Posted on 01/11/2005 2:46:00 PM PST by neverdem
The United States Supreme Court on Monday declined to consider dismissal of a lawsuit seeking to hold a gun manufacturer and dealers liable for the death of a postal worker.
Buford Furrow used an illegally obtained weapon to kill Filipino-American letter-carrier Joseph Ileto and to wound five people at a Jewish day care center in a pair of Los Angeles-area attacks in 1999. Ileto's mother, Lillian, and families of the survivors have sued Glock Inc., the gunmaker, China North Industries Corp., RSR Management Corp and RSR Wholesale Guns Seattle Inc. contending they are liable for the attacks because they knowingly facilitated and participated in an underground illegal gun market.
A federal judge threw out the case, but it was reinstated in 2003 by a divided 9th Circuit panel of judges. The Supreme Court's decision means the case can go forward to trial.
But there seem to be several targets missing in the plaintiffs' legal line of fire.
Christopher Renzulli, the attorney for Glock and the RSR companies, has said the gun Furrow used to kill Ileto was originally sold to the police department in Cosmopolis, Wash., by the RSR companies. Court records indicate the police department then exchanged the weapon at a gun shop in exchange for a different model. That shop made a legal sale of the firearm to a gun collector, who then allegedly sold it to Furrow - an ex-convict prohibited from owning guns - at a gun show in Spokane, Wash.
So between Glock et. al. and the killing were several other handlers of the firearm who are not mentioned in the lawsuit, among them law enforcement.
If Glock and the RSR companies are liable for for Ileto's death by "knowingly participating" in the "underground" gun trade - even at so many degrees of separation from Ileto's killer - then just as surely the Cosmopolis, Wash., police department and the gun's resellers are guilty as well. So why are they not being sued?
Obviously the plaintiffs have gone after those with the deepest pockets and the most symbolic scapegoat, not those most directly linked to how the legally manufactured and sold handgun ended up in a killer's possession. Sure, had the gun never been made it couldn't have been used to kill Joseph Ileto and to wound others, but it is disingenuous to blame the only gunmaker and ignore the chain of custody in-between.
Of course, it's much more publicly palatable to demonize a gunmaker en route to a multimillion-dollar settlement than to demonize the police who passed the gun right along.
But it isn't completely honest.
BANG!
ONLY IN THE LAND OF FRUITS AND NUTS
A federal judge threw out the case, but it was reinstated in 2003 by a divided 9th Circuit panel of judges.
The 9th circus...Says alot.
damn these idiots. damn them all to hell.
If the Supremos allow this suit through, there will be an end to gun manufacturing within the next hundred years, and powder production within 50, because you can bet that they'll go after the powder first.
The frog don't know it's boiling yet.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.