News

25601 readers

3919 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

151

Supreme Court to hear arguments over Mexican government's suit against U.S. gunmakers (www.cbsnews.com)

submitted 23 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

19 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Summary

The Supreme Court will hear arguments in a lawsuit brought by Mexico seeking to hold U.S. gun companies liable for firearm trafficking that fuels cartel violence.

Mexico argues that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) does not shield gunmakers who knowingly facilitate illegal sales.

Lower courts disagreed on whether the "predicate exception" applies, prompting the Supreme Court to step in.

If the ruling favors Mexico, it could open legal avenues for similar suits. Gunmakers contend Mexico's claims fail due to multiple intervening steps before guns reach cartels.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] -2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

In the United States the sale of Firearms is regulated by the Federal Government and / or and individual State itself. All NEW firearm sales must go through an FFL. In many places that is also true for used firearms but even where it isn't its STILL one person selling a firearm to someone else.

To make it absolutely clear at no point in any firearms transaction is any normal person purchasing firearms directly from a firearms manufacturer.

In the case of entities, such as a Gun Store / FFL, who can purchase new firearms directly from a manufacturer there's still no direct sales happening and the sale of those firearms is controlled by Federal Law.

So HOW is it the fault of US Firearm Manufacturers when people purchase firearms and traffic them across the southern border?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

I would think that they could be liable in the same way pharmacists were for the opioid epidemic.

If they can prove the manufacturers were supplying a 'suspicious' number of firearms to a couple of dealers like the pharmacists were supplying a suspicious number of pills to pill mill doctors.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 children)

I would think that they could be liable in the same way pharmacists were for the opioid epidemic.

In the opioid epidemic the Pharmacists got into trouble because they had relationships with the manufacturers, the Doctors, and the Patients. So in this instance the best fit for your analogy is the Firearms Dealers as they are the ones who have relationships with the Manufacturers, BATFE, and the buyers.

If they can prove the manufacturers were supplying a ‘suspicious’ number of firearms to a couple of dealers...

It doesn't work like that. The sale of firearms from the Manufacturer to the Wholesaler is regulated by the Federal Government because they set the rules. In many cases the Manufacturer doesn't even know what dealer is going to end up with how many firearms or of what type. Some of them certainly do but Interstate Arms nor Smith & Wesson are not special in that regard.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 17 hours ago (1 children)

I do see your point about pharmacists being a better analog for gun dealers, but Purdue pharmaceutical was also liable in the opioid crisis, and that would be a much better analog /equivalent for the manufacturer.

It doesn't work like that . . . In many cases the Manufacturer doesn't even know . . . Some of them certainly do

Maybe I'm misreading the 2nd paragraph, but it seems like you're saying: it doesn't work like that, except when it does

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 hours ago

By their logic, you can eliminate your liability for any evidently harmful product by installing a middleman.