Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN Legal & Legislation

Testimony of Lawrence G. Keane, Vice President & General Counsel, National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc.

Wednesday, April 17, 2002

House Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection

IN SUPPORT OF

 “PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT”

 (H.R. 2037)

April 18, 2002

Chairman Stearns and distinguished members of the Subcommittee, my name is Lawrence G. Keane.  I am the vice president and general counsel to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. (“NSSF”).  The National Shootings Sports Foundation appreciates the opportunity to appear before the Subcommittee to offer testimony in support of the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act.” (H.R. 2037), which is an important piece of common sense legislation.

Formed in 1961, the National Shooting Sports Foundation, with approximately 1,900 members, is the major trade association for the firearms and recreational shooting sports industry.  The NSSF manages a variety of programs designed to promote a better understanding of, and a more active participation in, the shooting sports.  The NSSF’s programs and initiatives reflect the firearms industry’s genuine and longstanding commitment to fostering firearm safety and education and further reducing the illegal acquisition and criminal misuse of firearms.  Our members are engaged in the interstate and foreign commerce of firearm and ammunition products, a lawful and highly regulated activity.

Beginning in 1998, a group of approximately forty urban politicians, aligned with contingency-fee trial lawyers and anti-gun activists, have flooded our nation’s courts with lawsuits against federally licensed firearms manufacturers, wholesale distributors and retailers.  On March 28, 2002 the City of Jersey City, New Jersey became the most recent city to file suit.  Additional suits are threatened, and there are a growing number of private (non-municipal) suits against the industry.

As the courts have recognized, these suits are an improper attempt to use litigation to regulate the design, manufacturer, marketing, distribution and sale of firearms, thereby circumventing state legislatures and Congress.  In dismissing the New Orleans’ case, the Louisiana Supreme Court commented on local suits threatened the public safety and welfare because they will result in haphazard and inconsistent rules.

Winning on the merits is not necessary in order for these politicians to impose their will.  Their policy judgments can be implemented throughout the nation if the coercive effect resulting from the staggering financial cost to defend these suits forces the industry into a Hobson’s choice of either capitulation or bankruptcy.  At the time he filed his suit, Chicago Mayor Richard Dailey said, “We’re going to hit them where it hurts – in their bank accounts…”  Andrew Cuomo, then Housing and Urban Development Secretary, threatened firearms manufacturers with “death by a thousand cuts.”   

The collective industry-wide cost to defend these ill-conceived, politically motivated suits has been truly staggering.  Exact figures are not available because the defendants are still competitors and their defense cost is considered confidential business information.  However, based on discussions with insurance industry executives, manufacturers’ corporate counsel, cost estimates in various publications, and NSSF’s own experiences, I believe a conservative estimate for the total, industry-wide, cost of defense to date exceeds $50 million dollars.

This cost has been borne almost exclusively by the companies themselves.  With few exceptions, insurance carriers have denied coverage.  This has resulted in large, across-the-board, price increases for consumers.  Many of these suits allege that industry’s products are defectively designed.  While this allegation is patently untrue, these suits have ironically forced companies to scale back research and development to further improve the overall safety and design of their products.

As a result of these suits, firearms industry members have experienced dramatic premium increases when renewing their insurance policies.  Renewed policies almost invariably exclude coverage for the municipal suits.

These suits have been an unnecessary distraction to our nation’s firearms manufacturers whose time and attention would be better-spent supplying law enforcement and our armed forces with the equipment they need to protect America and combat global terrorism.

Of the twenty-four municipal suits that have been filed to date, ten have been dismissed by the courts, with six of those cases being fully and finally adjudicated.  Every appellate court in the nation to decide a municipal firearms case has ruled in favor of the industry and ordered the cases dismissed, including three state supreme courts and the United States Supreme Court denied certiorari of New Orleans’ appeal.  Seven cases are currently on appeal.

