Mexico, drowning in American guns, is suing gun manufacturers

In a groundbreaking lawsuit, the Mexican government filed suit against eight American gun manufacturers, accusing them of being "deliberate and willing participants [in the killing and maiming of Mexicans], [and] reaping profits from the criminal market they knowingly supply." Mexico v. Smith & Wesson, et al., 1:21-cv-11269-FDS (D. Mass., filed Aug. 4, 2021). In the complaint, the Mexican government paints a devastating picture of rampant violence, fueled by open and obvious patterns of trafficking that gun manufacturers have chosen to ignore, in order to benefit from more than $170 million in sales each year.

As these weapons flow across our southern border, the gun industry claims that assault weapons are Americans' favorite self-defense weapon. Meanwhile, for years, that same gun industry has systematically barred the collection of reliable data about private gun sales and ownership. See 18 U.S.C Section 926, All the while, the gun industry wields manufacturing and import data to support arguments about the ubiquity of assault weapons.

The National Shooting Sports Foundation has claimed that one in every five firearms purchased in this country is an AR-style assault rifle. From that, the association extrapolates that these are the most popular rifle among Americans, fondly calling them "America's rifle."

The NSSF, and others who cite this data, fail to account for how many of the assault weapons purchased in the United States end up across the border -- often converted into fully automatic weapons used to terrorize communities. Without data indicating how many of these firearms are trafficked across the border or sold in bulk to the military, law enforcement, or major firearm collectors, there is no reliable way to understand how many law-abiding Americans own assault weapons or whether they own them specifically for self-defense.

For decades, the gun industry has sought to place itself outside the reach of the law. In the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, which was passed in 2005, gun manufacturers got a statutory shield to hide behind that has allowed them to avoid accountability for reckless conduct.

Mexico's lawsuit has shed light on yet another reckless gun industry practice: inflating the popularity of the AR-15 to cover up their own responsibility for exporting violence and death.

Assault weapons are weapons of war that are poorly suited to civilian self-defense, and marketing them as such is disingenuous. They don't just appear more deadly than other firearms, they actually are more deadly: The wounds caused by an assault weapon are considerably more severe than those caused by other firearms. It is precisely their lethality that makes them so appealing for organized crime.

Assault weapons have devastating consequences for the residents of both Mexico and the United States. In the U.S., assault weapons are the weapon of choice for mass shooters and are the firearm most likely to be purchased by people with criminal histories. In Mexico, these weapons can be (and are) easily converted into fully-automatic weapons and are used by the drug cartels to terrorize the Mexican people.

As Mexico's lawsuit points out, guns manufactured in the U.S. are more likely to be used to murder a Mexican citizen than an American citizen -- despite the fact that Mexico has only 40% of the United States' population and just one gun store.

In its challenges to assault weapons regulations, the gun lobby has twisted its extrapolated data to convince courts that the popularity of these weapons grant them special Second Amendment protection. At least one extremist court has been convinced by this argument. Miller et al. v. Becerra et al., 3:19-CV-1537 (S.D. Cal., filed Aug. 15, 2019). While others have acknowledged that -- even assuming the gun lobby's extrapolations are reliable -- a weapon's popularity today has little to do with the scope of a constitutional right established in the 18th century.

Americans across the political spectrum strongly support an assault weapons ban, but the gun lobby has so far successfully prevented it. Concerned for its bottom line above all else, the gun industry has also pointed to even the suggestion of regulations on assault weapons as a reason to attempt to derail confirmation of a 25-year ATF veteran's nomination for ATF director.

Firearms trafficking is one of many harms caused by the gun industry's refusal to take even modest measures to protect lives. And more guns in Mexico is obviously not the solution to this problem. Before anything else, we need data -- good, complete data -- so that we can understand how Americans are buying, using, and trafficking firearms, and that means changing federal law on the collection of firearm data.

We also need more lawsuits like Mexico's. Litigation has the power to incentivize responsible behavior, creating accountability for actions that unreasonably put people in harm's way.

We also need to change laws that protect the gun manufacturers from liability. Although some litigation may succeed despite firearm-specific immunity laws, these immunity laws disrupt the balance between profits and safe practices that litigation can force upon corporations, and should be repealed.

In fact, as long as federal immunity laws stand, the gun industry will continue to act with impunity and we all will suffer the consequences.