SNOHOMISH COUNTY JUDGE SAYS LAWSUIT v. EDMONDS GUN LAW ‘RIPE FOR DETERMINATION’

BELLEVUE, WA – A Snohomish County Superior Court judge will allow a lawsuit challenging a so-called “safe storage” ordinance in the City of Edmonds to proceed, ruling that all plaintiffs in the case have standing to challenge the ordinance as a violation of Washington State’s 35-year-old preemption law that placed sole authority for firearms regulation in the hands of the Legislature.

The case is brought by the Second Amendment Foundation, National Rifle Association and two private citizens, Brett Bass and Swan Seaburg. Judge Anita L. Farris denied a motion by the City to dismiss the case, noting that “the Plaintiff’s claim that the ordinance is preempted by state statute is ripe for determination.”

Edmonds adopted a “safe storage” requirement last year, which violates the preemption statute. SAF and NRA promptly filed suit with the two private citizens.

Judge Farris has done what King County Superior Court Judge Barbara Linde would not do when she dismissed a similar lawsuit against the City of Seattle on technical grounds after the city argued that the plaintiffs lacked standing to sue. SAF and NRA have appealed her ruling. Seattle has adopted a “safe storage” requirement, possibly emboldened to challenge state preemption because it also adopted a controversial “gun violence tax” in 2015 that the State Supreme Court allowed to stand. Read more

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colorado

To say the least, these are challenging times in the shooting sports industry following another unthinkable tragedy, this time in Christchurch, New Zealand. Every one of these high-profile, senseless killings engulfs the world in a renewed and impassioned gun debate. The inevitable result: shaming, blame-shifting and social stigma.

Sportswriter Alan Abrahamson’s latest column in 3 Wire Sports titled “At the Olympics: No More Guns” does all of that for one of the oldest Olympic sports, while adding in a blatant slap in the face. It’s an alarmist’s reaction to a sport millions of people across the globe participate in.

His column calls for the removal of shooting as an Olympic sport. This response is in defense of USA Shooting’s Olympic and Paralympic athletes as well as our hopefuls and those safely participating in this sport on a daily basis. All of them are unwillingly stigmatized because the sports equipment they use is so negatively associated with tragedy. Read more

Despite the strenuous objections of Connecticut Supreme Court Chief Justice Richard A. Robinson, a narrow majority of Justices have ruled that the Soto v. Bushmaster case can be revived. The reversal of a lower court ruling was based on a section of the state’s Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA). Using that argument, Remington, the manufacturer of the Bushmaster rifle shooter Adam Lanza used to kill 20 first graders and six adults at Sandy Hook Elementary School in 2012, could be liable for marketing “what it knew was a weapon designed for military use to civilians like Nancy and Adam Lanza.”The court’s ruling didn’t rule on the merit of the argument, saying only the families of the victims should have the “opportunity to prove that Remington violated the CUTPA.” Using this reasoning, the judges concluded that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act “does not bar the plaintiffs from proceeding on the single, limited theory that the defendants violated CUTPA by marketing the XM15- E2S to civilians for criminal purposes, and that those wrongful marketing tactics caused or contributed to the Sandy Hook massacre.

Accordingly, on the basis of that limited theory, we conclude that the plaintiffs have pleaded allegations sufficient to survive a motion to strike and are entitled to have the opportunity to prove their wrongful marketing allegations.” Attorneys for Remington and Camfour, the firearms distributor that sold Riverview Gun Shop the AR-15 Lanza used, held their position that the PLCCA protects them from just this type of lawsuit. The National Shooting Sports Foundation issued a statement saying the decision “is at odds with all other state and federal appellate courts that have interpreted the scope of the exception.”

The Second Amendment Foundation was more direct, calling the decision “like suing Ford or General Motors because a car they sold was stolen and used to run over a pedestrian all because the car manufacturers advertised that their car had better acceleration and performance than other vehicles.”

Firearms Retailers, NSSF Federal Suit Against ‘Enforcement Notice’ Goes Forward

NEWTOWN, Conn. — The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts today denied Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey’s attempt to stay a federal lawsuit brought by four federally-licensed Bay State firearms retailers and the National Shooting Sports Foundation® (NSSF®). The lawsuit states that Healey in her 2016 “Enforcement Notice” redefining “assault weapons” had overstepped her legal authority and deprived the retailers of their due process protections guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

In 2018, a federal district court judge denied Healey’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit finding that the plaintiffs had asserted valid federal due process claims. In January 2019, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit dismissed Healey’s appeal of that decision, just hours after hearing oral argument.

