Gun Control Group Plans to Challenge Protections for Gun Industry

cnsnews.com ^ | 10 19 05 | Susan Jones

[freepatriot32]

CNSNews.com) - The House is expected to vote Wednesday on a bill that would restrict lawsuits against gun makers and gun sellers for the criminal misuse of their products. But even before the voting begins, a gun control group announced it would challenge the measure on constitutional grounds.

The Senate passed the "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act" in July, and the House is expected to follow suit.

The National Rifle Association says the bill will stop "meritless, reckless lawsuits" that are filed with the goal of bankrupting the gun industry.

But lawyers at the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence call the bill a "special interest extravaganza" that threatens the rights of "gun victims."

The Brady Center, which has filed a number of negligence/nuisance lawsuits against the gun industry, said Congress can pass the bill, the president can sign it, but "this shameful law will not stand."

Dennis Henigan, director of the Brady Center's Legal Action Project, called the bill "an unprecedented attack on the due process rights of victims injured by the misconduct of an industry that seeks to escape the legal rules that govern the rest of us. We believe state and federal courts across this nation are prepared to strike it down."

Brady Center lawyers have nine pending lawsuits against gun sellers and manufacturers, in which they represent individual crime victims as well as cities seeking to recover the cost of crimes involving guns.(The cases are pending in the states of Indiana, New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, North Carolina and in the District of Columbia.)

The first of the nine cases, a lawsuit brought against the gun industry by New York City, is scheduled to go to trial in federal court in Brooklyn, N.Y., on November 28. The suit charges the gun industry with contributing to a public nuisance in New York City by selling guns through retail dealers who facilitate gun trafficking.

The Brady Center anticipates that the defendants in those pending lawsuits will try to have their cases dismissed once the bill becomes law.

Second Amendment supporters say the New York City lawsuit and others like it are nothing more than back-door gun control.

See Earlier Stories: Gun Control Group Files New Lawsuits to Make A Point (28 July 2005)

Senate Okays Gun Maker Protection Bill (29 July 2005)

[freepatriot32]

a gun control group announced it would challenge the measure on constitutional grounds.

so a law protecting the second amendment of the american constitution is going to be challenged and thrown out of court on constitutional grounds?Irony is so ironic isnt it

I'm convinced now more then ever that John hinkley shot the wrong brady

[2banana]

Funny how lefties always run to the courts to subvert the will of the people...

[freepatriot32]

Libertarian ping.To be added or removed from my ping list freepmail me or post a message here

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed one.
- Thomas Jefferson quoting Cesare Beccaria, Criminologist 1764.

[freepatriot32]

ping

[School of Rational Thought]

a gun control group announced it would challenge the measure on constitutional grounds.

Of course. What leftists cannot do legitimately they will find an activist judge to do their bidding.

[Houmatt]

I heard about this, myself. Not only is it ironic, but it is demonstrative of how these people want to disarm citizens by way of suing gun companies into bankruptcy.

[redgolum]

Probably attack under the "equal protection" clause. Since there is no similar protection for the maker of Acme Sprockets,then we should be able to sue Remington for anything we want.

[Allosaurs_r_us]

Dennis Henigan, director of the Brady Center's Legal Action Project, called the bill "an unprecedented attack on the due process rights of victims injured by the misconduct of an industry that seeks to escape the legal rules that govern the rest of us. We believe state and federal courts across this nation are prepared to strike it down."

 

Then Mr. Henigan, I guess we can all start suing the automakers whenever a loved one is injured or killed in an auto accident where there are criminal consequences, i.e. a drunk driver, huh? I would like for you to explain the difference.

 

You sir are an idiot!

 

How is it the seller has to accept the responsibility of his clients? To my knowledge the only law on the books for this, is if you sell an obvious drunk more alcohol. Just how would you expect a manufacturer to have knowledge of his client's intent? I don't understand your definition of misconduct!

 

Go crawl back under your rock and let the citizens of this country who are not afraid of defending themselves and their families carry on with our lives. If you choose to lay down and let your loved ones be assaulted or extinguished, that is your right. Do not try and make it my law for then I assure you, I will be a criminal!

 

[absolootezer0]

Probably attack under the "equal protection" clause. Since there is no similar protection for the maker of Acme Sprockets,then we should be able to sue Remington for anything we want.

fine. if they say that a company is liable for a persons actions with their product, i'm gonna sue dodge for when i crashed my durango. and bf goodrich for the tires that slipped on the ice. and the company that made the brakes that didn't stop me. and the city for putting that darn tree so close to the road.
and then i'm gonn sue estwing for the hammer that dropped on my foot.
and craftsman for the torque wrench that slipped and sprained my wrist.
oh and staples for the papercut i got yesterday...

[redgolum]

There have been cases similar to what you have described. Most notable the suit against McDonald's for making people fat. And the tobacco companies are the template for all judicial activism.

I just hope this stand up in court.

[redgolum]

There have been cases similar to what you have described. Most notable the suit against McDonald's for making people fat. And the tobacco companies are the template for all judicial activism.

I just hope this stand up in court.

[inquest]

So Congress doesn't have the power to protect industries from lawsuits, according to the Brady Bunch? I wonder what they thought of Congress's shielding airlines from 9/11-related lawsuits. If they're actually intent on overturning all this, it should be quite interesting to watch.

[RWB Patriot]

"gun victims."

Three guesses who they're really talking about, and the first two don't count.