Armed & Fabulous With Lauren Liberty Ep. 3 - Attorney Emma Wittmann
April 22, 2024
In this episode of Armed and Fabulous, civil paralegal Lauren Liberty sits down with criminal defense attorney Emma Wittmann to discuss the legal complexities surrounding gun ownership, self-defense rights, and the legal battle between the City of Chicago and firearm manufacturer Glock. Attorney Wittmann shares her journey in law and The Attorneys For Freedom Law Firm’s (AFF) approach to constitutional advocacy.
The Human Element Behind Rights Restoration
Attorney Wittmann began her legal career by focusing on post-conviction relief, assisting individuals in restoring their civil rights, particularly the right to carry firearms. This process is complex and often involves filing petitions with the court under A.R.S. § 13-906 and A.R.S. § 13-910 in Arizona, usually after a prior felony conviction has been overturned.
“A lot of people grew up… hunting, they enjoyed target shooting… and because of potentially a single incident that made them a felon, they lost those rights.”
-Attorney Emma Wittmann
Attorney Wittmann stresses that for many, restoring rights is about more than just firearms – it’s about dignity, family traditions, and safety. The process also acts as a formal acknowledgment by the court that the petitioner has been rehabilitated and does not pose a public threat.
Chicago Versus Glock
Both Ms. Liberty and Attorney Wittmann addressed the City of Chicago’s lawsuit against Glock, alleging that its pistols can be too easily converted into fully automatic weapons using a “Glock switch.” This switch, often manufactured illegally through 3D printing or imported from overseas, enables a semi-automatic handgun to fire in automatic mode. This classification makes it a machine gun under the National Firearms Act (NFA) and Gun Control Act (GCA). Chicago is seeking to ban sales of Glock firearms within the city, claiming the manufacturer should redesign their products to prevent tampering by criminals.
“They’re essentially going after the wrong guy… Glock is manufacturing a product that fits within the bounds of what it’s supposed to be making.”
-Attorney Emma Wittmann
The lawsuit does not adequately address the role of criminal possession or the black-market production of conversion devices but targets the lawful manufacturer. This raises concerns about how product liability law applies in cases of criminal misuse – and whether cities can impose civil penalties on manufacturers for third-party criminal acts.
Attorney Wittmann emphasizes that the lawsuit aims for a municipal cost recovery fund, which could require Glock to cover all investigation costs related to modified Glocks. She argues this creates a huge financial strain that effectively punishes businesses to serve a political purpose.
A Slippery Slope of Civil Liberty Erosion
The concern is that if this legal theory is upheld, it could establish dangerous precedent. It could lead to retroactive enforcement against current Glock owners and open the door to future litigation targeting other firearm manufacturers under similarly tenuous grounds.
“We have to be careful because the people that are essentially leading to this suit… those that have used it, modified it – who probably were prohibited possessors to begin with – are going to risk the rights of people who are legal, responsible firearm owners.”
-Attorney Emma Wittmann
The main problem comes from trying to expand the public nuisance doctrine and enforce strict liability under civil law. This approach aims to reshape the private market through lawsuits instead of laws. It mirrors recent federal regulatory overreach, like the ATF’s changing rules on bump stocks, pistol braces, and forced reset triggers. These rules were made without Congress’s approval and have criminalized actions that used to be legal.
Conclusion
Ms. Liberty and Attorney Wittmann agree that gun rights are no longer just about the Second Amendment – they serve as a litmus test for broader constitutional protections. Whether it’s the right to self-defense, the fairness of post-conviction relief, or the scope of civil litigation, these legal battles influence not only public policy but also individual lives.
Though the Glock case centered on one manufacturer, it has nationwide implications. If courts accept civil liability for third-party criminal modifications, it could alter manufacturers’ responsibilities and unfairly punish law-abiding citizens for criminals’ actions.
If you’re facing criminal charges, don’t go through the system alone. Find experienced attorneys who are ready to fight for your future, like the attorneys at AFF. Want to learn more about our Attorneys On Retainer Program and how we offer legal defense, financial support, and peace of mind? Please call 866-404-5112 or email us.
Related Content
