mr. speaker , i yield myself such time as i may consume . 
mr. speaker , i will include in the record the following letters in opposition to s. 397 . 
letters from the aba , letters from two former directors of the atf , a letter from a number of nationally recognized organizations , and letters from a number of law professors . 
mr. speaker , a moment ago , i raised the scenario of a terrorist getting denied access to an airplane because they are on the terrorist watch list going down to a local gun shop and saying , you know , i am on that watch list , can i get some guns ? 
and under this legislation , that individual would be allowed to purchase those guns . 
i have read the bill , and that is why i offered the amendment in committee . 
and what the bill says very clearly under negligent entrustment is essentially if the gun dealer knows or should know that the person to whom the product is supplied is likely to use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury . 
now , we all might say common sense tells us that that would cover a person on the terrorist watch list . 
but you know what , that is not what the explanation was in committee . 
in fact , i have the committee transcript here , and the gentleman from utah ( mr. cannon ) xz4000590 stated that the reason that they did not want to adopt the amendment was not because the bill already covered that scenario . 
the real reason was they have questions about the reliability of the terrorist watch list and whether or not someone who is on the terrorist watch list is legitimately put there . 
well , here is the question . 
if the terrorist watch list is good enough to deny someone access to an airplane because that will put the public safety at risk , why is it not good enough to deny someone a firearm who goes down to the local gun store ? 
we have tried to make it a condition that people who are on the terrorist watch list can not purchase weapons at gun stores . 
the attorney general in testimony before our committee said maybe we should think about that . 
we have not passed that as a congress . 
and so for the chairman of the committee to say that the gun store owner will be assumed to know that person is a danger , when the united states congress and the judiciary committee have refused to make that decision , it is just plain wrong . 
the congress has not gone on record saying that someone on the terrorist watch list should not get a gun . 
why should we expect a gun dealer and seller to do that ? 
so this does open a loophole that would allow exactly the scenario i talked about . 
it would close the door on lawsuits by the victims of the snipers in this area . 
the letters i submitted for the record from law professors and others make it absolutely clear that that is what this does . 
look , we have got a system for bringing lawsuits . 
we heard from the author of the bill , the gentleman from florida ( mr. stearns ) xz4003880 , a number of cases that were filed that he said were frivolous . 
most of those cases were in fact dismissed from the courts . 
the system is working . 
frivolous lawsuits were dismissed . 
but what this legislation would do is to change the rules . 
it does not have to change the rules to protect the ones that were dismissed ; they have been dismissed under the existing rules . 
so why are we changing them ? 
because we want to deny people who bring legitimate suits today , people like the families of the sniper victims , people like the officers from new jersey , the police officers , who i must point out , again , and emphasize obtained settlements in those lawsuits . 
we want to close the courthouse door on them . 
i would just ask a very simple question , mr. speaker , my colleagues . 
we have a bill here saying we are going to protect the lawful commerce in arms act , which in fact changes the rules to make what is today unlawful , lawful . 
why do we not go about the business of passing legislation to protect the victims of gun violence rather than that small handful of bad-apple gun dealers who wrongfully and negligently help put the guns in the hands of killers in this country and allow them to go on the kind of rampage that leads to the death of so many people . 
the killers are in jail . 
thank god for that . 
but why should someone who is known to be negligent , who the atf found to be negligent and later closed the gun shop , why should that person not be liable for their contribution to the negligence and to the deaths and sufferings that were faced by those families ? 
let us get about protecting the victims . 
mr. speaker , the material i previously referred to is as follows : american bar association , governmental affairs office , washington , dc , april 4 , 2005 . 
dear senator : i am writing on behalf of the american bar association to express our strong opposition to s. 397 , the protection of lawful commerce in arms act , and to similar legislation to enact special tort laws for the firearms industry . 
the aba opposes s. 397 , and has opposed similar legislation in the past two congresses , because we believe the proposed legislation is overbroad and would unwisely and unnecessarily intrude into an area of traditional state responsibility . 
the responsibility for setting substantive legal standards for tort actions in each state 's courts , including standards for negligence and product liability actions , has been the province of state legislatures and an integral function of state common law since our nation was founded . 
s. 397 would preempt state substantive law standards for most negligence and product liability actions for this one industry , abrogating state law in cases in which the defendant is a gun manufacturer , gun seller or gun trade association , and would insulate this new class of protected defendants from almost all ordinary civil liability actions . 
in our view , the legitimate concerns of some about the reach of a number of suits filed by cities and state governmental units several years ago have since been answered by the deliberative , competent action of state courts and within the traditions of state responsibility for administering tort law . 
there is no evidence that federal legislation is needed or justified . 
there is no hearing record in congress or other evidence to contradict the fact that the state courts are handling their responsibilities competently in this area of law . 
