Mexico tries to fine gun manufacturers
We wrote a while back that Mexico is suing US gun manufacturers because their products are heavily used by drug gangs and criminals in Mexico. Got shot down, right?
Now, we in the US have a law passed a couple of decades back called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). At that time, one of the key tactics used by gun-ban groups was to sue gun manufactures at the drop of a hat . Kid uses a 40 year old Colt to shoot someone? Sue Colt. Gun store gets robbed and a stolen Glock is used to rob someone three states away? Sue Glock. The idea was that if they continually forced gun makers to defend these bull$hit suits, pretty soon they would go bankrupt from legal fees even if they never lost. PLCAA says that if the guns are legally manufactured and sold, the gun companies’ responsibility for wrong-doing ends there. If the gun is defective or deceptively marketed, they are still liable. (This is the “protection gun makers from lawsuits no other manufacturer has” that Biden and company whines about. Most companies are already protected by case law – you can sue a bar for serving a drunk driver because they are a proximate cause, but not Ford because they made the drunk’s Mustang, right?) The plethora of suits caused Congress to pass PLCAA.
But here is how the gun groups describe it:
PLCAA is a law that protects the gun industry from civil liability for harm caused by negligence, defective products, or irresponsible behavior. It denies justice to victims and survivors of gun violence and perpetuates the flow of crime guns into communities of color. Brady.org
So many lies…
Anyhoo, Mexico is suing seven manufacturers and a distributor, alleging negligence, defective product, barratry, piracy, simony, and for all I know indecent exposure. (They also want to know how Mexican Army guns wind up in the hands of the narco-gangs… cough cough ARMY CORRUPTION cough cough. Different article.)
Now, any normal person would say they can’t do that, right? They’ve already been shot down once. Oh no… the 1st Circuit steps in.
U.S. appeals court on Monday revived a $10 billion lawsuit by Mexico seeking to hold American gun manufacturers responsible for facilitating the trafficking of weapons to drug cartels across the U.S.-Mexico border.The Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturnedThe Boston-based 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned, a lower-court judge’s decision dismissing the case on the grounds that a U.S. law barred Mexico from suing Smith & Wesson Brands (SWBI.O), Sturm, Ruger & Co and others.Mexico’s lawyers argued the law only bars lawsuits over injuries that occur in the U.S. and does not shield the seven manufacturers and one distributor it sued from liability over the trafficking of guns to Mexican criminals.U.S. Circuit Judge William Kayatta, writing for the three-judge panel, said that while the law can be applied to lawsuits by foreign governments, Mexico’s lawsuit “plausibly alleges a type of claim that is statutorily exempt from the PLCAA’s general prohibition.”He said that was because the law was only designed to protect lawful firearms-related commerce, yet Mexico had accused the companies of aiding and abetting illegal gun sales by facilitating the trafficking of firearms into the country. Reuters
Category: Gun Grabbing Fascists, Guns
Well, if this or suspending Presidential immunity gets traction, Mexico and the family of Brian Terry should also use Obama over Fast and Furious.
And why is Eric Holder still a free man?
God may punish me for using CNN as as a source, however even they ruled that false.
https://www.cnn.com/factsfirst/politics/factcheck_22838c84-048d-49ed-b50b-30ba482fb524
I think the simplest solution is that they should stop selling guns to Mexico. All weapons and armaments and defense items. There’s only one gun store in all of Mexico. Surely they can’t be making too many dollars off of that.
The largest source of illegal guns in Mexico is the Mexican Army followed by the Mexican police followed by the ATF. Sounds like more of an internal and government type problem.
Don’t forget, that fentanyl money goes a long way in Afghanistan to buy abandoned US goods
And I’m sure our old pal Viktor Bout is back in business.
So we’re going to hold gun manufacturers liable for illegal use of their products in Mexico. When do we hold Obama and Holder accountable for illegal firearms trafficking to Mexico? The family of Bryan A. Terry wonders.
