mr. speaker , i rise today to express my concern over s. 397 , the protection of lawful commerce in arms act . 
the safe and lawful use of firearms is very important to me . 
when i was in the california state assembly , i chaired the public safety committee where i worked to pass sensible gun safety legislation and i have voted to ban assault weapons . 
i firmly believe we must pass sensible gun laws for the safety of all . 
the measure on the house floor today is intended to protect a manufacturer or seller of a firearm , from any legal liability stemming from the criminal or unlawful misuse of that firearm . 
the legislation also requires the immediate dismissal of pending lawsuits , even cases in which a court has found the suit to be meritorious . 
i fear this bill will deny justice to innocent victims of gun violence , and therefore i will oppose it . 
in recent years , dozens of individuals and municipalities have filed lawsuits against gun manufacturers for damages caused by gun violence . 
such suits typically contend that gun makers knowingly provide weapons to irresponsible gun dealers , who then take advantage of gun sale loopholes to sell weapons to criminals . 
some of these lawsuits by victims of gun violence have begun to expose how the gun industry 's reckless , though not always technically criminal , sales tactics supply criminals with weapons . 
the gun lobby argues that s. 397 prohibits `` frivolous '' lawsuits , while allowing `` legitimate '' cases to proceed through the legal system . 
however , many legal experts confirm that this bill would give the gun industry sweeping immunity that no other industry has , and would bar many meritorious cases brought by victims of gun violence injured or killed by negligent gun sellers and manufacturers . 
the bill would even restrict many cases in which a product defect is at issue . 
s. 397 seeks to provide sweeping legal immunity to an industry that already enjoys exemptions from federal health and safety regulations . 
it would dramatically re-write liability law for the direct benefit of a single industry . 
furthermore , lawsuits brought on behalf of officers injured or killed in the line of duty by guns negligently sold by dealers , would be barred . 
if immunity for the gun industry is enacted , police officers who put their lives on the line every day to protect the public would have no legal recourse when they are harmed due to another 's negligence . 
mr. speaker , we should not be providing this blanket immunity to the gun industry and i therefore oppose this measure . 
