As a number of U.S. cities consider joining a planned nationwide
effort to sue gunmakers for associated costs of dealing with run-related
crime, efforts are being made by scholars, crime specialists, policy
experts and legal representatives to blunt a drive many see as a threat
to an entire industry.
Such suits, which have already been filed by New Orleans, Chicago and
a few other cities, were subjects of a debate forum sponsored by the
CATO Institute last week. David B. Kopel,
research director for the Independence Institute
and Jonathan E. Lowy, a staff attorney for Handgun Control Inc.
participated in the event held in Washington.
Robert A Levy, the event moderator, told WorldNetDaily that the
importance of such events couldn’t be overemphasized. He said many
Americans ought to realize that the precedent of “extortion through
litigation” used on the tobacco industry is likely to be tried on others
unless the gun industry is successful.
During the debate, HCI’s Lowy claimed, “Guns must now become the next
tobacco,” and he said gunmakers ought to be held liable for the costs of
unsafe firearm design, negligent marketing practices, and the costs
associated with police overtime and uninsured medical expenses.
Opponents say, however, that the positions taken by cities and HCI
are “untenable,” and they’re “simply designed to extort money from a
hapless industry.”
“The gutless, compromising performance by the tobacco industry has
set this bad precedent,” Levy said, “and it’s not unreasonable to
believe that there will be more attempts to extort major U.S.
corporations down the road.”
Levy said the most important aspect he was able to articulate during
the debate was a point regarding the intimacy of public and private
entities. Levy said it was “highly improper” for states to contract with
private attorneys during the tobacco lawsuits on a contingency basis. He
said that it is in the interests of any attorney — whether representing
state attorneys general or private citizens — to see that justice is
done, not to begin litigious processes “simply on the promise of being
paid a huge sum of money when all is said and done.”
Levy said he sees the same thing happening in the gun lawsuits.
“CATO’s position is that contingency contracts between public and
private sectors should be illegal, because when a public entity — a
state, county or city — begins a process of litigation strictly on the
premise of a big payoff, the public’s interest is not being served.”
“That’s why we rely on private counsel — and not the state — to
represent our interests in a court of law,” he added. “In the case of
tobacco and guns, the state has every interest to win with no respect to
whether or not justice has been served.”
Furthermore, according to John R. Lott, an economics and law
professor at the University of Chicago, cities have no inherent right to
“possibly squander millions of taxpayer dollars away on an effort that
is no sure thing.”
Levy said these kinds of lawsuits — and especially the gun suits —
“are unique in that they were never intended to succeed in court.” The
suits are being used by anti-gun groups like HCI to forward their
political agendas, but he said “the real motive behind (them) is to
force gun makers to the negotiating table, to force them — through
litigation — to ‘pay off’ the cities.”
The strategy consists of having “perhaps as many as 100 cities” file
suits, thus creating a seemingly endless string of court battles which
would cost more to fight than to settle.
“But the NRA and other groups are moving to head off this process by
lobbying states to pass laws to prohibit suits of gun makers,” Levy told
WorldNetDaily. “So far, it has worked in Georgia and other states are
considering the same thing.” By accomplishing that, he said, “you end
the process of the never-ending lawsuit right up front, and you take
away the intimidation and the necessity to compromise.”
Other critics of the lawsuits have said that they are inappropriate
not only because municipalities are inherently obliged to fight crime,
but because they say it is not the fault of gunmakers for a city’s
failure to effectively enforce its own gun laws.
Related Articles:
