What do you think would happen if about 10-20 thousand gun owners file small claims civil suits against HCI over a 2-3 month period. The Mayors of certain cities are trying this bastardized approach in the legal system. It would cost each of us about $35-$150, depending on where you live. The suits could be based on HCI's attemps to circumvent our 2nd amentment rights. No merit, I know, but suits don't have to have merit unless you expect to win them, only opportunity. Few or none would probably bear fruit, but it would sure drive HCI nuts. They could not possibly cover all of the suits and some default judgements could result. Let's drain off some of their legal funds for awhile. I have gone after business in small claims for wrongs they have done me and have been pretty successful. It's basically simple; find out who their registered agent is, fill out a citation, pay the fee for filing and pay the fee to have it served in their state to their agent. If a group got together they could have all of the citations served over several days. This would really crank HCI up. Usually they will have 30 days to reply to the suit or you can set the court date yourself. If if they do reply a court date is set anyway, but you don't get to choose it. If they don't show up but you do, you receive a default judgement against them which you can then have enforced. The maximum amount allowed in small claims, in most places, ranges from $2,000 to $5,000. What do you say? This could be organized through a web page to generate interest and accumulate participants. I think this approach would put a kink in HCI's operations much more that a class action suit of the same type. I would like to hear everyones' thoughts on this offensive idea.
Turning the tables on HCI
- Thread starter TEX
- Start date
Tex..
That idea is vile, offensive nasty. I like it!
I have suggested a similar action against the mayors and City Councils of said cities instituting these suits, including naming the politicians personally. Making it personal could establish the precedent that politicians may be held legally and personally responsible for their actions while in office.
The only point I think that is weak in your suggestion (even though I agree that they are attempting to destroy the 2nd) are the "charges" you raise. Technically, HCI is a private organization and merely exercising 1st Amendment rights. Technically, they could rest on that, just as the Nazis, KKK, etc have successfully defended themselves.
Understand that I am not saying your idea has no merit, and it is great for nuisance value...I'd just like a charge or accusation that would require their lawyers to do some serious work to really run up the billable hours.
Example, if it could be shown that certain politicians are members or have a more than passing relationship with HCI, perhaps it could be charged that they have favored influence. And that politicians give them and/or their agenda favored status. Something along those lines, wherein private citizens start filling up the legal system and politicians see that it could spill over onto them.
------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
That idea is vile, offensive nasty. I like it!
I have suggested a similar action against the mayors and City Councils of said cities instituting these suits, including naming the politicians personally. Making it personal could establish the precedent that politicians may be held legally and personally responsible for their actions while in office.
The only point I think that is weak in your suggestion (even though I agree that they are attempting to destroy the 2nd) are the "charges" you raise. Technically, HCI is a private organization and merely exercising 1st Amendment rights. Technically, they could rest on that, just as the Nazis, KKK, etc have successfully defended themselves.
Understand that I am not saying your idea has no merit, and it is great for nuisance value...I'd just like a charge or accusation that would require their lawyers to do some serious work to really run up the billable hours.
Example, if it could be shown that certain politicians are members or have a more than passing relationship with HCI, perhaps it could be charged that they have favored influence. And that politicians give them and/or their agenda favored status. Something along those lines, wherein private citizens start filling up the legal system and politicians see that it could spill over onto them.
------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Jeff-
Find us a knowledgeable and friendly attorney to give us some advice on how we take this forward in a do-it-yourself manner, at a discounted fee, and I think we can find a few bucks in the TFL Slush Fund to pay for his time. Personally, I'd prefer DC's plan, if a few thousand of us can do it individually.
Like all the rest, I spend too much time belly-achin' and writing letters. It's time to become a bit more offensive.
This could be more fun than the Alice's Restaurant Massacree in Three Part Harmony. We get Howard Stern to plug us and it could become a "movement"!
Rich
Find us a knowledgeable and friendly attorney to give us some advice on how we take this forward in a do-it-yourself manner, at a discounted fee, and I think we can find a few bucks in the TFL Slush Fund to pay for his time. Personally, I'd prefer DC's plan, if a few thousand of us can do it individually.
Like all the rest, I spend too much time belly-achin' and writing letters. It's time to become a bit more offensive.
This could be more fun than the Alice's Restaurant Massacree in Three Part Harmony. We get Howard Stern to plug us and it could become a "movement"!
Rich
Rob Pincus
New member
I'm all for a concerted effort against HCI. Eat some of their funds.
I wouldn't attack local politicians though or LE, that's just me, maybe.
I think that the "How-to" is a great first step. What would be even better is to find a lawyer that says "Fill out this form and send me $XX and I'll sue HCI for you." If that was the case and the "$XX" waws within reason, I'll reckon we could get a lot of people to join in. Not being a lawyer, I don't know exactly how that could work. Does the lawyer have to be in the same state as HCI? or the person doing the suing? does it matter?
I wouldn't attack local politicians though or LE, that's just me, maybe.
I think that the "How-to" is a great first step. What would be even better is to find a lawyer that says "Fill out this form and send me $XX and I'll sue HCI for you." If that was the case and the "$XX" waws within reason, I'll reckon we could get a lot of people to join in. Not being a lawyer, I don't know exactly how that could work. Does the lawyer have to be in the same state as HCI? or the person doing the suing? does it matter?
Rob - I'm all for filing suit against local politicians, including the sheriff. If they're not part of the solution, they're part of the problem.
I've e-mailed the National Rifle Association Grassroots office, the Second Amendment Foundation (they've already got some suits in progress against mayors of cities that are filing suit against gun manufacturers), the Gun Owners of America, and the Independence Institute. I need to know how to contact the industry group (I forgot what it's called!) that represents the manufacturers - the Shooting Sports Foundation or something.
I'll post back with info as soon as I get it.
I've e-mailed the National Rifle Association Grassroots office, the Second Amendment Foundation (they've already got some suits in progress against mayors of cities that are filing suit against gun manufacturers), the Gun Owners of America, and the Independence Institute. I need to know how to contact the industry group (I forgot what it's called!) that represents the manufacturers - the Shooting Sports Foundation or something.
I'll post back with info as soon as I get it.
Rob Pincus
New member
www.nssf.org
National Shooting Sports Foundation
Also SAMMI (Sporting Ammunition Manufacturers M-Something I-something .. or something like that.. the Ammo group....is run by the same people.)
------------------
-Essayons
[This message has been edited by Rob (edited 01-10-99).]
National Shooting Sports Foundation
Also SAMMI (Sporting Ammunition Manufacturers M-Something I-something .. or something like that.. the Ammo group....is run by the same people.)
------------------
-Essayons
[This message has been edited by Rob (edited 01-10-99).]
Jeff Thomas
New member
This is an excellent idea, and I concur with Rich that it will be smart to get at least some basic legal advice. However, I stongly suspect NRA or another group already have scoped this out, so perhaps your contacts will yield that info. [Cautionary note - some states, and CA comes to mind, have sanctions for 'frivolous' lawsuits ('vexatious ligigants', I believe they call 'em), so know your ground.]
The only way I wouldn't sue a local politician is if they have NOT signed on to this. In Arizona, to my knowledge, none of our cities have joined the fray. Nevertheless, I would be willing to throw some money in the ring to assist, and I am serious about that - TFL, Rich et al should not be out $$ for this when there are so many of us.
Hopefully we could create a 'kit' for members to use as they pursue this. I know the National Organization of Women's web site had a good reference for members to use in their attempt to help Bill avoid impeachment. 'Course, it was on the 'net, and I used it to encourage Congress to <u>support impeachment</u> ... but I made sure I emailed NOW to thank them for the resource.
Funny thing, but I never heard back from those kind ladies ...
The only way I wouldn't sue a local politician is if they have NOT signed on to this. In Arizona, to my knowledge, none of our cities have joined the fray. Nevertheless, I would be willing to throw some money in the ring to assist, and I am serious about that - TFL, Rich et al should not be out $$ for this when there are so many of us.