On March 27, 2002 the City of Boston, after completing 18 months of comprehensive discovery, became the first municipality to voluntarily dismiss its case against the industry.  In dismissing its case, Boston acknowledged it had learned the firearms industry has a genuine and longstanding commitment to further reducing firearms accidents; cooperating with law enforcement in their efforts to combat the criminal misuse of firearms; and promoting the safe and responsible distribution of firearms.  Boston now believes the best way to achieve these shared goals is through cooperation and communication, rather than through expensive, time-consuming and distracting litigation.

The National Shootings Sports Foundation urges you to vote in favor of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (H.R. 2037).

                                                                                    Respectfully Submitted,

                                                                                     Lawrence G. Keane

TRENDING NOW
“Fact Checker:” Joe Biden’s “Gun Ban” Not a Gun Ban Because Some Guns Wouldn’t Be Banned

News  

Monday, July 15, 2019

“Fact Checker:” Joe Biden’s “Gun Ban” Not a Gun Ban Because Some Guns Wouldn’t Be Banned

Facebook has teamed up with what it calls “third-party fact-checkers” to punish users of its platform that post information embarrassing or inconvenient to the political outlook of its principals. Yet like most sources of what ...

Hollywood Fantasy v. Reality on Firearm Suppressors

News  

Monday, July 15, 2019

Hollywood Fantasy v. Reality on Firearm Suppressors

It’s no secret that Hollywood has a very loose relationship with reality.  The movie industry, after all, is based on fantasy and escapism, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing.  If someone wants to forget ...

Presidential Pretender Who Campaigned on Gun Control First to Call It Quits

News  

Monday, July 15, 2019

Presidential Pretender Who Campaigned on Gun Control First to Call It Quits

On Monday, Eric Swalwell became the first of the many pretenders for the Democrat presidential nomination to bow (or perhaps slink) out of the race. The U.S. Congressman from California’s 15th District had tried to distinguish himself from ...

California: City of San Diego Considers Gun Control Ordinance

Friday, July 12, 2019

California: City of San Diego Considers Gun Control Ordinance

San Diego City Attorney, Mara Elliott has asked the City Council to consider a draft ordinance that would require mandatory locked storage of firearms in the home and would propose a conflicting law regarding the reporting of ...

Hawaii: Governor Ige Signs Anti-Gun Legislation

Wednesday, July 10, 2019

Hawaii: Governor Ige Signs Anti-Gun Legislation

On July 9th, Governor David Ige signed the final remaining anti-gun bill awaiting his consideration, Senate Bill 600. This comes on the heels of him signing Senate Bill 1466 on June 27th. 

California: Injunction Request to be Filed in Lawsuit Challenging California Ammo Law

Wednesday, July 3, 2019

California: Injunction Request to be Filed in Lawsuit Challenging California Ammo Law

CRPA, with the support of NRA, challenged the ammunition background check law in court months ago with the filing of the Rhode v. Becerra case. The lead plaintiff in the case is Olympic gold medalist shooter ...

Vox Wants to Take Your Guns

News  

Monday, July 8, 2019

Vox Wants to Take Your Guns

A conspiracy relies on secrecy. Some are, perhaps, never uncovered. Others are exposed by the conspirators themselves, who cannot help but share the details whether from arrogance or anxiousness. For years, law-abiding gun owners and ...

NRA Statement On Virginia Special Session

News  

Tuesday, July 9, 2019

NRA Statement On Virginia Special Session

FAIRFAX, Va.–   The interim executive director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, Jason Ouimet, released the following statement today regarding the special session in Virginia:  "The National Rifle Association has a long ...

Guide To The Interstate Transportation Of Firearms

Gun Laws  

Thursday, January 1, 2015

Guide To The Interstate Transportation Of Firearms

CAUTION: Federal and state firearms laws are subject to frequent change. This summary is not to be considered as legal advice or a restatement of law.

Recent Poll Shows Gun Control Not as Popular as Some Would Like to Believe

News  

Monday, July 8, 2019

Recent Poll Shows Gun Control Not as Popular as Some Would Like to Believe

A recent Morning Consult/POLITICO poll, conducted immediately prior to the recent  Democratic debates and gathering responses from 1,991 registered voters, asked about views toward the candidates, issues of potential importance in the election, voting intention, and ...

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.