Indiana Supreme Court allows gun lawsuit to proceed to trial
By
Sarah Bloom |
POSTED AT
12:51 AM ON Jan. 20, 2009
| PRINT |
Email
| SHARE
| COMMENTS (10)
A decade-old lawsuit filed against a group of gun manufacturers by the city of Gary will proceed to trial, the Indiana Supreme Court ruled Jan. 12, overturning a 2007 ruling by the Indiana Court of Appeals.
The suit, which challenges several precedents set throughout the country in favor of gun manufacturers in recent years, alleges the companies are a public nuisance, engaging in irresponsible sales practices by funneling guns to ineligible buyers via gun dealers.
Gary first brought the suit in 1999 after police conducted a videotaped sting operation catching gun dealers participating in “straw purchases” – selling guns to intermediaries who provide them to purchasers who are disqualified by prior convictions or inability to pass a background check.
Gary also sued major gun manufacturers who allegedly sold handguns through those dealerships.
However, videotapes from the sting might only incriminate the dealerships, not necessarily the manufacturers themselves.
Brian Siebel, senior attorney for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence and co-counsel representing the city of Gary, said two undercover police officers entered the gun stores with the intention of purchasing a firearm. The first officer approached a salesperson, making it clear that the gun was intended for the second officer, who could not legally purchase it himself.
The suit has dragged on for almost 10 years due to several challenges by the manufacturers.
Following the 2005 passage of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which shielded gun manufacturers from liability for crimes committed with their guns, manufacturers moved to dismiss the case, claiming the act barred the city’s public nuisance claim.
In October 2007, the Indiana Court of Appeals ruled that the case could proceed to trial because the city’s public nuisance claim falls under an exception in the act applying to the sale and marketing of firearms.
Last week’s Indiana Supreme Court ruling was a denial of the gun
manufacturers’ appeal of the 2007 ruling.
According to the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, about 1 percent of the nation’s gun stores are the source of 57 percent of the firearms traced to crimes.
Siebel said the concentration of gun crimes in Indiana is particularly troubling.
“There is no place in this country for gun dealers willing to sell to straw buyers,” Siebel said. “They should be put out of business and prosecuted. If these dealers were not selling to ineligible buyers, it would make it harder for gang members and criminals to
get their guns.”
But James Dorr, trial counsel for defendant manufacturer Sturm, Ruger & Co. and coordinating counsel for the manufacturer defendants in the case, said it is not fair to hold manufacturers responsible for the criminal acts of others. He said Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act specifically to prohibit lawsuits like City of Gary v. Smith & Wesson.
“I am quite confident the defendant manufacturers will prevail in this litigation,” Dorr said. “There is no basis in law or in fact for the claims against the manufacturers. The claim that the defendant manufacturers are somehow complicit in illegal activities is misplaced, a waste of valuable resources and contrary to the record of these defendants.”
Dorr said that when the case goes to trial, the city of Gary will fight against a precedent in favor of gun manufacturers. Of the more than 30 governmental entities or organizations that have brought similar claims against gun manufacturers since the passage of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in 2005, none have prevailed.
Nevertheless, Siebel remains confident about the City of Gary’s claims against the gun industry.
“This suit is about keeping dangerous guns away from dangerous people and drying up the illegal market,” said Siebel. “We intend to establish in court the wrongdoing of the gun industry.”