Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Griffin opens checkbook, but not yet as wide as before
Posted in:
* WLS Radio…
A creative new lawsuit has been filed in federal court to get at the problem of guns used in crimes.
Studies suggest crime guns cause PTSD in children, especially in minority communities. So, this lawsuit uses the Americas With Disabilities Act and the Illinois Civil Rights Act to demand the state do something about it.
Public interest lawyer Tom Johnson argues the state police could do something, “The law already says the state police have the authority to regulate gun sales. We don’t have to pass a new statute. We don’t have to get the courts to do this. They already have the authority!”
According to the complaint, 40 percent of guns used in firearm-related crimes in Chicago are purchased at gun shops in suburban areas surrounding the city. It names seven specific gun dealers in Riverdale, Lyons, Lincolnwood, East Dundee, Melrose Park, Lansing and Posen.
“Under current law, and without cost, the Illinois Department of State Police can adopt reasonable regulations that would curtail the gun trafficking by these shops, and thereby reduce the gun violence in Chicago, and in turn reduce the terrible effect such gun violence has on the African-American children bringing this case,” the lawsuit states. […]
The complaint outlines several steps that could be taken now without any changes to Illinois law. They include conducting background checks on all gun store and gun show employees; not allowing the sale of guns to people who the seller knows will quickly transfer ownership of the weapon; and preventing those linked to “crime guns” from buying another gun.
The plaintiffs seek a declaratory judgment that Illinois has violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by not making a “reasonable accommodation to the special needs of the plaintiff children in the conduct of the federally assisted law enforcement programs,” and violated the Illinois Civil Rights Act by not controlling the gun trafficking that primarily impacts black children.
* The Trace…
The plaintiffs are wading into uncharted legal territory. They seek to prove that children exposed to violence suffer impairments so severe that the state must impose tougher rules on the businesses that supply guns.
“As far as I know, no one has ever sued the state for the health effects or mental health effects of gun violence based on a violation of the ADA,” Timothy Lytton, a professor at Georgia State University’s College of Law who has studied gun litigation. “This seems an entirely novel approach.” […]
The ATF has the power to inspect gun dealers, but it is legally allowed to conduct only one audit on each business per year. Normally, however, the resource-starved ATF only inspects a minute fraction of them — slightly more than 7 percent in 2016.
The lawsuit is here.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 11:31 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Question of the day
Next Post: Griffin opens checkbook, but not yet as wide as before
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
“Studies suggest crime guns cause PTSD in children”
When will people understand that most gun violence is caused by gangs. Get rid of the gangs by creating jobs so kids won’t have to join a gangs in order to survive.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 11:38 am
“not allowing the sale of guns to people who the seller knows will quickly transfer ownership of the weapon”
How do you do that? How can this claim be proved?
Comment by Bogey Golfer Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 11:44 am
===Get rid of the gangs by creating jobs===
Simple solutions are usually neither.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 11:50 am
I recall being in court before the late Judge Darrah on a few occasions when he gave a very sincere compliment to an attorney (not me) on presenting a very inventive and novel legal argument, followed quickly by a ruling for the other party. “Novel” appeared to mean “interesting but utterly unsupported by the current state of the law” in that context.
Comment by titan Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 12:25 pm
==Get rid of the gangs==
You got this part right. “By any means necessary”, as far as I’m concerned. Carry a firearm illegally, a year in the can. Carry a firearm during commission of a felony, three years in the can. Brandish the weapon during a felony, five years in the can. Fire the weapon, seven years in the can. Hit someone, ten years in the can (minimum). Kill someone, life in the can. And I don’t mean Cancun.
Comment by Stuntman Bob's Brother Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 12:30 pm
==reasonable accommodation to the special needs of the plaintiff children in the conduct of the federally assisted law enforcement programs,” and violated the Illinois Civil Rights Act by not controlling the gun trafficking that primarily impacts black children.==
It would seem that the plaintiff would need to be an individual disabled child or parent of disabled child that may be traumatized by a gunfight. - A gunfight enabled by illegally obtained firearms to at least to make to the Fed Appeals court. Unfortunately if it makes it to USC Inc., it’s probably gonna be thrown out regardless of the wording of the law or facts.
Comment by Well-Regulated Militia Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 12:31 pm
Government by judiciary update. What can’t get done by convincing the Illinois State legislature is supposed to be done by an unelected federal judge.
Comment by Steve Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 1:05 pm
Stuntman- “Carry a firearm illegally, a year in the can.” If you have a loaded gun on your person without an FOID card, that’s already a felony in Illinois.
“Carry a firearm during commission of a felony, three years in the can. Brandish the weapon during a felony, five years in the can. Fire the weapon, seven years in the can. Hit someone, ten years in the can (minimum). Kill someone, life in the can.”
All of these proposed charges can and will be used by prosecutors to charge armed citizens defending themselves from violent home invasions, etc. Not good ideas, if you’re a firearm owner, which it looks like you are not. The only bright spot with this suit is it looks like NRA won’t horn in on it like they did with the Otis McDonald case to cater to anti-gun police unions.
Comment by Anonymous Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 1:29 pm
People who neither under stand the law nor how gun sales work.
A coup,e of the gun shops mentioned have been audited by the ATF and no violations were found
You can’t sell a gun to someone who is going to turnaround d and sell it to someone else thats a straw and lots of gun shops these days are even hinky about gifts to spouses or kids
The state police do not have the authority as claimed by the plaintiffs and you just can’t go removing constitutional rights for no substantive reason
Btw the city tried this novel approach as a public nuisance theory back in 1994 and lost at the Illinois Supreme Court
Now if they would like to try with SCOTUS with justice Kavanuagh lets go
Comment by Todd Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 1:38 pm
This suit stands very, very little chance of going anywhere for a number of legal reasons; plaintiffs lack Article III standing to sue; no active case or controversy for the court to decide (because trying to use the ADA to force Illinois to rewrite gun laws is far outside the scope of the ADA, also a Federal court cannot directly enforce a State law). Their lawyer should be sanctioned for filing a frivolous suit.
Comment by revvedup Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 2:55 pm
“If you have a loaded gun on your person without an FOID card, that’s already a felony in Illinois.” No, it’s a misdemeanor and you are back on the streets in hours.
Comment by striketoo Friday, Oct 5, 18 @ 3:06 pm