 | ||
| Dave Marlett, Editor | theconservative@usa.net | Number 22 |
http://www.wilderness-cry.net/tcn | ||
| ||
| Dave Marlett, Editor | theconservative@usa.net | Number 22 |
http://www.wilderness-cry.net/tcn | ||
This gun manufacturers' lawsuit is a thing of beauty for those of us who have been saying that the feds, the states and the cities have been unlawfully depriving businesses of their constitutional rights. In this lawsuit, the gun manufacturers actually accuse a government cartel of illegally "conspiring" to force the gun people to accept a code of conduct that otherwise could not be imposed on them. The complaint filed has information that looks like there is significant evidence of such a conspiracy.
The lawsuit claims that the named public officials have conspired to impose regulations and restrictions on the plaintiffs in violation of a number of constitutional provisions and principles, including the Commerce Clause and the doctrine of separation of powers. In essence, the gun manufacturers claim that certain government officials, who are merely supposed to enforce the laws that exist, have acted beyond their powers by trying to make law (rather than enforce law, which is a limitation on their jobs) in ways that should make us shudder. These government officials are trying to make law by bullying the gun manufacturers through suits imposed in states and municipalities, and attempting to destroy the businesses that do not go along with the government's plans.
Some weeks ago, one gun manufacturer, Smith & Wesson, caved in to the pressure of these mounting lawsuits by the public officials and entered into an agreement. The public officials later hailed the agreement as voluntary, but it was government blackmail at work. In exchange for a release from the lawsuits, this cabal of government officials agreed to give Smith & Wesson privileges in selling guns to law enforcement officials. Of course, Smith & Wesson would comply with all that these government officials wanted with regard to selling guns to the public. Smith & Wesson angered a lot of people who saw that manufacturer as harming the industry to save its own skin.
Fortunately, the other gun manufacturers have not only sent a message that they will not cave in to such unlawful pressures by the government officials, but they will be proactive and protect their constitutional rights. The gun manufacturers have done nothing unlawful, but their mere existence annoys the liberal government officials who cannot, through proper constitutional methods, impose more restrictions than what Congress and the other legislatures will allow.
One leader of the government cabal is New York Attorney General Spitzer. According to the complaint filed by the gun manufacturers, Spitzer sent a letter on March 16 of this year to President Clinton and over 100 state and municipal officials. In that letter, he bluntly acknowledges his attempt to go around the proper constitutional methods of regulating the firearms industry, and use economic coercion against the gun manufacturers who refuse to accept a code of conduct imposed by the cabal of officials.
The lawsuit states that a coalition was formed to do, in effect, an end run around Congress' legislative prerogative to regulate commerce among the states. The government officials have been rather blunt in the acknowledgment of their attempt to violate the Constitution.
Acting in concert with the Clinton administration (through HUD Secretary Cuomo), the government coalition is bent on bankrupting any gun manufacturer that does not sign on to the code of conduct that the government officials are trying to ram down the throat of the industry. Decrying the fact that legislatures are not doing what these government officials want, Spitzer said that by "[w]orking together, we can help bring fast and meaningful reform" to the regulation of gun manufacturers. Excuse me, Mr. Spitzer, but that is a job for the legislature, not an enforcer of laws created by legislatures.
Spitzer also acknowledged that they will use "financial leverage" to get what they want. That is, the government cabal will purchase guns only from gun manufacturers who sign the code of conduct. Mayor of Atlanta Bill Campbell was even more blunt. He said that gun manufacturers "will comply or they will cease operations." And Spitzer added that if the gun manufacturers do not sign the code of conduct, "your bankruptcy lawyers will be knocking at your door."
In other words, the government officials formed this coalition explicitly to put gun manufacturers out of business unless they complied with the collective will, not of the people, but of these government officials. The Justice Department's case against Microsoft doesn't even come close to alleging such an evil, unconstitutional and destructive plot. Here we have people who are supposed to be upholding the law. Instead, it appears that they may have been conspiring to deprive legitimate businesses of their constitutional rights.
This sounds like a conspiracy to me. And it sounds like the government officials are doing a brazen end run around the constitutional process. These officials are trying to bankrupt gun manufacturers who will not comply with an unconstitutional plan to effect what the legislatures will not do. This is against the will of the people.
The lawsuit filed by the gun manufacturers is important because it shows that one industry will not succumb to unlawful pressures by government officials. As I said earlier, it's a novel approach, and it may set a trend. The tobacco industry, Microsoft and the sweepstakes industry all failed to organize and become proactive against the government officials who ganged up on them like hoods in a bad neighborhood.
