An Illinois judge ruled that a contentious lawsuit against Smith & Wesson may proceed, despite federal law prohibiting such frivolous legal actions against the weapons industry.

This brought an immediate and sharp rebuke from the Second Amendment Foundation, which blasted the decision as directly endangering constitutional rights.

The horrific scenario the case is based on unfolded on Independence Day in 2022 at a July 4th parade in Highland Park. Robert Crimo III opened fire and killed seven celebrants while injuring dozens more in a heinous criminal act to which he later pled guilty.

Charges were also brought against his father, who also pled guilty to seven felony counts of reckless conduct for his role in obtaining a gun license for his son.

Plaintiffs then turned their attention to the weapons industry and filed suit against manufacturer Smith & Wesson. The gunmaker built the rifle used in the attack, and the litigants are attempting to establish guilt in the way the company’s products were marketed.

The problem is—or should be—the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA).

Two decades ago, Washington lawmakers moved to head off a flurry of questionable attacks on gun manufacturers and retailers that were nothing more than lawfare intended to run them into the ground. The result was the powerful PLCAA.

Critics claim that it provides blanket protection for all wrongdoings committed by the industry, but that is far from the truth. The federal law instead shields constitutionally protected enterprises from spurious attacks meant to bankrupt essential businesses.

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) blasted the decision as directly countering clearly defined federal law. SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said that lawmakers were precise in their intention to protect the weapons industry from weaponization of the legal system.

“This is precisely the type of junk lawsuit that Congress sought to prevent with the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act,” Gottlieb asserted. “Smith & Wesson is no more responsible for the Highland Park shooting than a car manufacturer would be for a drunk driver who kills someone in a crash.”

SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut explained that the facts exonerate the company of any wrongdoing.

“Smith & Wesson, like any number of other manufacturers in other industries, had absolutely no control over the criminal misuse of their product,” Kraut declared. “Allowing these types of lawsuits to proceed only invites further litigation against firearms manufacturers to drive them out of business through lawfare. While such an end result may be the desired effect by the anti-gun crowd, it would be detrimental to the exercise of Second Amendment rights and also national defense.”

The plaintiffs returned to arguments made over two decades ago by cities claiming that the gun industry targeted teens in their marketing. Those plaintiffs attempted to tie weapons manufacturers to “violations” of consumer protection laws.

Of course, the goal is eradicating Second Amendment-related businesses entirely.

Gottlieb noted that “the plaintiffs have been working with billionaire Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown for Gun Safety, which has previously supported lawsuits in an attempt to bankrupt the firearms industry, thus depriving consumers from purchasing firearms and exercising their rights under the Second Amendment.”

The Highland Park tragedy is the sole responsibility of the guilty parties, and taking aim at lawful businesses that have no control over criminal acts committed by individuals is misguided at best—and illegal.

Anti-gunners want nothing more than to attach liability to these manufacturers, no matter the facts of the case. With possibly billions in damages awarded by an emotional jury, venerable institutions would quickly be driven into the ground. 

That is precisely why the PLCAA exists and why the Illinois lawsuit should not proceed.

The Anti Anti-2A Social Club is more than a name—it’s a stand against misinformation, double standards, and the relentless attacks on our rights. It’s for those who are done being quiet and ready to push back against a narrative that seeks to misrepresent and marginalize us.

They say the first step to solving a problem is admitting there is one. But here’s the thing: we’re not trying to “solve” anything. We’re here to embrace our rights, to stand firm, and to protect what’s ours.

This isn’t just another t-shirt; it’s a symbol of defiance and a call to action for everyone who refuses to be silenced. The Anti Anti-2A Social Club T-shirts, hats, and drinkware represent a movement that knows our rights are non-negotiable and proudly defends them.

So click the link below and wear it with pride. Because being part of the Anti Anti-2A Social Club isn’t just a choice—it’s a badge of honor.