Posted on 11/19/2004 6:27:03 AM PST by Tumbleweed_Connection
In a crushing defeat for gun control advocates, the Illinois Supreme Court dismissed two lawsuits against the firearms industry Thursday, prompting the father of 19-year-old shooting victim Andrew Young to say the justices "will have some of that blood on their hands now."
The high court tossed out a $433 million lawsuit that Chicago and Cook County brought, as well as a lawsuit families of gun victims filed against firearms makers, distributors and suburban dealers.
Steve Young, whose son Andrew was killed in 1996 by a gang member who got a gun through a middleman, said he was astounded.
"After my son died, I was so devastated and the pain was so great," said Young, a plaintiff in the families' lawsuit. "I could not understand why all these guns were on the street. Here we are six years after the suit was filed and eight years after my son died and some people still don't get it, namely the Illinois Supreme Court."
The 1998 lawsuits accused the gun industry of creating a public nuisance by using irresponsible suburban gun shops to flood the city with guns that traffickers supplied to criminals. The city and the county sought reimbursement for policing, emergency services and prosecutions tied to gun violence.
Nuisance claim rejected
Governments have traditionally used nuisance laws to go after polluters, but applying the theory to the gun industry was new. Courts in other states have recently allowed cities to go to trial against the gun industry with nuisance claims, but the Illinois Supreme Court refused to create "an entirely new species of public nuisance liability."
"The mere fact that defendants' conduct in their plants, offices and stores puts guns into the stream of commerce does not state a claim for public nuisance," wrote Justice Rita Garman, author of the court's opinion in both cases.
The court suggested a legislative remedy. But that seems unlikely, given the setbacks for Mayor Daley on gun control in the General Assembly.
"I don't see a legislative solution," said Senate President Emil Jones (D-Chicago).
Gun-rights advocates felt vindicated.
The lawsuits tried to hold gun makers and dealers liable for crimes they have no control over, said Todd Vandermyde, a National Rifle Association lobbyist in Illinois.
"It would be tantamount to General Motors being blamed for drunk driving," he said.
The rulings followed a key legislative victory for the NRA this week in Illinois. The House followed the Senate's lead and voted to override Gov. Blagojevich's veto of a bill that would make it more difficult to prosecute gun owners who shoot home intruders in towns that ban guns.
Plaintiffs revel in victory
"This week, there was a one-two punch on behalf of gun owners in the state of Illinois," Vandermyde said. "We have beaten them in the Legislature and now we have beaten them in the courts."
The plaintiffs conceded defeat. Their cases were based on state law, so the U.S. Supreme Court does not have jurisdiction.
Daley said he was disappointed.
"America is not that worried about guns," he lamented. "I will go to the rehab center and show you all the kids who got shot by a pistol, or a shotgun or rifle."
Dennis Henigan, legal director of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said the rulings were "very much out of step" with courts in other parts of the country.
Six Illinois justices filed a "special concurrence," saying they agreed with the ruling but were alarmed about statistics the plaintiffs presented about gun sales. Guns sold by the defendants wound up in crimes almost twice as fast as guns sold by dealers not named in the lawsuit, the plaintiffs claimed.
"Allegations about defendants' conduct, if true, suggest the defendants were not only aware that their products were used by third parties for criminal acts, but the defendants affirmatively sought to increase their profit by pandering to that market," Justice Charles Freeman wrote.
Guns? Guns are tame, this stuff is a real killer: http://www.dhmo.org/
"In a crushing defeat for gun control advocates..." AND their personal injury lawyer friends....
let's not overlook that!
"Lock & Load" Bump!
BANGLIST
Good news. 2 more down, how many more to go? We need to get Dr. Paul's Second Amendment Protection Act pushed through Congress. In the 108th, it was HR 153. Needs to be resubmitted, not allowed to die in comittee, and passed by the 109th. Either that, or something with even stronger language.
Has anyone looked into why guns sold to particular dealers get used in criminal activity more than other dealers? I presume at some point that an illegal sale or transfer occurs for this to happen in many cases (but not all). What existing laws are being broken, and by whom?
Oh goody. Something *else* to worry about.
Because their parents were too galactically STUPID to teach their kids how to properly clean/maintain/fire them.
The state police approve each sale made by a retailer. The hysterical complaints made by the Sun Times are B.S.
But that would not further the master plan which is to show
that only a control regime such as in the UK would work.
The antis do not want the current laws to work.
Why not just assume the obvious? Criminals are attracted to certain types of weapons, and prefer to travel in certain parts of town.
Don't EVER assume these people are using valid statistics...check them out EVERY time, because the simple fact of the matter is they believe their cause justifies their methods, and those methods would get you ostracized by your own flesh and blood if you practiced them within your family.
Daley said he was disappointed.
"America is not that worried about guns," he lamented. "I will go to the rehab center and show you all the kids who got shot by aN ILLEGAL pistol, or a shotgun or rifle."
The caps are inserted into the quote by me.
Your second point is well taken. Because it's possible that a gun retailer can be a criminal. If a retailer has been deceived after having taken those precautions prescribed by law, that's one thing. But it is possible that a retailer is taking advantage of his location by deliberately selling to criminals. Such retailers should be investigated to ascertain what the case actually is. That's why I'm asking whether any existing gun retailing laws are being broken. If they aren't, the responsibility lies solely with the criminal. But if the retailer is breaking laws, then he/she has to be held accountable for that.
Correct. Just try to buy a gun of any kind in Illinois. Its difficult if you're a resident, impossible if you are from outside the state.
I recently learned un a YMCA class that DMHO can kill in 10 seconds or less if inhailed.
It can be some real nasty stuff!
Do you REALLY support a law that purports to make the retailer responsible for knowing the consumer's intent???? Do you have any idea how such laws are enforced?
That's just an ex post facto method of making the retailer a sacrificial goat on the alter of demagoguery.
"It would be tantamount to General Motors being blamed for drunk driving," he said.
Just wait!
I'm sure it's coming!
Kids should be taught gun safety by their father or other responsible adult.
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.