Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Smith & Wesson Brands v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2025 16:30:29 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <vqcij5$31qnb$2@dont-email.me>
References: <vqch2l$31qnb$1@dont-email.me> <vqchip$cke$1@reader1.panix.com>
Injection-Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2025 17:30:29 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="00e663c037d2936c695305e5a3249647";
	logging-data="3205867"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/T1EvuuB95lzjqCye0szQ2FXF0HBJo2hI="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Bnc29CfII/VEeYrBRQFaRGYKdy0=
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Bytes: 1878

danny burstein <dannyb@panix.com> wrote:
>Adam H. Kerman <ahk@chinet.com> writes:

>[snip]

>>The second problem with the lawsuit is Mexico's allegation of willful
>>misconduct in distribution, that S&W had knowledge of which avenues of
>>distribution were leading to illegal export.

>>The problem here seems to be lack of evidence. Forgive me, but Mexico
>>never found the "smoking gun" document as arms manufacturers keep
>>themselves well insulated from ultimate users of their products.

>per the summary I heard on, maybe NPR?, Mexico is alleging
>the gun manufacturers kept selling through dealers that
>had numerous ATF and other citations against them.

>(which brings up that other whole issue).

>We'll see...

In the supply chain, intent may be provable against the straw buyer. For
everyone else in the supply chain, it's a wink and a nod.

Prove a different crime that doesn't require proving intent to aid and
abet crimes committed by cartels.