The ruling today to deny a stay in this case, pending parallel litigation in a state court, is the third attempt by Attorney General Healey to stall a trial in federal court. “… the Enforcement Notice warrants constitutional review for vagueness without reaching the state law issue,” wrote District Judge Timothy S. Hillman. The parallel state court case filed by different retailers claims the enforcement notice is an invalid regulation that was improperly issued by the Attorney General in violation of the state’s administrative procedure act. Read more

BELLEVUE, WA – Reports that the National Rifle Association is being engulfed in what one publication described as “a rapidly expanding tangle of congressional investigations” raise an important question that nobody has been asking: Is this a deliberate effort by anti-gun-rights Congressional Democrats to overwhelm the organization’s leadership and prevent NRA from fulfilling its mission to protect the Second Amendment?

That’s what the Second Amendment Foundation and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms are wondering as House Democrats are pressing their gun control agenda.

“According to The Trace, which is funded by anti-gun billionaire Michael Bloomberg, Congress has launched six investigations of the NRA,” noted SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb. “With Democrats in control of the House, promising to push a full slate of gun control measures, that seems just a little curious.”

Gottlieb, who also chairs the CCRKBA, said it is fair to question an avalanche of investigations involving the NRA at a time when its attention should be focused squarely on renewed efforts to erode the Second Amendment. Read more

Additional Media Information

Buckeye Firearms Foundation Wins Legal Battle Against Cincinnati over Bump Stock Ban

Buckeye Firearms Foundation, in cooperation with Ohioans for Concealed Carry, has won a lawsuit against the City of Cincinnati over its “bump stock” ban.

On Friday morning, February 8, 2019, Judge Ruehlman of Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas granted a Motion for Summary Judgment and shall issue a permanent injunction. As a result, the City of Cincinnati is no longer permitted to enforce its illegal ordinance.

In May of 2018, Cincinnati City Council passed an ordinance making the possession of “trigger activators” illegal within city limits. The trigger activator ban included a number of devices, including “bump stocks” or “bump fire” stocks, which are legal everywhere else across Ohio.

“This ban was completely unjustified and a great concern for gun owners,” said Dean Rieck, Executive Director of Buckeye Firearms Foundation. “Under Ohio law, local municipalities are not permitted to enact firearms laws that conflict with state law. And clearly, outlawing guns or gun parts, is a clear violation of state law.”
Read more

Firearms Retailers, NSSF Federal Suit Against ‘Enforcement Notice’ Goes Forward

NEWTOWN, Conn. — A three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit on Wednesday, just hours after hearing oral argument, dismissed an appeal filed by Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey in a federal lawsuit brought by four federally-licensed Massachusetts firearms retailers and the National Shooting Sports Foundation® (NSSF®), the trade association for the firearms and ammunition industry. The lawsuit challenging Healey’s 2016 “Enforcement Notice” will go forward unimpeded. In 2018, a federal district court judge in Worcester had denied Healey’s motion to dismiss the lawsuit finding that the plaintiffs had asserted valid federal due process claims.

“We are very pleased that the judges saw the total lack of merit in the appeal and, in a rare move, dismissed it the very same day they heard oral arguments, Attorney General Healey’s frivolous attempt to prevent part of this suit from moving ahead based on state law claims that were not even being made,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President and General Counsel.

The lawsuit states that Healey overstepped her legal authority and deprived the retailers of their due process protections guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution. The action seeks declaratory relief and a permanent injunction enjoining enforcement. Read more

NEWTOWN, Conn. — The National Shooting Sports Foundation® (NSSF®), the trade association for the firearms and ammunition, today announced that it opposes the Assault Weapons Ban of 2019 introduced in the U.S. Senate this week.

The legislation introduced by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), like earlier versions, relies on wrongfully defining commonly-owned semi-automatic rifles based on certain cosmetic features. The new version of this legislation, however, expands ways to ban the most-popular center-fire rifle in America. Since the original Assault Weapons Ban expired in 2004, more than 16 million of these rifles have been legally purchased for lawful purposes.

“It is disappointing to see politicians continue to pursue a failed policy agenda that has proven ineffective in improving public safety and will deny law-abiding citizens their Constitutional right,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF Senior Vice President of Government and Public Affairs and General Counsel. “Despite what proponents may say, the record shows that Sen. Feinstein’s original 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban had no demonstrable impact on reducing crime and this one would be equally ineffective.” Read more