Here is a very interesting development that could significantly affect America’s gun psychosis. The Mexican government is doing what the corrupt U.S. Congress has never had the integrity to do, hold gun companies responsible for the death and injuries they cause. I’m not sure most Americans know that the gun makers were uniquely protected from being sued or held responsible the murders, suicides, and injuries their products cause. But the courts have rule Mexico’s suit for $10 billion is not effected by that Congressional protection. There is almost no coverage of this in the media, particularly the television news, but I think this may work, and a judgment of that size would significantly change the murder industry. So potentially excellent good news.
A seized gun with a decorative grip is displayed to the press in Tijuana, Mexico. Credit: Guillermo Arias / AP
The lawsuit seeks US$10 billion in damages and a court order to force the companies named in the lawsuit – including Smith & Wesson, Colt, Glock, Beretta and Ruger – to change the way they do business. In January, a federal appeals court in Boston decided that the industry’s immunity shield, which so far has protected gun-makers from civil liability, does not apply to Mexico’s lawsuit.
As a legal scholar who has analyzed lawsuits against the gun industry for more than 25 years, I believe this decision to allow Mexico’s lawsuit to proceed could be a game changer. To understand why, let’s begin with some background about the federal law that protects the gun industry from civil lawsuits.
As the article states: “….to win, Mexico will need to convince a Boston jury that the manufacturers’ design choices, marketing campaigns and distribution practices are closely enough connected to street crime in Mexico to consider the companies responsible for the problem. This is known as “proximate cause” in the law.” This will be a very high bar to prove, especially if the charges involve intent. I doubt this will succeed. Mexico, like the United States, will have to address our internal corruption though internal systemic change, not by the type of externalization shown in the article.
As the article states: “….to win, Mexico will need to convince a Boston jury that the manufacturers’ design choices, marketing campaigns and distribution practices are closely enough connected to street crime in Mexico to consider the companies responsible for the problem. This is known as “proximate cause” in the law.” This will be a very high bar to prove, especially if the charges involve intent. I doubt this will succeed. Mexico, like the United States, will have to address our internal corruption though internal systemic change, not by the type of externalization shown in the article.