Marketing Is Not To Blame
For Murder
Firearms Industry Prepares For Trial
in Brooklyn, NY
NEWTOWN, CT -- The NAACP is suing members of the firearms
industry, seeking to blame manufacturers for the violent acts
of criminals who illegally use firearms to commit crime. (Click
here for a complete list of defendants). Represented by
a radical anti-gun lawyer, the NAACP is making the outrageous
and highly offensive claim that the firearms industry’s
lawful and heavily regulated distribution and sale of firearms
has somehow led to increased crime rates in the African-American
and minority community.
The trial begins on March 24, 2003 in the Brooklyn, NY federal
courtroom of Judge Jack B. Weinstein, who is well known in
legal circles as a liberal, activist jurist.
“This is the same baseless and defamatory claim being
made by big-city politicians, greedy trial lawyers and radical
anti-gun groups in a series of municipal suits filed against
the firearms industry in Chicago, Washington, DC, New York
City and elsewhere,” said Lawrence G. Keane, vice president
& general counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation,
the firearm industry’s trade association.
“Courts have been throwing these cases out of court
and utterly rejecting the ridiculous notion that marketing
is to blame for murder,” added Keane. (Click
here for a summary of the municipal firearms litigation).
An identical lawsuit, brought by several California cities,
including San Francisco, Los Angeles, Berkley and Oakland
was thrown out of court on March 7, 2003.
“This is a vindication for our industry and a fatal
blow to the efforts of anti-gun zealots like the Brady Center,
who seek to destroy our industry by blaming it for the acts
of criminals and demonizing our products,” Keane said.
“Regrettably, the NAACP’s baseless case remains,”
he added.
Who’s Paying For This Case
Anyway?
The NAACP’s suit is being funded and supported by extreme
anti-gun organizations and non-profit foundations like the
Brady Center to Prevent Handgun Violence (formerly known as
Handgun Control Inc.); Andrew McKelvey, founder of Americans
for Gun Safety; the Irene Diamond Fund; and George Soros’
Open Society Institute and Funders’ Collaborative For
Gun Violence Prevention.
Judge Shopping
In a blatant and highly improper case of judge shopping,
the NAACP handpicked Judge Jack B. Weinstein to hear its case
in federal court. Weinstein is the only judge to lead a jury
to a verdict against members of the firearms industry in a
case called Hamilton v. Accu-Tek, which was later thrown out
on appeal by a unanimous appellate court. New York City trial
lawyer Elisa Barnes, who represented the plaintiffs in the
failed Hamilton case, is representing the NAACP.
Where’s Beretta U.S.A.?
In order to ensure that Judge Weinstein would hear their
case, Elisa Barnes and the NAACP purposely did not name Beretta
U.S.A. Corp., the third largest handgun manufacturer in the
United States, as a defendant in this case. Why you ask? Because
the NAACP had to choose between Judge Weinstein and Beretta
U.S.A. Corp. Since the NAACP and Beretta U.S.A. are both Maryland-based
corporations, the case could not be heard in federal court
if Beretta had been named.
“It is very telling that the NAACP thought it more
important to have a judge it thinks will be favorably predisposed
to its case than to have one of the largest and most well
known members of the firearms industry named as a defendant.
The funny thing is that Ms. Barnes thought Beretta was very
important in the Hamilton case. I highly doubt her opinion
of Beretta, wrong as it may be, has recently changed,”
said Keane.
Judge Will Be Able To Rewrite Nation’s
Gun Laws
Unfortunately, Judge Weinstein has refused to allow a jury,
as provided for under the federal constitution, to decide
this case. Instead, in this bench (or non-jury) trial, Judge
Weinstein will decide what law applies and what the “facts”
prove.
If he finds the NAACP proved that the lawful and highly regulated
sale of non-defective firearms by some or all of the separate
defendant companies have caused a “nuisance” and
the NAACP itself has somehow suffered injury as a consequence,
he will issue an injunction against the entire industry. He,
not Congress, will change the way firearms are distributed
and sold in the United States, effectively amending and revising
federal and state law, like the Gun Control Act of 1968.
“Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms”
Common Sense Legal Reform
These “junk” lawsuits are an attempt by extreme
anti-gun groups to bankrupt the firearm industry through litigation
and regulate them in ways that neither Congress nor the American
people support.
They threaten to put an entire industry out of business,
taking thousands of precious American manufacturing jobs with
it. They also threaten our nation’s national and homeland
security. The companies being sued, American icons like Colt,
Browning, Smith & Wesson, Sturm, Ruger, Winchester, Beretta
U.S.A. and Glock, are part of America’s “Arsenal
of Democracy.” They provide our nation’s soldiers
and law enforcement officers with the tools they need to protect
our nation and our communities.
These lawsuits waste millions of taxpayer dollars, clog our
courts, and deny truly injured plaintiffs their day in court.
The firearms industry enthusiastically supports and calls
upon Congress to swiftly pass the Protection of Lawful Commerce
in Arms Act of 2003 (H.R. 1036).The act was introduced in
the House of Representatives on February 27 with 243 original
co-sponsors, more than a majority of the House of Representatives.
The bill was introduced in the Senate (S. 659) on March 19th,
with 51 original co-sponsors. The Act enjoys strong bi-partisan
support.
“The NAACP case, and the remaining frivolous municipal
suits that seek to scapegoat a responsible American industry
for hideous acts of criminals, is the poster child for why
it is urgent that Congress enact common sense legal reform
and restore fairness and integrity to our judicial system,”
said Keane.
-30-
|
