Here's another one for the "cities suing gun dealers" archives.
New York City is suing a Georgia gun dealer, alleging that the gun shop, Adventure Outdoors, is responsible for a disproportionately large number of the guns owned by criminals in New York City. The City's assertion is that the gun dealer consistently violates federal firearms laws.
In addition to Adventure Outdoors, New York is suing 26 other out-of-state gun shops. These lawsuits were filed ages ago, back in May 2006. However, the Adventure Outdoors case is the first to go to trial, so it will be making headlines as the case moves forward.
The gun store's owner, Jay Wallace, says the store will defend itself in the lawsuit. Hopefully, they won't be packing any heat in the courtroom! Gulp.
But, seriously, he say his store abides by Georgia and federal regulations and takes steps to avoid selling firearms to gun traffickers.
In fact, Mr. Wallace responded to the lawsuit by filing a lawsuit of his own. He countersued Mayor Bloomberg for $400 million because he thinks the City's lawsuits are slanderous and defamatory.
Interestingly, lawyers for Mayor Bloomberg are asking a judge to ban any reference to the Second Amendment during the upcoming trial.
Gun lovers believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to own a gun. The opposition says the the Second Amendment does not give every American the right to private gun ownership, but, rather, gives states the power to keep militias.
The gun store's attorney said he did not plan to oppose the city's request regarding references to the Second Amendment. He says he will, however, ask for something in return. His team won't mention the Bill of Rights to the jury as long as the plaintiffs don't mention the National Rifle Association.
The attorney says the City's case has no merit. He asks this rhetorical question: "Is Budweiser liable if someone drives drunk?"
Clever as it might seem, that line of thinking doesn't make sense to us with respect to this case. In this case, the question to be asked is more like: "If a liquor store sells beer to a minor, should they be held responsible for that illegal action?"