So…every victim of a criminal illegal alien can sue Mexico?
And remember, Mexico has some of the “toughest” gun control laws in the world. The place should be crime free.
True, they have a higher murder rate than the U.S. with it’s “looser” gun control laws.
Well lets see. Since the majority of fentanyl comes from mexico, the US or any US citizen should be able to sue mexico for allowing a deadly drug to enter the country and failure to stop the cartel’s criminal activity. I would say that $900 billion should be a good starting point for the first suit.
Nobody I know uses illicit drugs, but if I were to sue Mexico, I’d ask for $1 Google dollars (punitive damages, pain and suffering, plus legal fees) and see how it would play out.
Imma gonna sue David and TAH for posting that picture of the Sister Golden Hair Surprise Ms Thang. The picture has caused me to have lustful thoughts for her and I covet (a violation of His Commandments) that revolving hand cannon. Hang on while I call my lawer.
Tell her to keep her booger hook off the trigger.
Then offer to show her your pistol.
For those playing at home – Paige Wyatt, from the short lived “American Guns” show.
“Dear Mexico,
Send us a list of the guns involved in the crimes. List by manufacturer, model, AND serial number. We’ll wait…….”
“Dear Mexico,
Oh. You don’t know the make, model, and serial number of the gun involved in the crime? Then how do you know it was a gun that we manufactured?”
“Dear Mexico,
Our records show that that particular model and serial number gun was sold to a reputable middleman warehouse dealer, IAW all applicable FedGov laws, rules, and regulations. After that, not our circus, not our monkeys. You want the name of the dealer? Pound sand.”
https://dailytimewaster.blogspot.com/2024/02/insurrection-gear.html
May need one of these.
“It’s an 88 magnum. It shoots through schools.”
It’s probably more because the cartels are being attacked more by others with firearms. They’re telling the politicians they’ve bought in Mexico to do something about those fighting back against them, because its hurting their bottom line.
“…deceptively marketed…”
So the Arms (or the abundance of, or lack of fences) in the hands of sworn agents of the state aren’t ‘deceptively wielded‘?
I guess our definitions of ‘deceptive’ differ greatly, to wit;
Those twats a couple towns over were able to get the CT “Supremes” to hold Remington over the barrel based on this horrendous stipulation.
No proof Adam F-face had even seen one of their ads (Bushmaster, later bought by Big Green), let’lone acted in accordance with the implied condition of the ad (which is cringe af). See below.
The law is absolute, and no
governmentcorporation ‘shall infringe’.How about the families of those killed by fentanyl sue Mexico in a class action for it allowing those drugs to be transported across its territory and across the border?
Suing a bar for the damage caused by a drunk driver is barred by statute in many states. The statutes are called Dramshop Acts. Some have exceptions that allow a lawsuit against the bar if the bartender served an “obviously intoxicated” patron who has an auto crash.
Mass. is one of the states where the bar can be sued, if not criminally charged. And some states allow the server to be sued. If you have a few friends over to have a few beers and watch the superbowl, and one of them hits another car on the way home from your house, you may be sued.
You can’t criminally charge a bar. Maybe somebody who works there, the bar itself is never going to go to jail.
Some states passed these laws barring civil suits at the behest of the liquor industry. Moreover, politicians such as state legislators commonly host events where booze is liberally served. So, these laws protect both the bars/restaurants and politician social hosts dispensing alcohol from civil liability.
I’ve witnessed a few manufacturer to end user firearms transfers in my time. At no time does Colt, FN, SIG Sauer, or any other manufacturer just send the guns out without accountability and multiple checks. When The Old Guard got brand new M16A4s to replace the A2s in 2005, I went to the warehouse at Fort Belvoir to pick them up as the Company Armorer. My CO, XO, and a few other Soldiers were there too, and each serial number was accounted for before multiple papers were signed and the weapons transferred. Those of us who’ve served in the US military know what happens if a US owned weapon goes missing. I have a feeling Mexico might be a little more lackluster in those regards.
