|
Coalition Against Gun Violence |
Originally appeared in Newsletter
Vol. 6, No. 1, Winter 2000
For 30 years gun control advocates failed to accomplish all but modest regulation of the manufacturing and sale of firearms. Yet today the industry is enmeshed in broadening litigation that could force it to change its marketing and manufacturing practices. We are reporting the story as a real-life drama, with its dramatis personae the real people involved. (Based on a 10/21/99 Wall Street Journal analysis)
CAST OF CHARACTERS AND SYNOPSIS
Act I - The Victims, the Cities and the Courts
Barbara Hohlt, technical worker for New Yorkers Against Gun Violence.
Freddie Hamilton, whose son was lost to gun violence in 1993, convinces Hohlt that gun manufacturers should be held accountable for the prevalence of guns, and that the only place to do this is in the courts.
Elsa Barnes, a solo practicing New York attorney, takes on the case, filing a suit against the gun industry that became known as the Hamilton case.
George Soros, philanthropist/social visionary, provides a grant of $300,000 in October, 1998 to make sure the case, now involving the families of seven New Yorker shooting victims, got to trial. Other sources also contribute funds.
U.S. District Judge Jack Weinstein hears the Hamilton case when attorney Barnes steers it into his courtroom, knowing his reputation for stretching legal principles to force manufacturers to compensate large groups of victims. As hoped, Weinstein opines: "There may come a point that the market is so flooded with handguns sold without adequate concern over the channels of distribution and possession that they become a generic hazard to the community as a whole because of the high probability that these weapons will fall into the hands of criminals or minors." In February, 1999, the Hamilton jury became the first ever to find gun companies liable for criminal shootings.
David Kairys, Temple University law professor and member of the Philadelphia mayoral commission on youth violence (coincidentally, Judge Weinstein's former student at Columbia University Law School), saw the Hamilton ruling and the tobacco suits against cities as models. He reasoned that a city could also sue gun manufacturers demanding reimbursement for the public costs of gun violence: emergency medical and police services.
Philadelphia Mayor Edward Rendall decides not to file the Kariys suit -- choosing instead to attempt to negotiate with the gun companies -- but Kairys's precedent results in 29 other municipalities suing gun manufacturers, using the same public nuisance strategy in their litigation.
James Jay Baker, NRA's chief lobbyist, takes a hard line against suing cities, and brings down Richard Feldman, head of the American Shooting Sports Council, who was encouraging gun manufacturers to compromise with cities. Baker says of pending litigation: "We'll win this, we don't have to compromise."
Act II - Meanwhile, Back in Congress
Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the teen-aged killers at Columbine High School, set-off nationwide furor, leading Robert Walker, President of Handgun Control to state: "We haven't seen a public reaction like this before. We perceived an historic opportunity" (for meaningful gun-control legislation).
NRA-allies in Congress block meaningful legislation, demonstrating how difficult it is to enact serious gun control at a national level. This underscores realization that if production and sale of firearms are to be significantly altered, it will occur by means of litigation and that the basic struggle of meaningful control must occur at the local level by grassroots organizations everywhere.
Act III - The Future of Litigation
Eliot Spitzer, New York's attorney general, a realist who sees the municipal litigation as chancy in legal terms, but as a way to force the industry to accept a new "code of conduct" in exchange for a truce. Soon after taking office in January, 1999 he orders his staff to prepare drafts for two actions: a suit that would make New York the first state to join the litigation, and an industry code of conduct that he would offer manufacturers as an alternative to a New York lawsuit. The code of conduct would include the following provisions: cease producing less-expensive handguns, develop a smart gun, and supervise retail sales for only one gun per buyer. It would also require the industry to subject itself to an outside "monitor" who would enforce the code.
An Ohio state judge issues the first ruling on the merits of one of the municipal suits, dismissing that city's legal action. He rejects the suit as an attempt to accomplish through the court system what is really the job of a legislature.
Other "actors" in this drama - the future will tell!
Articles | Newsletter
| Partner Organizations
About Us | Getting
Involved | Resources | Contact
Us | Site Map
Copyright © 1999-2007 Coalition Against Gun Violence. All rights reserved.
A Project of the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation
Other Articles
"A Message About Important Legislation from Senator Barbara Boxer"
"Ban Sales of .50 Caliber Rifles"
"Do Gun Laws Assist Freedom Fighters & Terrorists?"
"Does Society Need Sniper Rifles?"
"New Legislation in California!"
"Registration and Licensing of Guns"