Opinion Editorial | |
Gun Lawsuits: Bad Law and Bad Public PolicyH. Sterling BurnettH. Sterling Burnett is an environmental policy analyst with the National Center for Policy Analysis, a non-partisan, non-profit research and education institute. |
Attorney Elisa Barnes is suing gun manufacturers on behalf of two women who lost loved ones to criminal gun use. She argues that gun
manufacturers negligently flood cities with more guns than they could
expect to sell to law-abiding citizens, thus aiding and abetting criminals
in obtaining firearms. Therefore, she concludes, the firearm industry
should compensate her clients for the suffering they have endured. If it succeeds, this lawsuit will establish bad law and bad public
policy. It would establish bad law because it asks the courts to
legislate. In a multitude of similar lawsuits, courts have consistently
held that questions concerning whether firearms should be legal and widely
available are for legislative assemblies to decide. In addition, the suit
would reverse well-established tort law: manufacturers are not responsible
for the criminal misuse of their products. Should automobile makers be
held responsible for vehicular homicides committed by drunken drivers or
people in the grip of road rage? Criminals also use knives, prescription
drugs and household products to commit crimes, should courts hold the
manufacturers of these products at fault? If gun makers are held liable
when criminals misuse guns, where will the lawsuit parade end? It would be bad public policy because guns prevent more harm than they cause. Criminals fear armed citizens more than police. Why? Nearly
3,000 criminals are lawfully killed each year by armed civilians - more
than three times the number killed by the police. An additional 9,000 to
17,000 criminals are wounded by civilians each year. Numerous studies have
shown that citizens use guns in self-defense between 800,000 and 3.6
million times annually (in the vast majority of cases merely showing the
firearm prevents the crime), with the most comprehensive study estimating
more than 2.5 million defensive gun uses per year. This far exceeds the
number of crimes committed with firearms each year. In addition, a recent study by economist John Lott examining the
impact of "concealed carry" permits found that:
However, not every city or state has seen the drop in crime that
has accompanied the liberalization of concealed carry laws. States like
New York, where this lawsuit is being brought, allow local officials
discretion in issuing concealed carry permits, and they have issued
relatively few. These states suffer a 30 percent higher murder rate and a
19 percent higher incidence of rape than states with more liberal laws. Relying on police protection is not a realistic option since at any
one time there are only about 75,000 police on the streets to protect more
than 260 million people - which is why police primarily investigate crimes
after they occur rather than prevent them. Therefore, people's best
security against crime is their own willingness to defend themselves. And
the best defense against violence is an armed response. For example, women
faced with assault are 2.5 times less likely to suffer serious injury if
they respond with a firearm rather than by trying to defend themselves with
less effective weapons or by offering no resistance at all. Perhaps the general public and crime victims should file a class
action suit against Ms. Barnes and groups like Handgun Control, Inc., whose
lawsuits and successful lobbying for restrictive gun laws make the public
less safe. Guns don't increase crime, foolish gun control policies do, and
those that encourage them should be held accountable for the resulting
harm. Home | Support Us | All Issues | Social Security Debate Central | Contact Us |