Ninth Circuit Court Of Appeals Dismisses Glock Lawsuit


Monday’s ruling by the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that dismisses a lawsuit against Glock by the victims of a deranged gunman in Grenada Hills, CA was a proper decision under existing statute, the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

In a 2-1 decision, a three- judge panel upheld a lower court’s ruling that the case, Ileto v. Glock, was nullified under the 2005 Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). That federal statute was passed to prevent junk lawsuits against gun makers, and this specific case was cited during Congressional debate as precisely the kind of lawsuit the law would prohibit.

“We are delighted that the Ninth Circuit panel not only affirmed the lower court ruling,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb, “but also that the court upheld the constitutionality of the federal law prohibiting this kind of lawsuit. While we sympathize with the victims, it would be an egregious miscarriage of justice to hold gun manufacturers responsible for the acts of criminals over whom they have no control.”

In August 1999, a deranged man named Buford Furrow opened fire at a Jewish Community Center summer camp in Granada Hills. The Glock pistol he used had once been owned by a police department in Washington State, but had been sold as surplus and passed through several hands before Furrow got it. Furrow wounded three children, a teenager and adult at the Jewish Center and later murdered a postal carrier, Joseph Ileto. Families of the victims, and Ileto’s widow, sued Glock and others in 2001, claiming that gun companies “intentionally produce, market, distribute, and sell more firearms than the legitimate market demands.”

Judge Susan Graber wrote the majority opinion, stating that “The PLCAA affects future and pending lawsuits, and courts are required to ‘immediately dismiss’ any pending lawsuits preempted by the PLCAA.”

“Holding gunmakers responsible for crime is a false panacea,” Gottlieb said. “Congress saw this when it passed the PLCAA, and now the court has affirmed that logic.”
 

Last edited by a moderator:

utimmer43

New member
Wow, it's not often the 9th gets it right. Good for them.:victory: Of course, they couldn't do something crazy like a unanimous ruling. (2-1)

Families of the victims, and Ileto’s widow, sued Glock and others in 2001, claiming that gun companies “intentionally produce, market, distribute, and sell more firearms than the legitimate market demands.
Hmm, legitimate market? These people need to refresh their handbook of anti-gun, twisted-language arguments. The ones they are using now are getting old and are no longer entertaining.:lazy:
 

CathyInBlue

Tool Maker
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this two in a row on 2A grounds that the 9C has gotten right?

Someone check water. Is it still wet? Check the sky. Is it still blue? Is up up and down down?
 

tattedupboy

Thank God I'm alive!
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this two in a row on 2A grounds that the 9C has gotten right?

Someone check water. Is it still wet? Check the sky. Is it still blue? Is up up and down down?

I checked, and indeed, all those things are still the way they're supposed. I'm wondering if, in the wake of D.C. v Heller, the 9th Circuit finally woke up.
 

gdcleanfun

Banned
OMG, I remember this. I lived in Simi Valley, just over the next hill, when this occurred. My G/F was friends with the adult woman who was shot. G/F was home with what we thought was the flu, she lived only a few blocks from the Jewish Community Center. Turns out my G/F had leukemia and died shortly after. I hadn't thought of this in years. I guess I put it all out of my head. I'm not sure how I feel about it all even now. Talk about mixed emotions! I didn't even know there was a lawsuit involved. Wow, you certainly brought up the past to me. Gonna have to take a time out here.
 

FN1910

New member
It is extremely scary that one of the three judges ruled against Glock. We can celebrate this ruling but we also need to remember how close it was to being very, very bad.
 
It is extremely scary that one of the three judges ruled against Glock. We can celebrate this ruling but we also need to remember how close it was to being very, very bad.

As was the SCOTUS decision which is even more scary under current conditions.
 

New Threads

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
49,340
Messages
622,576
Members
74,168
Latest member
blammoammo.com
Top