In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Options
Groups Setting New Sights on Gun Industry Protecti
Josey1
Member Posts: 9,598 ✭✭
Groups Setting New Sights on Gun Industry Protections
4/10/2002
Feature Story
by Dick Dahl
(Second of a two-part series on special protections enjoyed by the gun industry and how some groups are responding.)
The gun lobby has been successful in convincing legislatures across the country to erect statutory barriers to protect the gun industry from legal action and from the efforts of local governments to enact tough gun-regulation ordinances. According to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 23 states now provide the gun industry immunity from lawsuits, while 39 have passed pre-emption laws to prohibit municipalities from passing ordinances that are tougher on guns than relevant state laws.
Combined, these uniquely protective industry-protection laws comprise a formidable obstruction standing in the way of citizens who would like to hold the industry accountable to some degree for the ongoing toll of gun violence in America.
Although the challenge is a difficult one, several organizations have mounted campaigns to raise public awareness about the special treatment accorded this industry, elect candidates who are strong on gun-violence prevention, and pass tougher laws.
One recent victory against the gun industry and gun lobby was recorded by the Alliance for Justice's new Gun Industry Watch project, which prompted H&R Block, the nation's largest tax-preparation firm, to drop a marketing agreement with the National Rifle Association (NRA). Gun Industry Watch learned of an arrangement between H&R Block and a marketing company called Memberdrive to market its services to NRA members in exchange for "royalties" paid by H&R Block through Memberdrive to the NRA. Gun Industry Watch also learned that Memberdrive's senior vice president of marketing is Susan LaPierre, wife of the NRA's chief executive officer, Wayne LaPierre.
Gun Industry Watch, a national student network that was created late last year, staged a protest outside an H&R Block outlet in Washington, D.C. in mid-February and then mobilized for a broader response, joining forces with the Million Mom March, the Brady Campaign, and the Mid-Atlantic Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence to organize a series of protests around the country. Dozens of them were scheduled to be held on March 16, but on March 12, H&R Block announced that it was severing its ties with Memberdrive and the NRA.
Alliance for Justice spokeswoman Julie Bernstein said that H&R Block's decision came as an apparent response to mounting pressure. The Kansas City-based company reportedly received thousands of letters, faxes, and e-mails from activists who objected to the agreement with the Memberdrive and the NRA. "I think they were surprised at how mobilized we were," Bernstein said.
Following the announcement of H&R Block's decision, Alliance for Justice President Nan Aron proclaimed the effort a victory over the gun lobby. "Let this send a loud message to other corporate partners of the NRA," she said. "If you support the NRA, we will work to make sure that your employees, customers, and all of your stakeholders know that you support an extremist gun lobby that is out of step with mainstream America."
Another new effort to draw public attention to the gun industry is a joint California campaign of the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence and the Legal Community Against Violence called Justice for Gun Victims. According to Eric Gorovitz, western policy director for the Educational Fund, the purpose of the venture is to eliminate the special protection from liability that California law gives the gun industry. To that end, Justice for Gun Victims is working for passage of two bills that have been introduced in the California Legislature to repeal the protective law.
The new campaign is the latest evolution of a response from the state's legal community to the 1993 assault-weapon massacre in a law firm at 101 California St. in San Francisco that left 10 people dead (including the gunman) and five injured. The Legal Community Against Violence was formed to reduce gun violence through effective firearms regulations -- which all too often are blocked by protective laws.
In the case of the 101 California shooting, which prompted a lawsuit by survivors against Navegar, Inc., the maker of the assault weapon that was used in the shooting spree, the California Supreme Court ruled last August that state law immunized Navegar and the gun industry in general from certain lawsuits including the one stemming from the 1993 shooting. Plaintiffs in that lawsuit claimed that Navegar was negligent and should be held liable for marketing the murder weapon, a TEC-DC9, in a way that could be attractive to criminals. One Navegar ad, for instance, boasted of the gun's "excellent resistance to fingerprints" and its threaded barrel that could accommodate silencers.
