Crack In the Gun Wall

Two things are clear in Smith & Wesson’s agreement last Friday to a wide array of handgun restrictions. The action by one of the nation’s oldest and largest handgun makers should be broadly applauded and quickly emulated. But, make no mistake, it was bottom-line fears stemming from pending lawsuits--not a change of heart--that led the company to take this step. Lawsuits that pose the threat of millions of dollars in liability have a way of getting businesses to act responsibly, something the current well-bought Congress apparently can’t do.

In coming months, Smith & Wesson will begin to adopt dozens of changes in the way it manufactures, markets and sells handguns, all aimed at keeping guns out of the hands of children and criminals. Many of these reforms are identical to those President Clinton tried and failed to get Congress to mandate.

For instance, Smith & Wesson pledged to put trigger locks on all its handguns, make gun grips too large and triggers too powerful for young children to handle, and to stop doing business with gun show dealers who do not conduct criminal background checks. The company also pledged to imprint a hidden second serial number on its guns to deter theft. Most of these steps can help suppress gun violence, but some are more symbol than substance. For instance, Smith & Wesson has no authority to require its dealers to conduct background checks at gun shows. Yet the company’s decision to crack the industry’s stone wall of opposition to any new safety measures is clearly a major development, and Smith & Wesson management deserves credit.

But note that the agreement will excuse the company from litigation that ultimately could have led to its bankruptcy. Lawsuits filed against a number of gun makers by the federal government and more than a dozen cities, including Los Angeles, seek to hold firearms companies responsible for the carnage their weapons cause.

The plaintiffs’ legal claims were initially dismissed as so fantastical that no jury would ever buy them. Yet each school shooting, each workplace massacre and each hostage drama--along with recent outrageous claims by the National Rifle Assn. that Clinton is somehow responsible for continuing gun violence--made that prediction much shakier. Smith & Wesson, with an estimated 19% market share of the 2.5 million handguns sold nationally each year, wisely decided not to roll the dice at trial or with a costly monetary settlement. Other gun makers immediately--and predictably--denounced the company’s decision.

The mounting litigation has made the industry the newest champions of tort reform for all the wrong reasons, seeking harsh legislative limits on the right to sue. In this respect, the gun manufacturers join such corporate rogues as tobacco companies, asbestos manufacturers and some pharmaceutical firms, each, in its time, declaring itself blameless for the harm its products caused. Skyrocketing legal bills, multimillion-dollar jury verdicts and the bankruptcies of venerable companies have rendered those declarations as hollow as they were expensive. The firearms industry would be wise to take note.