Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Amicus briefs in Kachalsky | Main | Justice Scalia predicts more 2A cases coming »

Jaimie Zapata's survivors sue over Fast and Furious

Posted by David Hardy · 14 February 2013 12:47 PM

Zapata was the ICE agent who was murdered in Mexico by cartel killers using Fast & Furious guns. David Codrea reports on the lawsuit, and links to a copy of the complaint. Some quick observations:

1) All three rifles found at the scene appear to have been Fast and Furious guns. Of the six guns found on the killers when they were arrested, one traced to Fast and Furious.

2) There are references to guns being given to ATF "CIs" -- "cooperating individual" or "confidential informant," meaning informants. This suggests that letting cartel straw men buy guns wasn't enough, ATF's own informants were given guns to pass on to the cartels.

3) ATF policy is that a written report must be filed within five days of an event, but in this case some were not filed until more than three months passed.

4) I think the Federal Tort Claims Act claims are going to be very hard for the government to defend. The usual defense is the "discretionary function exception," which says the government does not consent to be sued over discretionary functions, a term the Supreme Court construed to mean actions where the decisionmaker had discretion to act, in the sense of not having been forbidden to do so by a superior. Here, the decision(s) to run guns to the cartels didn't just violate regulations or policies, they violated multiple sections of the Gun Control Act and of various arms export statutes. I don't think an agency supervisor will be able to claim he had discretion to do what Congress had specifically outlawed.

· BATFE

2 Comments | Leave a comment

Dave D. | February 14, 2013 4:23 PM | Reply

...Discovery and interrogatories should be interesting. They can't all lie in the same way. Somebody is gonna screw it up.

Veracitor | February 14, 2013 6:55 PM | Reply

No doubt the government will assert the "state secrets" privilege over all evidence in the case, then request dismissal on the grounds that the case cannot be tried without evidence.

Leave a comment