"I think (the Supreme Court) interpreted it incorrectly," Gorovitz said. "But our bone to pick is not with the court; it's with the statute. We're trying to get rid of this statute, which gives the gun industry higher levels of protection than other industries."
According to Gorovitz, there was strong public reaction to the court's decision last August, strong sentiment expressed to fix what the public believes is a statutory problem. He said that Gov. Gray Davis has stated that he would sign a bill to end gun-industry immunity in California if it makes it to his desk. But history has shown, time and again, that the NRA is highly effective in achieving goals that are not supported by most people. Gorovitz said it's hard to predict how the bills that Justice for Gun Victims is supporting will fare. "It would be easier if it wasn't an election year. But because it is, it could cut a number of different ways."
The NRA's influence in California, as in many states, is formidable. But if a new project of the Violence Policy Center achieves its aims, the activities of the nation's top gun-lobbying organization will be more widely known by the general public. And because the public disagrees with the NRA's extremist positions on gun policy, this knowledge will presumably be detrimental to the NRA and the gun industry alike.
The new venture is called the Violence Prevention Campaign, which has been organized as a separate 501 (c)(4) lobbying organization designed not only to publicize the gun-control records of elected officials but to dog the NRA and the gun industry. The Violence Prevention Campaign kicked off its activity in February with the release of a report, "From the Gun War to the Culture War: How the NRA Has Become the Pillar of the Right," which documents how the NRA is expanding its scope from guns to a broader presence and influence in right-wing America.
According to Violence Prevention Campaign Political Director Joe Sudbay, the evidence to support the contention about an expanding NRA influence includes the relatively recent additions of people known for their great conservative influence to the NRA board of governors. Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and founder of the American Civil Rights Institute, a group dedicated to repealing affirmative action nationwide, is one. Another is David Keene, who heads the American Conservative Union. "These are two leaders of the conservative movement with no relationship to guns, and they put them on the board," Sudbay said. "That's very significant."
Along with its changing role, the NRA demonstrated in the 2000 elections that is has also "pretty much come to eschew any sense of bipartisanship," Sudbay said.
"I think they view themselves as a very integral part of the conservative movement instead of just gun-control opponents these days," he said. "In this climate, if Democrats think they can try to assuage the NRA, their efforts are going to be for naught because in essence the NRA has become the grass roots of the conservative movement -- which means that they're going to be working to elect Republicans."
The NRA's activity in the 2000 elections was marked by a dramatic change in its method of financing its favored candidates, Sudbay said. Even though most NRA recipients have traditionally been Republican, the organization had been somewhat bipartisan, funding whatever candidates, regardless of party, they thought would better vote their way. In 2000, though, Sudbay said the NRA "just dumped money into the Republican National Committee."
The purpose of the Violence Prevention Campaign, Sudbay said, is to "keep the focus on the gun industry, as opposed to the end user."
"But we also want to keep people focused on the idea that the way we're going to make change is by defining elected officials on their gun records. That's the message that came out of the 2000 elections -- you win when you can successfully define the candidates as extreme because of their pro-gun records."
This message has been obscured as a direct result of the NRA's post-election spin machine, Sudbay contends, "and the Democratic Party bought into it." In fact, the gun-control issue probably delivered the Senate to the Democrats, he says, because in several close races in which the issue was prominent, the NRA-backed candidates lost.
One of the most important messages that activists can take from the 2000 elections, he said, is that the gun issue can be effective in electing candidates when used wisely. In similar manner, H&R Block's decision to sever its ties to the NRA provides a lesson in the value of public pressure in fighting the gun lobby.
The record from the 2000 election and the response to the H&R Block campaign shows that people respond to common-sense action on gun violence. When states pass immunity laws, like the one in California that the Justice for Gun Victims project is trying to remove from the books, common sense should be a powerful force for change. As the Educational Fund's Gorovitz says, "It makes no sense to protect those who supply criminals with high-power assault weapons. Gun makers must take responsibility for the carnage their products create. The law should protect the public, not gun-industry profits."
Groups Setting New Sights on Gun Industry Protections. Original feature article, Join Together Online (www.jointogether.org), April 10, 2002.
