[Malum Prohibitum]

The Indiana Court of Appeals today ruled that the City of Gary's lawsuit against gun manufacturers may proceed to trial. The 3-0 Court ruling held that the 2005 federal "Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act" does not shield the gun industry from liability for irresponsible sales practices that funnel guns to the criminal market.
:roll:

 

[Gunstar1]

Is it me or do the judges that say this law does not cover these lawsuits are not actually reading what congress passed?

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

GS1, I am not so sure.

Gary's case began with a sting conducted by Gary police of northern Indiana gun dealers that, between them, supplied more than 60 percent of the crime guns recovered in the city. The dealers' sales to undercover officers posing as "straw purchasers" was captured on videotape before the suit was filed in 1999, and confirmed the dealers' gross misconduct in supplying the underground market.

I do not think the law would shield this conduct.

The court today did not address whether the law is unconstitutional because it ruled that the law does not apply to the City's case.

Was a lawsuit easier than the "reasonable doubt" standard in a criminal trial?

 

[fallison]

GS1, I am not so sure.

Gary's case began with a sting conducted by Gary police of northern Indiana gun dealers that, between them, supplied more than 60 percent of the crime guns recovered in the city. The dealers' sales to undercover officers posing as "straw purchasers" was captured on videotape before the suit was filed in 1999, and confirmed the dealers' gross misconduct in supplying the underground market.

I do not think the law would shield this conduct.

[quote:2xdc5k68]The court today did not address whether the law is unconstitutional because it ruled that the law does not apply to the City's case.

Was a lawsuit easier than the "reasonable doubt" standard in a criminal trial?[/quote:2xdc5k68]

But what does the conduct of Indiana gun dealers have to do with the manufacturers?

I am ready for some judicial impeachments. The judges in this country have decided they are our overlords.

 

[Malum Prohibitum]

Good question. I have not read the opinion.

 

[Gunstar1]

The law says that clearly breaking a gun law means you have no protection. So I have no problem with the dealers getting in trouble.

How exactly this allows the suit against manufacturers that sell to distributers that then sell to these unlawful dealers is what I am referring to.