comes a few months after President Biden reiterated his support of repealing a 2005 federal statute that gave gun manufacturers far-reaching immunity from being sued by victims of gun violence and their relatives.
The 2005 law, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, protects gun producers and firearm dealers from being held liable when crimes are carried out with their products. The federal statute, however, did not shield manufacturers in some cases, such as when they break state laws in their sales and marketing practices — an exception that the New York bill seeks to exploit.
State lawmakers believe that the gun industry can be held liable under state law if its sales and marketing practices create a nuisance. The bill requires that gun companies establish “reasonable controls” to prevent their guns from being used, marketed or sold illegally in New York. If the companies do not do so, the bill empowers the state attorney general and cities to take legal action against them, and allows individuals to seek damages if they were hurt as a result of a gun company’s actions.
There’s a relatively easy way to handle this. If this gets signed into law in NY, all firearms manufacturers who care about liberty should stop selling firearms to all law enforcement in the state of New York, including federal (FBI, Marshals Service, etc.) and all state, county and city law enforcement.
No Glocks, no S&W M&Ps, no Sigs, no FNs, no patrol rifles of any kind, including ARs, no long range bolt action rifles, and no replacement parts, build kits, or cleaning supplies (e.g., from Brownells, Midway, or anywhere). No ammunition sent to law enforcement in NY, not from individual suppliers or wholesalers, and no mail order (Ammoseek could quite easily exclude suppliers who send ammunition to New York state at all).
Do it and see how they like playing hard ball. But then, all firearms manufacturers and suppliers won’t make such a decision and follow through, will they?
Will they? Because $$$$.
Until they get sued themselves under the new law. There are ways to beat gun control – those ways just require a new paradigm and true commitment to something other than $$$$.
On June 9, 2021 at 11:33 pm, ROFuher said:
Unless I missed the headline declaring Barrett changed his tune, he did exactly that to CA.
It would take the above mentioned and more to get these states’ attention, I fear.
On June 10, 2021 at 6:43 am, George said:
Amen, Herschel, amen!
On June 10, 2021 at 8:35 am, W Wilson said:
How about a law making it legal to use politicians for not following the Constitution!
On June 10, 2021 at 10:55 am, alfie said:
I remember reading some time ago about California outlawing .50 weapons, but at a later date the Calif state law enforcement people sent their .50 Barretts back to the factory to be rebuilt and refurbished. Which Barrett did, except they put the said weapons in storage ( hopefully charged Calif rent fo the storage area ). when Calif law enforcement asked where are our firearms, Barrett supposedly said or told Calif law enforcement that it was against Calif state law to ship, sent or transport any kind of large caliber firearms in the state of Calif. Don’t know how that one turned out, haven’t heard anything more about that.
On June 10, 2021 at 11:53 am, CT Ginger said:
An inventive lawyer could apply the logic of this law and represent a client suing liquor distiller for his DUI or cirrhosis. Likewise an ISP could be sued for a porn addiction and a pizza chain for causing diabetes.
On June 10, 2021 at 12:56 pm, TJ said:
Logically follows that car manufactures could then be sued, then cigarette manufactures, then knife manufactures, and any boxing or martial arts gym…
On June 10, 2021 at 9:20 pm, X said:
New York (the center of Satanic degeneracy on the East Coast) got this idea from the lawsuit that helped bankrupt Remington.
You will recall that Remington, the former owner of Bushmaster, was sued after Sandy Hook for allegedly “marketing” ARs incorrectly. Remington tried to get the suit thrown out under the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but the corrupt judge issued a bogus ruling allowing the suit to proceed by claiming that the Act did not cover “marketing.”
Remington, of course, had made enough stupid business decisions on their own, completely unrelated to the suit to put them on the edge of bankruptcy, and the the ruling was the final straw.
But this is an important lesson. In the biggest “panic” year of gun an ammo buying on record, with historic shortages of ammo, components, and weapons, “America’s oldest gunmaker” and it’s UMC ammo division was completely shut down. And most of Remington’s production was “Fudd” guns like 870s and Remlin lever guns that served as some of the only viable alternatives to banned “assault weapons.”
The gun banners have their boot on the throat of the gun industry for sure…