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878
4/10/2002
Feature Story
by Dick Dahl
(Second of a two-part series on special protections enjoyed by the gun industry and how some groups are responding.)
The gun lobby has been successful in convincing legislatures across the country to erect statutory barriers to protect the gun industry from legal action and from the efforts of local governments to enact tough gun-regulation ordinances. According to the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, 23 states now provide the gun industry immunity from lawsuits, while 39 have passed pre-emption laws to prohibit municipalities from passing ordinances that are tougher on guns than relevant state laws.
Combined, these uniquely protective industry-protection laws comprise a formidable obstruction standing in the way of citizens who would like to hold the industry accountable to some degree for the ongoing toll of gun violence in America.
Although the challenge is a difficult one, several organizations have mounted campaigns to raise public awareness about the special treatment accorded this industry, elect candidates who are strong on gun-violence prevention, and pass tougher laws.
One recent victory against the gun industry and gun lobby was recorded by the Alliance for Justice's new Gun Industry Watch project, which prompted H&R Block, the nation's largest tax-preparation firm, to drop a marketing agreement with the National Rifle Association (NRA). Gun Industry Watch learned of an arrangement between H&R Block and a marketing company called Memberdrive to market its services to NRA members in exchange for "royalties" paid by H&R Block through Memberdrive to the NRA. Gun Industry Watch also learned that Memberdrive's senior vice president of marketing is Susan LaPierre, wife of the NRA's chief executive officer, Wayne LaPierre.
Gun Industry Watch, a national student network that was created late last year, staged a protest outside an H&R Block outlet in Washington, D.C. in mid-February and then mobilized for a broader response, joining forces with the Million Mom March, the Brady Campaign, and the Mid-Atlantic Coalition to Prevent Gun Violence to organize a series of protests around the country. Dozens of them were scheduled to be held on March 16, but on March 12, H&R Block announced that it was severing its ties with Memberdrive and the NRA.
Alliance for Justice spokeswoman Julie Bernstein said that H&R Block's decision came as an apparent response to mounting pressure. The Kansas City-based company reportedly received thousands of letters, faxes, and e-mails from activists who objected to the agreement with the Memberdrive and the NRA. "I think they were surprised at how mobilized we were," Bernstein said.
Following the announcement of H&R Block's decision, Alliance for Justice President Nan Aron proclaimed the effort a victory over the gun lobby. "Let this send a loud message to other corporate partners of the NRA," she said. "If you support the NRA, we will work to make sure that your employees, customers, and all of your stakeholders know that you support an extremist gun lobby that is out of step with mainstream America."
Another new effort to draw public attention to the gun industry is a joint California campaign of the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence and the Legal Community Against Violence called Justice for Gun Victims. According to Eric Gorovitz, western policy director for the Educational Fund, the purpose of the venture is to eliminate the special protection from liability that California law gives the gun industry. To that end, Justice for Gun Victims is working for passage of two bills that have been introduced in the California Legislature to repeal the protective law.
The new campaign is the latest evolution of a response from the state's legal community to the 1993 assault-weapon massacre in a law firm at 101 California St. in San Francisco that left 10 people dead (including the gunman) and five injured. The Legal Community Against Violence was formed to reduce gun violence through effective firearms regulations -- which all too often are blocked by protective laws.
In the case of the 101 California shooting, which prompted a lawsuit by survivors against Navegar, Inc., the maker of the assault weapon that was used in the shooting spree, the California Supreme Court ruled last August that state law immunized Navegar and the gun industry in general from certain lawsuits including the one stemming from the 1993 shooting. Plaintiffs in that lawsuit claimed that Navegar was negligent and should be held liable for marketing the murder weapon, a TEC-DC9, in a way that could be attractive to criminals. One Navegar ad, for instance, boasted of the gun's "excellent resistance to fingerprints" and its threaded barrel that could accommodate silencers.
"I think (the Supreme Court) interpreted it incorrectly," Gorovitz said. "But our bone to pick is not with the court; it's with the statute. We're trying to get rid of this statute, which gives the gun industry higher levels of protection than other industries."