there is no data of any kind to support claims made by the industry that it is incurring extraordinary costs due to litigation , that it faces a significant number of suits , or that current state law is in any way inadequate . 
the senate has not examined the underlying claims of the industry about state tort cases , choosing not to hold a single hearing on s. 397 or its predecessor bills in the two previous congresses . 
proponents of this legislation can not , in fact , point to a single court decision , final judgment or award s. 397 proposes to exempt his one industry from state negligence law . 
the proposed federal negligence law standard will unfairly exempt firearms industry defendants from the oldest principle of civil liability law : that persons , or companies who act negligently should be accountable to victims harmed by this failure of responsibility . 
negligence laws in all 50 states traditionally impose civil liability when individuals or businesses fail to use reasonable care to minimize the foreseeable risk that others will be injured and injury results . 
but this proposed legislation would preempt the laws of the 50 states to create a special , higher standard for negligence actions for this one protected class , different than for any other industry , protecting them from liability for their own negligence in all but extremely the proposed federal product liability standards will unfairly insulate firearm industry defendants from accountability in state courts for design defects in their products . 
the proposed new federal standard would preempt the product liability laws in all 50 states with a new , higher standard that would protect this industry even for failing to implement safety devices that would prevent common , foreseeable injuries , so long as any injury or death suffered by victims resulted when the gun was not `` used as intended '' . 
under existing product liability laws in most states , manufacturers must adopt feasible safety devices that would prevent injuries caused when their products are foreseeably misused , regardless of whether the uses are `` intended '' by the manufacturer , or whether the product `` fails '' or `` improperly '' functions . 
thus automakers have been held civilly liable for not making cars crashworthy , even though the `` intended use '' is not to crash the car . 
manufacturers of cigarette lighters must make them childproof , even though children are not `` intended '' to use them . 
under this proposed legislation , however , state laws would be preempted so that gun manufacturers would enjoy a special immunity . 
enactment of s. 397 would also undermine responsible federal oversight of consumer safety . 
the broad and , we believe , unprecedented immunity from civil liability that would result from enactment of s. 397 must be viewed against the existing legal backdrop of the present , unparalleled immunity the firearms industry enjoys from any federal safety regulation . 
unlike other consumer products , there is no federal law or regulatory authority that sets minimum safety standards for domestically manufactured firearms . 
this is because the firearms industry was able to gain an exemption for firearms from the 1972-enacted consumer product safety act , the primary federal law that protects consumers from products that present unreasonable risk of injury . 
over the last 30 years , an average of 200 children under the age of 14 and over a thousand adults each year have died in gun accidents this bill , if enacted , would insulate the firearms industry from almost all civil actions , in addition to its existing protection from any consumer product safety regulations . 
such special status for this single industry raises serious concerns about its constitutionality ; victims of gun violence have the right -- as do persons injured through negligence of any party -- to the equal protection of the law . 
the risk that states may at some future date fail to appropriately resolve their tort responsibilities in an area of law -- where there is no evidence of any failure to date -- can not justify the unprecedented federal preemption of state responsibilities proposed in this legislation . 
the aba believes that the states will continue to sort out these issues capably without a federal rewriting of state substantive tort law standards . 
the wiser course for congress , we believe , is to respect the ability of states to continue to administer their historic responsibility to define the negligence and product liability standards to be used in their state courts . 
for these reasons , we urge you to reject s. 397 . 
sincerely , dear senators and representatives : the undersigned former directors of the bureau of alcohol , tobacco , and firearms ( `` atf '' ) write to express our grave concern over pending legislation that the congress is now considering . 
s. 397 and h.r. 800 would provide sweeping immunity to members of the gun industry in numerous cases . 
while there are many disturbing aspects to this bill from a policy perspective , this letter concerns one that is especially disturbing to us , as it threatens atf 's ability to fully and effectively enforce our nation 's gun laws . 
supporters of gun industry immunity have added language to s. 397 and h.r. 800 that was not included in the gun immunity bills considered by the last congress ( h.r. 2037 , s. 659 , s. 1805 , and s. 1806 ) . 
this new language includes provisions that threaten to block law enforcement efforts by the atf , as well as state governments . 
specifically , the legislation would now prohibit certain law enforcement `` administrative proceeding ( s ) . '' 4 ( 5 ) ( a ) . 
this goes well beyond barring civil damages suits , and is apparently intended to curtail law enforcement proceedings against gun sellers who violate the law . 
given the serious and persistent danger posed to society by irresponsible gun sellers who supply the criminal gun market and other prohibited purchasers , we find it outrageous that congress would contemplate tying the hands of law enforcement to protect scofflaw dealers . 
this broad new language threatens to block any atf `` administrative proceeding '' that seeks `` fines , or penalties , or other relief '' resulting from unlawful use of firearms by third parties . 