At PEO Soldier, while I didn’t work under PM-Soldier Lethality, the weapons (NGSW and M17/M18) that were shown to us and which we fired for familiarization (I missed that due to an appointment) were also strictly controlled. SIG didn’t just send PEO Soldier 100 M18s and say, “here ya go, have at it”. In both military cases, the weapons came from an Arsenal, with a chain of custody established all the way down to the units being fielded the new system.
Now, on the retail side of things, we rarely get guns straight from the manufacturers. Kimber is one, Palmetto State Armory is another, but Glocks, SIGs, Rugers, Savages, CMMGs, and about all of the various other brands we get come from either our distribution centers or wholesalers like Lipsey’s and Sports South.
Mexico has many, many problems internally, and I can see this as a possible veiled op by US federal agencies and lobbyists to further impact the bottom line of gun manufacturers in hopes of effectively having “self-inflicted” gun control. If manufacturers like Colt and FN decide to sell their “assault weapons” only to government agencies, and smaller MSR manufacturers like CMMG and Black Rain Ordnance are sued out of existence, the powers that be win.
I think you’re dead on. Couple years from now we’ll be reading a story about the federal government trying to do an end run around federal law by having foreign powers sue American companies out of business.
Kind of like when Obama directed the CIA to have foreign powers attack his political enemies in the United States.
All this makes me happy that I picked up my Kel-tec Sub CQB last week. With 147 grains of goodness it sounds like a cat sneezing.
I just read the story about that 90 year old guy that had a legal collection of fully autos and other rifles that he aquired legaly in Kalifonia including a relic license and those class, I forgot the atf number. Home was raided while the guy was in a senior home. Check it out. Am rushing to complete my comment and then head to the Dreamy Cow ice cream parlor to hear some live music and scarf down a mini cup of geedunk.
He must have acquired anything full auto a great many years ago, because Commiefornia outlawed the private ownership of all full auto firearms many years ago. Only specially licensed companies that rent modified ones for use in movies that only fire blanks can be owned in Commiefornia. WWII reenactors frequently rent them for their events.
Did some research, and any private party with a class III license in Commiefornia had to have acquired his full auto weapon prior to 1990. Apparently, the legislature outlawed the sale of any full auto weapons to a private party after 1990.
If I cared about CA law (I don’t, to the extent I remove or cover up the Prop 65 stickers every time I’m able to), I’d read up on this. Since I do care about gun laws, though, I may do so anyway.
Normally, transferable machine guns (those registered prior to May 19th, 1986) don’t require a license, only that the $200 tax stamp fee be paid. Pre-’86 samples can be purchased by a Class III dealer, while post-’86 samples usually require a law enforcement request for the dealer to legally obtain one.
If a state law can restrict the transfer of transferable (according to federal law) machine guns, then they’ve effectively started the process for state-run gun control. So, I bought my M16A1 in ’78, but now it’s 1990 and I can no longer sell it to a private party. How do things work when I’m gone? That M16 might be worth $30-40k private party. Maybe one of the kids wants it. With me out of the picture it’s now caught up in red tape, if not outright considered to be in the illegal possession of someone else. Is it confiscated and destroyed?
Kill them with time is a strategy that would work. “Compassionate” law makers wanting to protect people’s property ownership rights might not overtly ban all “assault weapons” and “high capacity” magazines by making them illegal to own by anyone. A grandfather clause could appease the average non-confrontational gun owner by letting them keep what they have, with an obscure reference to “…no Assault Weapon [under the definition provided] shall be transferred to a private citizen of the state of California. No private firearms transactions may occur between a resident of California and a resident of any other state or country, regardless of the jurisdiction in which the transfer takes place.”
If I was the judge,I would award Mexico all of the remittance money the illegals send back there every year. Once el jefe starts taking money from mamasita I’m pretty sure it won’t get sent home any more