It will be interesting to see what other information will come out through the discovery that the gun manufacturers will conduct in the case. Given how brazen the public officials have been in their comments that are already identified in the complaint filed by the gun manufacturers, I suspect there is a lot of information even more damaging to these government officials. These officials are sometimes too cocksure with their own power and authority. These officials also act in clandestine ways, and we'll see whether they try to block the truth about their communications through legal tactics designed to protect what could be even criminal activity if the gun manufacturers are able to get all of their questions asked.
These two lawsuits will play out in the public opinion. It will be interesting to see if the press will give more favorable coverage to those who are trying to protect constitutional rights or those who are trying to destroy them.
[Mark Fitzgibbons, CHQ ]
Mark Fitzgibbons is an attorney. He is President of Operations and General Counsel for American Target Advertising, Inc., which is a direct marketing agency, and is General Counsel to ConservativeHQ.com, Inc. He is former chairman of the litigation committee of the Free Speech Coalition, a Virginia organization that protects First Amendment rights for other advocacy organizations.
The following is a copy of the text from a letter written by Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee to New York Attorney General, Eliot Spitzer, regarding the Smith and Wesson quid pro quo -- compliance with Clinton's gun mandates in order to win federal and state law enforcement purchase contracts.
Dear General Spitzer:
I have received your letter inviting me to join in your effort to encourage various state and local governments to award law enforcement gun contracts only to gun manufacturers agreeing to a "Code of Conduct" which dictates various business practices, safety features, marketing strategies, etc., for both gun manufacturers and gun dealers at the wholesale and retail level. I must respectfully decline your invitation.
First let me say, if I believed the safety of my constituents were truly the issue, I would be much more considerate of your request. But we are not living in a country flooded with "unsafe" guns. It is their illegal use that endangers us -- that must be addressed through vigorous criminal prosecution.
Providing for guns safety locks is one thing and, in truth, only a small part of your "Code of Conduct." However, dictating how many guns a purchaser is allowed to take home on one day, banning sales at gun shows and prohibiting a minor from even entering a gun store without a parent or guardian are parts of a political agenda, not a push for "gun safety." Coupling the safety issue with a strict regulation of business practices is merely a maneuver to advance a decidedly political agenda under the guise of "public safety."
I am a strong proponent and defender of Americans' Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. I also make every effort to be a responsible manager of my constituents' tax dollars. I ask the director of the Arkansas State Police to make purchasing and requisition decisions based on quality, service and price. I will not ask him to award a lucrative government contract in order to further a political agenda geared at controlling and ultimately destroying the firearms industry. I want Arkansas State Troopers to protect our citizens and themselves using the best guns available, not guns from the most "politically correct" manufacturer.
In 1999, I signed into law an act prohibiting Arkansas' local governments from suing firearms manufacturers seeking compensation for injuries and deaths resulting from the illegal use of these companies' products. To hold the gun industry accountable for crime is like holding our nation's farmers liable for the healthcare costs associated with obesity. The desire of some to blame the gun manufacturers for crime rather than prosecute criminals seems to me a sadly misguided attempt at protecting our citizens. It is also a rather thinly veiled attempt to vilify and control those who engage in a business which is eminently legal and necessary, yet not particularly smiled upon by the current administration in Washington. I thank God previous administrations understood and appreciated not only the sanctity of the Second Amendment, but its necessity as well.
Gun manufacturers make the Second Amendment a viable right rather than some theoretical proposition. I will not abuse my authority as Governor to pursue their demise or dictate their business practices through coercion.
So the answer is a definite "no," I will not seek the capitulation of firearm manufacturers through the use of asinine lawsuits or the doling out of taxpayer-funded government contracts. I regret that you feel either of these tactics to be worthwhile endeavors.
Sincerely yours,
Mike Huckabee
[The Federalist]
In 1929, the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1928, Germany established gun control. From 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and others, who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1935, China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents were unable to defend themselves and were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1964, Guatemala established gun control. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1970, Uganda established gun control. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
In 1956, Cambodia established gun control. From 1975 to1977, one million "educated" people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.
That places total victims who lost their lives -- because they were unable to defend their liberty -- at approximately 56 million in the 20th century.
[ Federalist Brief 5-16]
The homepage and archives for The Conservative Newsletter are located on the WWW at http://www.wilderness-cry.net/tcn/
This newsletter is sent by subscription only. If you do not wish to be on the mailing list, please let us know and you will be removed immediately. To be removed from this mailing list, simply reply to this newsletter with the word REMOVE in the body of your reply. You may also send your request to theconservative@usa.net .
Thank you.
