madam speaker , for the purpose of debate only , i yield 30 minutes to the gentleman from florida ( mr. hastings ) xz4001701 , pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume . 
during consideration of this resolution , all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only . 
madam speaker , house resolution 493 is a closed rule . 
it provides 1 hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee on the judiciary . 
it waives all points of order against consideration of the bill , and it provides one motion to recommit . 
madam speaker , before we open debate on the rule for s. 397 , the protection of lawful commerce in arms act prohibiting frivolous lawsuits against the firearm industry , i would like to say that our nation 's judicial system is out of control . 
if a group or a person does not like what someone else does or believes , they try to sue them out of existence . 
this seems to be the case for the firearms industry . 
our founding fathers designed our second amendment rights to be absolute rights that shall not be infringed . 
however , those who find the second amendment offensive have made a concerted effort to sue out of existence those who lawfully and legally facilitate a constitutionally guaranteed right . 
america 's firearm companies are directly connected to and span our national history , but they are currently threatened by a lawsuit-friendly culture . 
addressing the burden of frivolous lawsuits has become a necessity for free enterprise . 
it seems that for some individuals lawsuits have become the latest get-rich scheme . 
frivolous lawsuits drive up the cost of goods and services , and they put law-abiding companies out of business . 
the passage of this legislation is time-sensitive . 
every day without this legislation puts more stress on firearm manufacturers , their customers , and their employees . 
indeed , some lawsuits are motivated by ideology and a distaste for the firearm industry and guns in general . 
they will simply keep suing until either the firearm companies are out of business or the guns are too expensive to purchase . 
this form of gun control will not only compromise one of our constitutional rights but , madam speaker , it threatens the jobs of many americans . 
so it is important to note that s. 397 , the protection of lawful commerce in arms act , does allow the following types of lawsuits to be filed : number 1 , an action against a person who transfers a firearm or ammunition , knowing that it will be used to commit a crime of violence , or drug trafficking crime or comparable or identical state felony law ; secondly , an action brought against the seller for negligent entrustment ; third , actions in which a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product violates a state or federal statute applicable to sales or marketing when such violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought . 
this exception would specifically allow lawsuits against firearms dealers such as the dealer whose firearm ended up in the hands of the d.c . 
snipers who failed to maintain a required inventory list necessary to ensure that they are alerted to any firearm thefts . 
fourth , actions for breach of contract or warranty in connection with the purchase of a firearm or ammunition ; and fifth , actions for damages resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of a firearm or ammunition . 
so , under this legislation , manufacturers and sellers must operate entirely within federal and state law . 
more than half our states have passed similar legislation , and i encourage passage of this rule and consideration of the underlying legislation . 
madam speaker , i reserve the balance of my time . 
