What’s the very definition of chutzpah? Try the following on for size.
Narco state Mexico is suing American firearms manufacturers for $10 billion — over it’s own cartel violence.
That’s right, the land long known for banditos, where the police and criminals may be one and the same (a man I knew of traveled to Mexico and was mugged by the cops), has a government that’s trying to put our gun manufacturers out of business instead of its own violent drug kingpins.
Per UPI News:
The Mexican government’s lawsuit against U.S. gun companies is set to go before the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday [March 4].
The lawsuit, originally filed in federal court in Massachusetts in 2021, seeks to hold gun manufacturers responsible for violence perpetrated by cartels using firearms trafficked from the United States.
The suit was dismissed in September 2022, with the court citing the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act [PLCAA], which shields gun manufacturers from being targeted by civil suits stemming from illegal use of their products.
The decision was reversed in January 2024 by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit, which ruled that the lawsuit falls under an exception to the PLCAA that allows manufacturers to be targeted by lawsuits if they knowingly violated the law.
Jonathan Lowy, a lawyer serving as co-counsel for Mexico and president of Global Action on Gun Violence, alleged the gun manufacturers are aware of unscrupulous gun dealers selling to cartels.
Mexican Government Banditry
Perhaps it’s not surprising that Mexico is attempting this via-the-legal-system theft. In the past, mainly pre-PLCAA, some left-wing U.S. cities had also sued gun manufacturers for damages. The motivation is more than just the prospect of a big payday, too. Anti-gun activists know that such lawfare can perhaps hobble or even bankrupt firearms companies through legal fees. It’s an attempt to do an end-run around the Second Amendment.
As for the current case, the defendants addressed the fancifulness of Lowy’s indirect-responsibility argument. As the New York Post reports:
“No case in history supports that theory,” argued Noel Francisco, the lawyer representing firearm manufacturer Smith & Wesson Brands, to the justices during Tuesday’s oral arguments.
“Indeed, if Mexico is right, then every law enforcement organization in America has missed the largest criminal conspiracy in history operating right under their nose, and Budweiser is liable for every accident caused by underage drinkers,” the defense lawyer said.
For sure. Moreover, car manufacturers, and the rest of us, know there are people who’ll drive without licenses. Sleeping-pill makers know there are those who’ll try committing suicide with their sleeping pills. Ice cream and candy companies know there are people who’ll feed their kids too much ice cream and candy. Mexico’s rationale could be applied to a multitude of things.
The fact remains, however, that businesses selling legal products are not law-enforcement entities. Dealing with those who drive without a license — or peddle or use guns unlawfully — is government authorities’ responsibility.
Irresponsible Mexico
This is, again, where Mexico is found wanting. The National Association for Gun Rights made this point in a brief in the current case, mentioning Mexico’s restrictive firearms laws. As The Western Journal reports:
“These strict gun control measures have not stopped a surge of violence, often linked to organized criminal activity associated with the drug trade in Mexico,” the group said.
… “Instead of addressing public corruption or cracking down on the cartels and organized crime in Mexico, Mexico brought this action seeking to hold American arms manufacturers accountable for its own domestic policy failures.”
That corruption is profound, too. And the American I mentioned earlier mugged by Mexican cops just reflects the bigger picture. As to this, Mexico is on a list of the 10 nations with the world’s most corrupt police forces. It’s in the company of countries such as Iraq, Somalia, Afghanistan, Sudan, Pakistan, and Haiti.
For corruption in Mexico is not the exception, but the norm — it pervades society. As a result, a 2012 survey found, “over 92% of crimes go unreported or uninvestigated” in Mexico, relates the Organization for World Peace.
In fact, if you have money, as the cartels do, you can buy the police. For instance, a documentary I once watched stated that you could pay your way out of a fatal hit-and-run in Mexico for $450.
Abetting Criminality
What’s more, the Mexican government appears wholly unserious about addressing the corruption. Just consider how Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum reacted when President Donald Trump declared her nation’s cartels terrorist organizations.
“‘If they declare these criminal groups as terrorists, then we’ll have to expand our U.S. lawsuit [against the gun manufacturers],’ she said,” The Western Journal further informs.
Whose side is she on?
Sheinbaum should welcome U.S. help in eradicating the evil scourge that is the cartels. Instead, she’d rather try to eradicate our exercise of Second Amendment rights.
But then there’s the larger matter of what could be called legalized harassment and professional destruction. Mexico’s lawsuit, and so many others, illustrates the need in America of a “loser-pays law.” As it currently stands, powerful entities with bottomless pockets — e.g., governments using taxpayer money — can destroy people with frivolous lawsuits. They can force you to bankrupt yourself with attorneys’ fees, and it’s all nice and legal. This would be remedied if losing plaintiffs had to reimburse their would-be victims.
So, yes, the Mexican government, being criminal in nature, is to blame here; it apparently abets the cartels. But our legal system is to blame, too, for abetting the abettors.