According to Gorovitz, there was strong public reaction to the court's decision last August, strong sentiment expressed to fix what the public believes is a statutory problem. He said that Gov. Gray Davis has stated that he would sign a bill to end gun-industry immunity in California if it makes it to his desk. But history has shown, time and again, that the NRA is highly effective in achieving goals that are not supported by most people. Gorovitz said it's hard to predict how the bills that Justice for Gun Victims is supporting will fare. "It would be easier if it wasn't an election year. But because it is, it could cut a number of different ways."
The NRA's influence in California, as in many states, is formidable. But if a new project of the Violence Policy Center achieves its aims, the activities of the nation's top gun-lobbying organization will be more widely known by the general public. And because the public disagrees with the NRA's extremist positions on gun policy, this knowledge will presumably be detrimental to the NRA and the gun industry alike.
The new venture is called the Violence Prevention Campaign, which has been organized as a separate 501 (c)(4) lobbying organization designed not only to publicize the gun-control records of elected officials but to dog the NRA and the gun industry. The Violence Prevention Campaign kicked off its activity in February with the release of a report, "From the Gun War to the Culture War: How the NRA Has Become the Pillar of the Right," which documents how the NRA is expanding its scope from guns to a broader presence and influence in right-wing America.
According to Violence Prevention Campaign Political Director Joe Sudbay, the evidence to support the contention about an expanding NRA influence includes the relatively recent additions of people known for their great conservative influence to the NRA board of governors. Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and founder of the American Civil Rights Institute, a group dedicated to repealing affirmative action nationwide, is one. Another is David Keene, who heads the American Conservative Union. "These are two leaders of the conservative movement with no relationship to guns, and they put them on the board," Sudbay said. "That's very significant."
Along with its changing role, the NRA demonstrated in the 2000 elections that is has also "pretty much come to eschew any sense of bipartisanship," Sudbay said.
"I think they view themselves as a very integral part of the conservative movement instead of just gun-control opponents these days," he said. "In this climate, if Democrats think they can try to assuage the NRA, their efforts are going to be for naught because in essence the NRA has become the grass roots of the conservative movement -- which means that they're going to be working to elect Republicans."
The NRA's activity in the 2000 elections was marked by a dramatic change in its method of financing its favored candidates, Sudbay said. Even though most NRA recipients have traditionally been Republican, the organization had been somewhat bipartisan, funding whatever candidates, regardless of party, they thought would better vote their way. In 2000, though, Sudbay said the NRA "just dumped money into the Republican National Committee."
The purpose of the Violence Prevention Campaign, Sudbay said, is to "keep the focus on the gun industry, as opposed to the end user."
"But we also want to keep people focused on the idea that the way we're going to make change is by defining elected officials on their gun records. That's the message that came out of the 2000 elections -- you win when you can successfully define the candidates as extreme because of their pro-gun records."
This message has been obscured as a direct result of the NRA's post-election spin machine, Sudbay contends, "and the Democratic Party bought into it." In fact, the gun-control issue probably delivered the Senate to the Democrats, he says, because in several close races in which the issue was prominent, the NRA-backed candidates lost.
One of the most important messages that activists can take from the 2000 elections, he said, is that the gun issue can be effective in electing candidates when used wisely. In similar manner, H&R Block's decision to sever its ties to the NRA provides a lesson in the value of public pressure in fighting the gun lobby.
The record from the 2000 election and the response to the H&R Block campaign shows that people respond to common-sense action on gun violence. When states pass immunity laws, like the one in California that the Justice for Gun Victims project is trying to remove from the books, common sense should be a powerful force for change. As the Educational Fund's Gorovitz says, "It makes no sense to protect those who supply criminals with high-power assault weapons. Gun makers must take responsibility for the carnage their products create. The law should protect the public, not gun-industry profits."
Groups Setting New Sights on Gun Industry Protections. Original feature article, Join Together Online (www.jointogether.org), April 10, 2002.
"If cowardly and dishonorable men sometimes shoot unarmed men with army pistols or guns, the evil must be prevented by the penitentiary and gallows, and not by a general deprivation of a constitutional privilege." - Arkansas Supreme Court, 1878