Has Gun Control Inc. created a nasty precedent that will result in
the destruction of the American gun industry?
On March 8, 2024, a federal judge threw out a challenge to a
Washington state law that opens the floodgates to lawsuits
against the firearm industry in several cases.
This gun control bill was one of three legislative proposals that
Gov. Jay Inslee (D) signed into law last year in an effort to impose
gun control on the population. It enacted a mandate on the gun
industry to use so-called “reasonable controls” in the
manufacture, sale and marketing of weapons, which features
steps to prevent firearms from being sold to individuals who are
perceived to be dangerous or to straw buyers — individuals who
purchase a firearm on behalf of another individual who is not
legally allowed to obtain a firearm.
This recently passed grants the attorney general or private
entities — like the family members of shooting victims — to file a
lawsuit for allegedly violating or incurring damages spelled out in
Washington state’s Consumer Protection Act. The National
Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association for the firearm
industry, filed a lawsuit against the law in the US District Court in
Spokane, declaring that the measure infringes on the Second
Amendment in addition to the First Amendment rights of its
members.
United States District Judge Mary K. Dimke denied the lawsuit in
the decision she issued on March 8, ruling that the gun
organization had no legal standing to challenge the gun control
measure. She highlighted that NSSF members were neither being
sued under the law nor had manifested any intent to violate its
provisions.
At the heart of this case is Protection of Lawful Commerce in
Arms Act, a law passed in 2005 which protected arms the
firearms industry from legal liabilities in some cases. Effectively,
the PLCAA provided legal immunity to firearm manufacturers and
dealers in order to prevent them from being subjected to lawsuits
in state courts for alleged acts of negligence.
However, Ferguson ruled that state governments are allowed to
carve out exemptions from federal law. States such as California,
Delaware, New Jersey, and New York have already implemented
liability measures that go beyond what’s allowed by the PLCAA.
On top of that, Gun Control Inc, previously drew blood by forcing
Remington to cough up a $73 million settlement to victims of the
2012 Sandy Hook massacre. In light of this ruling, it’s becoming
clear that the gun control crowd now has a new avenue to assault
the right to bear arms.
Blue states will be the testing ground for this new approach due to
how difficult it is for the gun control crowd to pass this type of
legislation at the federal level and in red states in the present
moment. Moreover, direct forms of gun control, such as outright
bans, are not politically feasible at the moment. These
circumstances have compelled gun controllers to become more
creative in their legislative approach.
Anti-gunners are playing the long game, though. Their strategy is
to build momentum in blue states, which will subsequently be
used in red states further down the line. By bankrupting gun
manufacturers, the quantity of firearms available to prospective
gun owners will be drastically reduced.
Only major manufacturers connected to the federal regime will be
left, while countless other individuals will not be able to acquire
firearms. Such a nightmare scenario will occur if Gun Control Inc’s
machinations are not checked.
It cannot be stressed enough that gun control is a ruling class-
driven policy that’s designed to hurt the little man. Gun owners
must recognize this and do everything in their power to stop gun
grabs at all levels of government. Complacency is the cousin of
death in high stakes political fights of this nature.
Leave a Reply