If the US can’t fix its gun policy, maybe an international lawsuit can (barf alert)

Boston Globe via MSN ^ | November 12, 2023 | Jonathan Lowy and Manuel Oliver

[Brian Griffin]

Tyrants and their lackeys can always be shot.

That is based on science and technology beyond the absolute control of any group.

[usurper]

before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.

Who? Please send your strongly worded letter addressed to me. I have just the place to file it.

[Brian Griffin]

Leftists should focus on controlling their hate, envy and avarice.

[Brooklyn Attitude]

“United States uphold the human right to live, free from gun violence.”

Sure. Right after they approve the Israel and the Jews have a right to live free from Muslim/Palestinian violence.

[Libloather]

...recognize and protect our most fundamental right.

Guns for everyone? Sure would bring the crime rate down.

[cowboyusa]

How about we ship you to taitormarxists to China in a box instead.

[Ge0ffrey]

This idea is a threat to the Republic.

[HartleyMBaldwin]

by enabling and tolerating ubiquitous shootings, the United States violated its obligations under human rights laws

I believe there are a few other nations in the Americas where violent crime, including shootings, is quite a bit more common than in the U.S.A., but I'm too lazy to dig up the stats.

[chrisser]

Being progressive means never having to evaluate your core assumptions, no matter how much evidence overwhelms them

[DoodleBob]

Hmmmm….interesting… Lowy and his new organization had to register with the US Department of Justice as foreign agents.

Brady United And Jonathan Lowy Parts Ways

Jonathan Lowy and Brady United have parted ways. Lowy was formerly the Chief Counsel and VP Legal for Brady United. He headed their Legal Action Project and had been an attorney with them in various capacities for 25 years. Lowy’s biography has been removed from the Brady Legal section and no mention is made of him in their history section.

Lowy is now the President and Founder of Global Action on Gun Violence. They are a 501(c)(3) non-profit located in the District of Columbia. According to Lowy’s LinkedIn profile, this parting of ways took place in September.

The lawsuit filed Monday by the Government of Mexico against five Arizona gun stores was what tipped me to the change. Lowy was listed under that attorneys representing Mexico in this lawsuit along with a firm from Arizona and another firm from Austin, Texas. Unlike past lawsuits in which he was listed as being part of Brady, this lawsuit has his affiliation listed as the new Global Action on Gun Violence.

Under the Foreign Agents Registration Act, Lowy and his new organization had to register with the US Department of Justice as foreign agents representing Mexico. As his organization doesn’t yet have a website, the registration filing (see below) provides the best clues about it.

The first name that pops out is Dennis Henigan who was the former Chief Counsel and one-time Acting President at Brady. He is now the VP for Legal and Regulatory Affairs at Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. Henigan is a member of the Board of Directors for Global Action on Gun Violence. He is joined on the board by a Josh Levy (chair) and Malcolm Ruby who is a Canadian attorney with a background on trans-border disputes.

Rounding out the team is Elizabeth Burke, COO, who was an attorney with Brady, and Lisa Proctor, CFO. Burke often served as co-counsel with Lowy on lawsuits brought by Brady.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out and what triggered the split. Was it because Lowy wanted to represent foreign governments in their lawsuits against the firearms industry? Or was Lowy being pushed out by Kris Brown as she did to former co-president Avery Gardiner?

[Paladin2]

Let Hamas disarm first.

[whitney69]

“...uphold the human right to live, free from gun violence.”

We already have that. It’s called laws that say you can’t shoot anyone that is a threat to you, your family, or your property. But if they can figure out how to make people who buy illegal guns, use them on people that didn’t deserve it, get rid of wars, get rid of evil, and allow people to protect themselves without some new law that takes the protection possibility away from innocents, then they’ve got something to talk about. Until then, criminals will shoot, rob, and beat people to death if they can be assured there is no protection to stop them.

Oh, and that means there will be no need for CIA, FBI, or even a DOJ except for property or service contracts and everyone, to include government employees won’t need protection. I guess as soon as they can get rid of knives, rocks, poisons, autos, and clubs, politicians along with everyone else will be perfectly safe. Nirvana...right.

wy69

[cross_bearer_02]

Pray tell, what jurisdiction does this “ Inter-American Commission on Human Rights” actually hold? I don’t recall ever agreeing to submit to such a court or electing anybody to kowtow to them. Just who in the hell do they think they are?

[Cincinnatus.45-70]

The authors of the article should schedule marches where they personally walk through 100 small towns in the South demanding government confiscation of guns.

[mabarker1]

ALL OF you USELESS GUN CONTROL FREAKS, LISTEN AND LISTEN GOOD.

It’s NOT THE GUN, IT’S SCUMBAG CULTURE CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR THAT ARE THE PROBLEM !!!

SO TAKE your STUPID USELESS oas/cfr GUN CONFISCATION PLANS AND SHOVE THEM UP your A$$.

[gundog]

And they will eventually apply this "logic" to car ownership, chainsaw ownership, knife ownership, dog ownership, cigarette lighter ownership, plastic bag ownership, and computer ownership.

Yup. The right of children to live trumps everything. Except abortion, of course. I mean, let’s be reasonsble.

[Billthedrill]

Molon labe.

[Allegra]

The stupid Zeeeeelennial who wrote the headline couldn’t even pass a basic composition course. Participation trophies for everybody!

So naturally, the content and opinion in the story are garbage.

[ChuckHam]

If the 13% were to suddenly follow the laws of this country violent crime would go down by 50%.

[freeandfreezing]

"Even the most avid gun owners should agree that the right of children to live deserves more protection than gun ownership"

What do you think the chances are that the people who filed the lawsuit are in favor of "a woman's right to choose" as that kind of leftist says?

Gun ownership is needed to protect the lives of children, because criminals, wild animals, and genocidal Islamic terrorists like Hamas don't care about the lives of children.