[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 140 (Friday, October 28, 2005)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2216]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               PROTECTION OF LAWFUL COMMERCE IN ARMS ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                       HON. JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, October 20, 2005

  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to S. 397, the 
Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. I believe this bill unfairly 
grants the gun industry immunity and takes away an individual's or 
state's ability to hold gun manufacturers, gun dealers, and gun trade 
associations accountable for negligence and product liability standards 
that apply to other industries. The bill perpetuates the gun industry's 
disregard for public safety and holds up their ``see-no-evil, hear-no-
evil, speak-no-evil'' approach to gun manufacturing and distribution.
  My opposition to S. 397 is an effort to crack down on negligent gun 
companies whose sole interest is making money even when it is at the 
expense of innocent lives and law enforcement. This bill would void a 
number of pending cases around the country which seek to hold the gun 
industry accountable for its actions. That includes cases brought 
against the gun industry by the City of Chicago and Cook County on 
behalf of victims of a shooting rampage a few years ago. That one 
tragic incident killed Ricky Byrdsong and injured others in our 
community. Those cases charge that the gun industry causes a public 
nuisance by being negligent in gun sales practices, particularly by 
making them available to minors and others who are banned from owning 
guns. This bill takes us backwards and gives immunity to the very 
industry that has the power to regulate the manufacturing and 
distribution of its products. One death by a handgun is too many. But 
when 647 people are murdered by guns in one year in just one city, as 
was the case in Chicago in 2002, now is not the time to give immunity 
to the gun industry.
  Although I oppose S. 397, I support an amendment that was added to 
this bill before it passed in the Senate. The amendment offered by 
Senator Kohl draws its provisions from the Child Safety Lock Act. It 
would prohibit the sale, delivery, or transfer by a licensed importer, 
manufacturer, or dealer of a handgun to anyone who does not have a 
secure gun storage or safety device. Child-safety locks cost as little 
as $10 and could save lives if sold with firearm. In fact, the Illinois 
House of Representatives passed a bill this year that will require gun 
dealers to sell child-safety locks with every handgun, to help prevent 
children from shooting themselves or others. This is important because 
our children possess the physical strength to accidentally fire a gun. 
According to the Illinois Council against Handgun Violence, 25 percent 
of 3- to 4-year-olds, 70 percent of 5- to 6-year-olds, and 90 percent 
of 7- to 8-year-olds can fire most handguns. The American Bar 
association believes that a locking device to prevent accidental firing 
should be a standard for the gun industry as seat belts are for the car 
industry. I support this amendment, and I hope it is enacted.
  S. 397 would strip away the legal rights of gun violence victims, 
including law enforcement officers and their families, to seek redress 
against irresponsible gun dealers and manufacturers. That is why the 
American Trial Lawyers Association, the American Bar Association, as 
well as law enforcement officers oppose this bill. As it is, guns are 
one of the few consumer products that are exempt from health and safety 
regulations. Therefore, litigation is the last opportunity for victims 
of firearm violence to hold the gun industry accountable when it acts 
negligently or recklessly. This bill would protect the gun industry at 
the expense of gun violence victims. We must not let the gun industry 
off the hook. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on S. 397.




                          ____________________