Hopefully we could create a 'kit' for members to use as they pursue this. I know the National Organization of Women's web site had a good reference for members to use in their attempt to help Bill avoid impeachment. 'Course, it was on the 'net, and I used it to encourage Congress to <u>support impeachment</u> ... but I made sure I emailed NOW to thank them for the resource.
Funny thing, but I never heard back from those kind ladies ...
Rich Lucibella
Staff
Here's the skinny from the world's greatest litigator (mine). A product of survivors of Hitler's Camps (one at Aushwitz), Norman should have been a prize fighter or military tactician. In short, he's brilliant, resourceful and merciless...kinda like DC 
.
It seems that govt officials are immune from suit unless their actions arise from their desire to control a private entity. This sounds good...it's not; read on. What this means is that they may be sued on very specific and technically defined issues such as their management of a sewer treatment plant or a cable contract.
There was a "private" component in the tobacco suit which left them, initially, vulnerable. This had to do with the complaints being crafted in such a manner to seek redress for lost worker productivity and the like. The officials quickly resolved this issue by focusing on strict public health issues and were thus covered by immunity provisions.
In short, Norman's first impression is that it would be difficult to separate the officials from the immunity umbrella for actions taken to "reduce crime". A 1,000 actions by citizens to argue they were not acting in the public interest would likely be rolled into one....hopefully the gun lobby will do this.
The Ray of Hope
Not willing to be defeated so easily, my guy suggests a recall petition. This is relatively inexpensive and usually will include a large number of officials, such that even those who don't go along with the suit can be caught in the net of the City's actions as a whole. One can pick and choose which officials to involve.
The result is that the officials must petition the Court to set aside the recall and it is at that time that the taxpayers can be heard, relatively cheaply, but not cheaply enough for any normal individual to bear the financial burden.
The key here is to identify the right city where a recall petition may be worked up easily and a large enough number of constituents be depended upon to support the fight in the press and at the polls. Win once; export it to the other munipalities involved and you'll see these cowards wither in their attempts to gain national press thru govt extortion.
Rich
.It seems that govt officials are immune from suit unless their actions arise from their desire to control a private entity. This sounds good...it's not; read on. What this means is that they may be sued on very specific and technically defined issues such as their management of a sewer treatment plant or a cable contract.
There was a "private" component in the tobacco suit which left them, initially, vulnerable. This had to do with the complaints being crafted in such a manner to seek redress for lost worker productivity and the like. The officials quickly resolved this issue by focusing on strict public health issues and were thus covered by immunity provisions.
In short, Norman's first impression is that it would be difficult to separate the officials from the immunity umbrella for actions taken to "reduce crime". A 1,000 actions by citizens to argue they were not acting in the public interest would likely be rolled into one....hopefully the gun lobby will do this.
The Ray of Hope
Not willing to be defeated so easily, my guy suggests a recall petition. This is relatively inexpensive and usually will include a large number of officials, such that even those who don't go along with the suit can be caught in the net of the City's actions as a whole. One can pick and choose which officials to involve.
The result is that the officials must petition the Court to set aside the recall and it is at that time that the taxpayers can be heard, relatively cheaply, but not cheaply enough for any normal individual to bear the financial burden.
The key here is to identify the right city where a recall petition may be worked up easily and a large enough number of constituents be depended upon to support the fight in the press and at the polls. Win once; export it to the other munipalities involved and you'll see these cowards wither in their attempts to gain national press thru govt extortion.
Rich
Jeff Thomas
New member
Rich - your comments focused upon legal actions undertaken against the politicians themselves. The recall idea sounds fine, and my limited experience would suggest New Orleans as a more likely success than, say, Chicago.
Is there any logic for suits directly against the cities involved? I suspect that could get pretty expensive, and I honestly doubt Small Claims Courts would accept any jusisdiction for such a suit.
This issue seems so egregious that common sense tells me there must be some way to 'return the favor'.
Is there any logic for suits directly against the cities involved? I suspect that could get pretty expensive, and I honestly doubt Small Claims Courts would accept any jusisdiction for such a suit.
This issue seems so egregious that common sense tells me there must be some way to 'return the favor'.
