U.S. District Court Dismisses Lawsuit to Ban Traditional Ammunition

NEWTOWN, Conn. -- The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia today dismissed a lawsuit brought by the radical anti-hunting Center for Biological Diversity and six other groups demanding the Environmental Protection Agency ban traditional ammunition containing lead components.

Traditional ammunition represents 95 percent of the U.S. market and is the staple ammunition for target shooters, hunters and law enforcement, with more than 10 billion rounds sold annually.

NSSF filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit last August. The court today agreed with NSSF that EPA does not have the authority to regulate traditional ammunition under the Toxic Substances Control Act.

EPA had already twice denied attempts by CBD to have the agency ban traditional ammunition, and the court had dismissed an earlier case brought by CBD seeking the same relief.

“We are gratified that the court has found this second frivolous lawsuit, which is essentially the same as the one dismissed last year, was equally without merit,” said Lawrence G. Keane, senior vice president and general counsel for the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry. “This was a waste of taxpayers' dollars and EPA resources spent in having to defend a baseless lawsuit.”

CBD's serial petitioning of EPA and its repeated lawsuits were designed to cripple the shooting sports in America by banning the ammunition that millions of hunters and target shooters choose to use safely and responsibly.

"There is quite simply no sound science that shows the use of traditional ammunition has harmed wildlife populations or that it presents a health risk to humans who consume game taken with such ammunition," said Keane. "Banning traditional ammunition would cost tens of thousands of jobs in America and destroy wildlife conservation that is funded in part by an 11 percent excise tax on the sale of ammunition. The protection and management of wildlife is properly handled by the professional biologists in the state fish and game agencies, as it has been for over a hundred years.

In addition to NSSF, the National Rifle Association, Safari Club International and the Association of Battery Recyclers intervened in the case.

Organizations that joined CBD in its lawsuit were the Cascades Raptor Center of Oregon, the Loon Lake Loon Association of Washington, Preserve Our Wildlife of Florida, Tennessee Ornithological Society, Trumpeter Swan Society and Western Nebraska Resources Council.

About NSSF The National Shooting Sports Foundation is the trade association for the firearms industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has a membership of more than 8,000 manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen's organizations and publishers. For more information, log on to www.nssf.org.

How about Obamacare?

It went all the way to the Supreme Court.

Thank you for proving my point.

For the case to preede to the Supreme Court meant lowers courts believed the case did have merit to be heard and argued in the appellate process. Just because a major of the upper courts found not to agree, doen't mean it was "meritless"

The nuisance cases I refer to are the cases at that are filed in lower courts that have been adjudicated yet with a incessant refiling the same case but approaching it with different arguements and rewording. i,e., the overweight murderer who tried to declare it would "cruel and unusual" to put to him death becausae he was too fat.

You can't have looser pays in criminal cases. A little problem with constitutional rights of the defendant.

Looser pays applies only to civil cases and it only applies to the plaintiff filing the suit, since the plaintiff already collects damages from the defendant if the defendant looses the case.

If the defendant wants to file a counter suite against the plaintiff claiming there is no merit to the case go for it, but they are required to prove there is no merit to the case, just don't hand the defendant money because they win the case.

There are a lot of lawsuits filed where the defendant wins the case but the case had merit. One example would be where an individual files a suit against a multimillion dollar company and simply cannot match the amount of money spent on legal fees of the multimillion dollar company.

A corrupt judge can drag a case out for years swamping the person filing the suit in legal fees.

You have automatic looser pay you are opening the door to even more corruption in the courts.

Look up the Center for Biological Diversity on the internet and you will see where their staff came from. A very incestuous network of environmental wackos with lots of foundations giving them tens of millions of dollars, perhaps hundreds of millions if you look further into each individual group (and then in the cumulative).

Here in Texas some of the democrat controlled counties have a new trick for taking someone’s property to sell to someone else that wants the property.

File a suit claiming delinquent taxes are due on the property even though the taxes have been paid.

When the owner presents evidence in the form of receipts showing the taxes have been paid they will agree to dismiss the suit.

With the owner believing the suit is dismissed the county will then get a judgment against the previous owner of the property and an en rem (SP?) judgment against the property.

Since the suit against the owner is dismissed the owner is never notified of any kind of judgment.

Without knowledge of any kind of judgment the owner has no reason to file any kind of appeal of the judgment.

Since the owner hasn’t appealed the judgment, the court will then seize the property.

The owner is then left with the option of paying the county the money they claim is owed, or the owner looses the property.

Anybody believe this is far fetched, they did it to me in Hardin County, TX.

From what I got out of an attorney the same thing has been happening in a number of counties.

I believe this is what was behind the attempt to take the taxing authority away from each individual school district.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.