USA - Moving Forward (DDLA)

[Police Officer]

The Drug Dealer Liability Act: An Idea Whose Time Has Come (as quoted)

If you are a citizen of one of the 39 states that have not yet passed the Drug Dealer Liability Act (DDLA), you can have a significant impact by helping to fill a gapping hole in our civil justice system. Let me explain.

Today, under existing law in 39 states, it is not clear that families who lose a child to drugs can compel dealers in their community to pay for the injuries they cause. This is so, even though in those states a producer of other products that injure a consumer can be liable for injuries resulting from the use of those products. The DDLA fills the gap by making drug dealers liable under civil law for the injuries to the families of drug users.

Michigan, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Illinois, Hawaii, California, South Dakota, Utah, Georgia, Indiana and Louisiana have passed the Model Drug Dealer Liability Act. The first lawsuit under the Act resulted in a judgment of $1 million against two Detroit drug dealers in favor of a drug baby. The proceeds were for the baby's siblings. You see, the baby was not only born addicted to cocaine, but at age two was bludgeoned to death. Her drug-using mother was charged with murdering the baby. In Utah, a wife sued her husband's drug dealer for the devastating impact that her husband's drug addiction had on her family. That case settled just before trial.

The DDLA is a products liability act for illegal drugs. It establishes a form of “market liability” so that the individual plaintiff need not prove a particular defendant's illegal drugs were distributed to him or her, a near impossible task. Instead, the plaintiff must prove that the defendant was distributing illegal drugs in the community at the time of his or her exposure and injury by that dealer's type of drug.

Current federal and state drug forfeiture laws require that money seized, even from convicted drug dealers, be returned to them, unless it is directly connected to their drug crimes. The DDLA makes all of a dealer's assets recoverable to pay for medical treatment and injuries caused by illegal drugs in the dealer's community. THE DDLA permits parents of children in drug treatment, state and county public agencies that pay for drug treatment and/or illegal drug related medical care, hospitals caring for drug babies, and others who are financially injured because of illegal drugs to collect damages.

In the Michigan case, the Detroit Sheriff's Office also won a judgment of over $7 million for its expenses in addressing drug activity in Detroit, recovering any assets in the hands of drug dealers who had distributed drugs in Detroit communities. Without the DDLA it would be difficult, if not impossible, for such recovery to be obtained.

Current laws clearly permit those negligently injured and requiring medical treatment in virtually every other aspect of our lives to recover from the negligent party. However, in the states that have not yet passed the DDLA, laws do not provide for compensation from those who cause injury by intentionally distributing illegal drugs.

Established civil law principles allow civil recovery from manufacturers of hazardous materials for injury caused by such materials that effect health, even where a particular plaintiff cannot determine which manufacturer manufactured the particular product that caused him or her injury. This is called “market liability.” Yet, except for the states that have passed the MODEL DDLA, existing law does not now clearly establish such recovery for injuries caused by hazardous illegal drugs. The DDLA would change this legal anomaly by imposing liability, including “market liability,” on dealers of illegal drugs.

When the Model Act was drafted, it was subject to review and comment nationally by more than 50 members of the legal, law enforcement, drug prevention, civil rights, business, and other communities. It has now been closely examined by the legislative process in the 11 states that have enacted it. The American Legislative Exchange Council has adopted the Act as its model legislation. In addition, the Model Act is now before a number of other legislatures and is receiving growing interest in still other states.

Once enacted throughout the United States, every dealer would know that law enforcement and criminal prosecution is only part of their problem. Injured parents and families will have the tools to make dealers with identifiable assets pay everything they own for the injury they cause, and civil justice will then be more complete.

[Veteran Joker]

Great! Drug dealers money is good when the state wants it, otherwise they're evil.

Proposition: Legalise all psychedelics, make current physically addictive drugs available on prescription, including sterile needles for dosing. The caveat to this would be anyone on prescription drugs such as methampthetamine, (crack) cocaine and heroin would also be compelled to go on ibogaine or analogous psychedelic to stop the bodies craving for the physically addictive substance.

With all drugs legal and non prosecutable, government regulated manufacturers could be established to ensure consistent, high quality, and instead of drug users being a burden upon the state and demonised, would instead be another source of tax, much like drunks and tobacco addicts. If the war on terrorism is ever going to be effective, then funding for the drug barons needs to be cut, by taking all drugs out of the black market.

[Paracelsus]

If the "market liability" for drug dealers will be introduced, it would be fair if they could do the same things that manufaturers of legal products do.

Soon we'll see dealers labeling drugs with "NOT FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION". Or at least providing info on safe use, how much, how often, who should not use, do not use with whatever, and "USE OF THIS PRODUCT OTHERWISE THAN DIRECTED IS ABUSE AND WE ARE NOT TO BE HELD LIABLE FOR ABUSE."

This is just plain stupid...

[bcubed]

WTF ever happened to personal responsibility?

If someone dies due to, say, an unethical dealer putting strychnine in his smack, then yes, there's a liability. Otherwise, it's the same "I can't be held responsible for my own actions" nonsense that they're trying to tie to tobacco, guns, and booze.

Personal parallel: if my local bartender gave me methylated spirits to drink, and I go blind, I ought to be able to sue. But if (when?) I drink myself to death, I'd hate for my heirs to sue a bartender for giving me what I wanted.

Actually, though, I'm not sure this is so bad, on net. If I understand correctly, basically some of the $$ from civil forfeiture will go to "victims" as opposed to John Law, possibly dirving down the incentive--and conflict of interest--present in current C.F. law.

Anyways, any dealer with a brain knows how to deal with this: lease your car, rent your house, and keep your real money offshore.

[darawk]

This is fucking retarded. The only reason these products are causing this much harm is BECAUSE they're illegal. And anyway, you can't sue the manufacturers of alcohol because you get addicted to that. This is just beyond stupid.

[stoneinfocus]

Absolutely, first of, how can a baby be addicted to cocaine, since cocaine doesn´t cuase any physical addiction (what about nearly all south-americans, with their "cocaine-addicted" babys) -and what´s that: "I´m so sorry, that I´ve klled my baby, it was just because the coke ad my dealer?" come-on, and a lot of low mined people are buying into this stuff and it´s such articles, that will make some retarded fascist-like cowards feel like, they´re meant to help in a way like, "it´s ok killing, mobbing terrorizing someone ,who´s maybe given away some piece to someone who asked him, off of his weekend stach, after doing his hard day´s work all week long and for non-profit thoughts at all.. that´s what those "thoughts" and articles are for and nothing else: Instrumentalizing idiots to run amok against those who they think could be the evil one... while the real dope-pushers are those, frightening the shit out ot these cowards so much, they´d rather give a freindly hand to them, just in case... so it´ll be the anonymous hippie that´s going to be slaughtered, the punk, the devestated drug-freak, the rave-scene, dance, trance .. well it´s pretty much gone, beside some happy squad-sight-seeing at the rare trying-to-be-rave-parties.