NAACP vs. NAACP

Two examples of inconsistency

Number 1: Preserving the rights of African-Americans and other minorities?

"And so the NAACP will be filing litigation this week in the United States District Court against the gun industry in an effort to break the backs of those who help perpetuate this over saturation of weapons in our communities."

- The Honorable Kweisi Mfume, 7/12/99 Keynote Speech, 90th NAACP Annual Meeting

vs.

"In 1991, the Virginia Conference NAACP successfully defeated a Richmond housing board effort to ban 14,000 public housing residents from keeping legal guns in their homes. State NAACP President Jack W. Gravely and Executive Secretary Lynda Byrd Harden led a coalition of civil rights groups… who argued against disarming a predominantly black group…"

-Frank J. Murray, Washington Times, 7/14/1999

Number 2: Saving jobs?

"And so the NAACP will be filing litigation this week in the United States District Court against the gun industry in an effort to break the backs of those who help perpetuate this over saturation of weapons in our communities."

- The Honorable Kweisi Mfume, 7/12/99 Keynote Speech, 90th NAACP Annual Meeting

vs.

"The NAACP's current treasurer and board member, Mr. Borges, is praised in organization literature for diversifying Connecticut's pension and trust portfolio during six years as state treasurer. But the NAACP said there was no conflict from his 1990 decision to invest $25 million and give the state 47 percent ownership of Colt's Manufacturing in a futile attempt to save the gun maker from bankruptcy court and keep 800 jobs."

-Frank J. Murray, Washington Times, 7/14/1999

Pass the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act

The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act seeks to protect firearms and ammunition manufacturers from being sued for the criminal misuse of their lawful products by third parties. This legislation seeks to prevent abuses to the American legal system.

Only passage of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (HR 1036 / S 659) will eliminate these frivolous lawsuits that threaten to destroy one of America's oldest, most important industries and eliminate the jobs of thousands of Americans. With 243 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives and 51 co-sponsors in the Senate, the Act enjoys strong bi-partisan support.

On Thursday, April 3, 2003 the Act was passed out of the House Judiciary Committee and onto the whole House by an overwhelming majority of votes. This was the last legislative hurtle the Act had to clear before it could be voted on by the entire House of Representatives. The House is expected to vote on the Act in the near future. See Testimony of Lawrence G. Keane

According to a recent national poll conducted by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, 69% of Americans would be more favorable toward their Senator or Representative if they voted to reform the way class action lawsuits are handled in the United States. A recent poll conducted by the American Tort Reform Association found that 83.4% of Americans believe there are too many lawsuits in America.