Posted on 01/03/2003 11:53:42 AM PST by FourPeas
Five years later, little action on antigun suits
The Associated Press
1/3/03 1:29 AM
DETROIT (AP) -- Nearly four years after the city and surrounding Wayne County sued gun makers, seeking $800 million for the cost of handling gun violence, the case has yet to go to trial.
The Detroit suit was the fourth of 33 jurisdictions around the nation to sue gun makers, distributors and retailers. The suits said the gun merchants pumped increasingly lethal handguns into urban areas and ignoring the resulting mayhem.
But so far, none has come to trial and nine cases have been dismissed, the Detroit Free Press said Friday.
The gun industry has poured an estimated $10 million into its defense, and the National Rifle Association has persuaded legislatures in Michigan and 30 other states to give them immunity.
The Detroit and Wayne County suits are before the Michigan Court of Appeals. A California case is to be the first to reach trial on April 25.
"The mistake was to assume the firearms industry would capitulate quickly and settle. That didn't happen," said Jeff Reh, lawyer for Beretta USA. The gun maker is a defendant in some of the suits.
"For the firearms industry to give up would mean basically we'd go out of business," Reh said.
But lawyers for the communities bringing the suits, as well as gun-control advocates, say the industry faces precedent-setting challenges from the remaining lawsuits.
They say the gun industry is trying to avert the threat by lobbying Congress for a federal immunity law.
"The gun industry would like people to think they're batting 1.000. That's clearly wrong," said Matt Nosanchuk of the Violence Policy Center, based in the nation's capital. The group is helping the communities that brought the suits.
The idea of using litigation as a public health tool was not a novel one. Cities used a recent $246 billion settlement from the tobacco industry to 50 states as a model.
The communities said that gun manufacturers supply more guns in some areas than could lawfully be used.
The companies then pass them on to distributors and dealers and "basically shut their eyes after that," said Jon Vernick, codirector of the Center for Gun Policy and Research at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore.
The communities say they have been left to pay for the carnage the industry promotes, including violent crime, depressed housing values and medical and police services.
Gun rights advocates say the suits are misguided and unfair.
"They're attempting to regulate social conduct by focusing on the means that are used in the crime," said Joseph Tartaro, president of the Second Amendment Foundation.
"You can't sue the manufacturer of a firearm, any more than you can sue Budweiser when someone gets involved in a drunk-driving accident," said Larry Keane, lawyer for the National Shooting Sports Foundation. It represents gun makers and sellers.
The Journal of the American Medical Association estimates that nationwide, the annual financial costs of gun violence is $1.4 billion to $4 billion. It says there are $19 billion in indirect costs, such as loss of productivity.
Weusi Olusola was a basketball star at Detroit Murray-Wright High School in 1986 when a group of men opened fire at a house, hitting him four times and making him a paraplegic.
He now visits schools and recreation centers in Detroit with others who were injured by gun violence, telling his story.
Olusola said he could buy a gun on almost any corner en route.
"They seem easier to get now than ever," he said.
Huh?
The communities say they have been left to pay for the carnage the industry promotes, including violent crime, depressed housing values and medical and police services.
Nah, couldn't be the lack of community standards, the lack of moral values or the complete breakdown of the community itself. Nah.
And, what a great ending to an article. No bias there.
I'm sure there are ways to get to that. For example, distribution warehouses commonly have more of various products than the local area can use in a reasonable periood of time...because they're intended to distrubute over several states. As for lawful use...well, that depends on the local laws - and the definition of "used" - doesn't it.
And just what would be the nationwide costs of crimes against an unarmed populace of sheep committed by the predator class?
Give them time. A few more precedents set in this toxic little swamp of new liability theory and that's precisely what they will be doing.
But at least the trial lawyers are NOT getting a big payday out of a contingency fee.
Detroit huh? How about suing the manufacturers, distributers, and dealers for all the carnage, lives taken, and gas wasted, etc. caused by cars? (/sarcasm)
These people know the drill. They plan to lose and lose and lose again. On the evening news, Joe Sixpack keeps hearing about the gun industry getting sued. "Must be sumpthin' to it..."
Pretty soon you got a jury full of Joe Sixpacks. Bingo, they hit a friendly jury and get a $100 billion judgement.
As I like to put it, lets make THEM worship at the altar of Our Lady of Perpetual Litigation...use their methods against them. Where are the pro-Second-Amendment lawyers willing to go after these creeps?
--Boris
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.