By: José Niño
The state of Connecticut recently filed a lawsuit against four gun parts companies asserting that these companies were shipping 80% AR-15 lower receivers to customers in the state.
According to John Crump of AmmoLand, “Connecticut bans unsterilized receivers, which it calls ‘ghost guns’.”
“Ghost guns are an untraceable menace that exists for one reason — to evade law enforcement and registration,” Connecticut Attorney General William Tong stated in the lawsuit. “They are a threat to public safety, and they are illegal in Connecticut.”
Lawsuits of this sort are popping up left and right. New York City filed some of the first lawsuits aimed at multiple gun parts companies. The city offered to hammer out a settlement with the companies if they hand over customer data to the city.
Other cities such as Buffalo and San Francisco have followed in Connecticut’s footsteps by launching their own lawsuits against gun parts companies. What’s transpiring here is not some random occurrence. Gun Control Inc. understands that there’s significant gridlock in Congress. For one, the United States House is controlled by Republicans, which makes radical gun control measures effectively a non-starter. On top of that, Democrats in the Senate do not enjoy a filibuster-proof majority to easily pass gun control.
In response to this dynamic at the federal level, gun controllers have shifted their focus to state legislatures, specifically those in blue states that are dominated by Democrats. However, even there, passing gun control is no sure thing. There are still countless people with residually strong pro-gun inclinations. Moreover, the unrest that followed the Wuhan virus outbreak and the death of George Floyd compelled many people to get strapped and start looking for ways to provide their own security without having to rely on the government. After all, this was a period when many law enforcement bodies were told to step down and allow for rioters, looters, and other criminals to cause mayhem with virtual impunity.
These factors have made it more difficult for gun controllers to enact anti-gun measures through conventional legislative means. In turn, anti-gun organizations and politicians have pursued legal action against gun companies in efforts to bankrupt them. This is being done in clear violation of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), a law passed in 2005 that is supposed to protect companies from frivolous lawsuits.
Knowing the way Gun Control Inc. moves, it doesn’t care about the law. It will do whatever it takes to move its agenda forward. Victims of the 2012 Sandy Hook massacre were able to successfully shake down gun manufacturer Remington for a $73 million settlement. Gun control organizations view this case as inspiration of future lawfare projects designed to bankrupt gun manufacturers.
In bankrupting gun manufacturers, gun controllers effectively deprive potential gun owners of places and vendors to acquire firearms from. If this becomes a systematic process, the overall supply of legal firearms will drop, and many individuals will end up being de facto disarmed. In essence, this kind of lawfare can function as a veritable form of gun control.
Second Amendment organizations must be flexible and be ready to adapt to legal fights. When the courts are being weaponized to destroy the firearms industry, gun rights advocates must do everything possible to counter these actions.
We cannot afford to let Gun Control Inc. open new fronts in the war on guns. These organizations will not stop until they destroy the right to bear arms. Resistance is key to keeping these political predators in check.