[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 16 (Tuesday, February 15, 2005)]
[House]
[Page H590]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             THE PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of 
January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Stearns) is recognized 
during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. STEARNS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to tell my colleagues about a 
piece of legislation that I have put in; it is called the Protection of 
Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. My cosponsor is Congressman Rick Boucher.
  Last year we introduced a very similar piece of legislation, and it 
passed, my colleagues, with overwhelming bipartisan support. Our bill 
has the support of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National 
Association of Manufacturers, and the National Association of 
Wholesalers, among other prominent groups.
  What this legislation does is stops baseless lawsuits against gun 
manufacturers or dealers, based upon the criminal or unlawful third-
party misuse of firearms.
  Now, some may ask the question, why do we need such legislation? The 
reason that we need it is because the firearms industry is under 
attack. Over the last few years, trial lawyers have filed suits against 
federally licensed firearm manufacturers across this country in the 
hopes of bankrupting this industry.
  They have been filing frivolous lawsuits that are based on the 
dubious premise, Mr. Speaker, that gun manufacturers should be held 
liable for the actions of others who use their products in a criminal 
or unlawful manner.
  In other words, if someone gets a gun and then commits a crime with 
it, these litigious gun-control advocates believe that gunmakers should 
be held liable for the damages or injuries that are caused.
  Now, that is like holding a car company responsible if a driver gets 
drunk, gets reckless, and hits someone with a vehicle. A law abiding 
manufacturer has a constitutional right to engage in interstate 
commerce without the fear of these frivolous lawsuits. I do not care if 
it is a business that makes guns, cigarettes, cars, fast food or 
whatever it is, although firearms are the only product that I have 
listed here which specifically has constitutional protection under the 
second amendment.
  Over 30 cities and counties, in addition to various individuals, have 
sued the gun industry since 1998. I am pleased to note that many of 
these cases have been completely, completely dismissed in various city, 
State, and Federal courts. In fact, just a few days ago San Francisco, 
based in California, the appellate court there unanimously upheld a 
superior court decision dismissing lawsuits filed by Los Angeles, San 
Francisco, and 12 other California municipalities against members of 
the firearms industry. I welcome this decision.
  However, there are still several lawsuits pending which threaten to 
devastate the industry. In New York City, recently enacted legislation 
allows victims of crime to sue the dealers and gunmakers. We also must 
consider that just the mere threat of these suits, taking the first 
couple of legal steps to defend these suits can be enough on their own 
to force some of the smaller companies out of business.
  As one prominent person said of this tactic, we are going to make the 
gun industry die a death by a thousand cuts. So our legislation will 
end these coercive and undemocratic lawsuits.
  Now, I understand there are some of my colleagues that may be 
hesitant to support my bill since the media and gun control advocates 
have spent years and millions of dollars vilifying the firearms 
industry. No one wants to be seen granting the industry special 
treatment or helping them to get away with something, or so it is 
perceived.
  I have two responses to this. First, the firearms industry has been 
around and has been respected for generations. They provide a valuable 
service and a highly desirable product to millions of sportsmen and 
supporters of those second amendment rights. They provide our law 
enforcement agencies and our officers with the tools necessary to fight 
crime in our neighborhoods, and they enable our Armed Forces to protect 
our freedoms around the world.
  The industry employs thousands of hard-working Americans and these 
Americans support their families like everybody else. These employees 
and their businesses pay taxes. It is an indisputable fact that the 
firearms industry has contributed immensely to our society over the 
years in a very positive way. But this does not mean that if one of 
these manufacturers purposely or recklessly sold a bad product they 
should be given a free pass. No, we are not saying that.
  Our legislation is very narrowly tailored to allow suits against any 
bad actor to proceed. It includes carefully crafted exceptions to allow 
legitimate victims their day in court for cases involving defective 
firearms, breaches of contract, criminal behavior by a gunmaker or 
seller, or the negligent entrustment of a firearm to an irresponsible 
person.
  In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I am honored once again to introduce this 
commonsense bill, and I urge all of my colleagues to join with me in 
co-sponsoring this piece of legislation.

                          ____________________