Unfortunately, its looking like all we're really able to do is help contribute to the big suits currently going on. Rich's litigator appears to be correct - most politico's cannot be held responsible for their actions!
I'm giving some extra $$$ to the Second Amendment Foundation - see http://WWW.SAF.ORG/pub/rkba/press-releases/Mayors1.html , and the NRA for their suit against the FBI.
Feeling downtrodden...
I'm giving some extra $$$ to the Second Amendment Foundation - see http://WWW.SAF.ORG/pub/rkba/press-releases/Mayors1.html , and the NRA for their suit against the FBI.
Feeling downtrodden...
Great replies Guys, but the iead would be like HCI (not immune protected government types) was the fire department and a bunch of fire bugs (Us gun owners) started ten thousand fires across the country AT THE SAME TIME! The fire department (HCI) could never cover them all quickly enough to prevent damage. If one lawyer files one suit representing a bunch of folks, HCI lawyers only have to show up once and in only one place. The more remote the county, the better and the worse the weather and the closer to a major holiday the court date is set, the better! GET IT! It is true that the suits would probably be pure Bull Crap and if met face on by an HCI lawyer would wilt to nothing, but that's not the point. What I am talking abouit here is fighting BS with our own variety of BS. Maybe even suing individuals that run HCI. HCI might not be willing to lend their lawyers to them. As far as a do-it-yourself kit, there are numerous books available, even at libraries, that take you step by step on how to file a small claims case. The court where you would file often has all of the information you need. I think this will work if it is a organized, but individual effort is made. If we start planning now, we could arrange to hit them in the dead of winter around Christmas of 1999. I really think it will take this long to get enough people and get the game plan down. It was not a frivilous suggestion. I believe in it and think it will cause havoc and get media attention. Our bitching, moaning and preaching to the choir is getting us NO WHERE! We must be pro-active and very, very aggressive.
Jeff...
My thoughts about sueing the cities is as follows: Say you are a citizen of New Orleans.
As a taxpayer I'd think you would have grounds to sue because the City suit against the GMs cost money, are by admission "nuisance" and by admission not expected to be won, just to make the GM's spend money. OK, so...you Jeff Citizen pay your taxes and expect certain services...good roads, clean streets, adequate LE. Was there a referendum vote authorizing the city to spend your taxes on nuisance suits? Is there any precedents allowing your city to waste money on nuisance suits? Are taxes going to be raised to cover basic services because some money was spent on these lawsuits? That is my drift...fiscal irresponsibility, harassment/interference of commerce, abuse of power, etc.
Tex....
I see your point and what the hell, why not?!
Your approach doesn't preclude other actions and upon pondering I like it...it is nasty, petty, vile and offensive. In fact, if the word is spread, other anti-gun organizations could be wounded too...."Death by a Thousand Cuts". I agree, we do some research on how to and post our thoughts , coordinate and drop the honey truck on them in one fell swoop. I live in a rural area, so that is a plus as you point out. OK I'm in.
------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"
My thoughts about sueing the cities is as follows: Say you are a citizen of New Orleans.
As a taxpayer I'd think you would have grounds to sue because the City suit against the GMs cost money, are by admission "nuisance" and by admission not expected to be won, just to make the GM's spend money. OK, so...you Jeff Citizen pay your taxes and expect certain services...good roads, clean streets, adequate LE. Was there a referendum vote authorizing the city to spend your taxes on nuisance suits? Is there any precedents allowing your city to waste money on nuisance suits? Are taxes going to be raised to cover basic services because some money was spent on these lawsuits? That is my drift...fiscal irresponsibility, harassment/interference of commerce, abuse of power, etc.
Tex....
I see your point and what the hell, why not?!
Your approach doesn't preclude other actions and upon pondering I like it...it is nasty, petty, vile and offensive. In fact, if the word is spread, other anti-gun organizations could be wounded too...."Death by a Thousand Cuts". I agree, we do some research on how to and post our thoughts , coordinate and drop the honey truck on them in one fell swoop. I live in a rural area, so that is a plus as you point out. OK I'm in.
------------------
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"