4 ( 5 ) ( a ) . 
the bill would likely prohibit atf from initiating enforcement proceedings including those to : prohibit atf from initiating proceedings to revoke a gun dealer 's federal firearm license if the dealer supplies guns to criminals or other prohibited buyers . 
current law enables atf to initiate proceedings to revoke a federal firearm license if a gun dealer willfully violates federal law , such as by transferring a gun to a criminal . 
18 u.s.c . 
923 ( e ) . 
limit atf 's ability to prevent the importation of non-sporting firearms used frequently in crimes . 
current law enables atf to initiate proceedings to prohibit the importation of firearms that do not have a `` sporting purpose. '' 18 u.s.c . 
925 ( d ) ( 3 ) . 
we know from experience how important it is that atf be able to enforce our nation 's gun laws to prevent firearms from being obtained by terrorists , other criminals , and the gun traffickers who supply them . 
to protect our citizens from the scourge of gun violence congress should be strengthening our laws and increasing atf 's resources and ability to enforce those laws . 
to handcuff atf , as this bill does , will only serve to shield corrupt gun sellers , and facilitate criminals and terrorists who seek to wreak havoc with deadly weapons . 
to take such anti-law enforcement actions in the post-9/11 age , when we know that suspected terrorists are obtaining firearms , and may well seek them from irresponsible gun dealers , is nothing short of madness . 
the bill also would likely limit the ability of state attorneys general to bring actions against gun sellers who violate state law , such as those who engage in `` straw sales '' to someone who illegally buys guns on behalf of prohibited buyers . 
had this bill been the law , california may not have been able to levy the $ 14.5 million fines wal-mart recently paid to settle a civil suit brought by the california attorney general concerning numerous violations of state law , including sales to straw buyers . 
the bill would also jeopardize state and local law enforcement proceedings to shut down `` kitchen table '' dealers who sell guns out of their homes to criminals . 
in closing , we would note that many of us have other reservations as well about substantive aspects of s. 397 /h.r. 800 . 
but even without those troublesome aspects , the restrictions placed on law enforcement should be reason enough for congress to reject this dangerous legislation . 
we urge congress to reject s. 397 and h.r. 800 . 
& lt ; center & gt ; stephen higgins , & lt ; /center & gt ; & lt ; center & gt ; & lt ; em & gt ; director ( ret. ) atf , 1982-1995. & lt ; /em & gt ; & lt ; center & gt ; rex davis , & lt ; /center & gt ; & lt ; center & gt ; & lt ; em & gt ; director ( ret. ) atf , 1970-1978. & lt ; /em & gt ; dear member of congress : please oppose any legislation that would limit the legal rights of gun violence victims . 
the national rifle association and others in the gun lobby are pushing legislation that would deprive gun violence victims of their legal rights and give special legal privileges to the gun industry ( house bill h.r. 800 and senate bill s. 397 ) . 
similar legislation was defeated in the last congress , and it must be stopped again in the 109th congress . 
recently , gun violence victims have exercised their legal rights and held reckless and irresponsible gun sellers accountable : families of victims of the 2002 d.c.-area sniper attacks won a $ 2.5 million settlement from bull 's eye shooter supply , the dealer who `` lost '' the snipers ' assault rifle , and bushmaster firearms , the assault weapon maker who supplied bull 's eye , while turning a blind eye to its disgraceful record of missing guns and regulatory violations . 
further , as part of the settlement , bushmaster agreed to inform its dealers of safer sales practices that will prevent other criminals from obtaining guns -- something bushmaster had never done before . 
two former new jersey police officers , ken mcguire and dave lemongello , shot in the line of duty with a trafficked gun negligently sold by a west virginia dealer , won a $ 1 million settlement . 
the dealer had sold the gun , along with 11 other handguns , in a cash sale to what turned out to be a straw purchasing team . 
after the lawsuit , the dealer , as well as two other area pawnshops , implemented safer practices to prevent sales to traffickers , including a new policy of ending large-volume sales of handguns . 
these reforms go beyond the law and are not imposed by any manufacturers or distributors . 
if the nra 's special interest legislation had passed congress , these victims would never have obtained justice and it would be business as usual for these dangerous gun sellers . 
instead of trying to close the courthouse doors to victims , congress should be investigating the gun industry , cracking down on the corrupt dealers who arm drug gangs and other criminals , and passing stronger laws to stop gun deaths . 
please protect gun violence victims and oppose any immunity legislation ( h.r. 800/s. 397 ) that would deprive them of their legal rights . 
sincerely , alliance for justice . 
american association of school psychologists . 
american association of suicidology . 
americans for democratic action . 
american humanist association . 
american public health association . 
brady campaign to prevent gun violence united with the million mom march . 
child welfare league of america . 
children 's defense fund . 
church women united . 
coalition to stop gun violence . 
common cause . 
congregation of sisters of st . 
agnes leadership team . 
consumer federation of america . 
consumers for auto reliability and safety . 
disciples justice action network . 
equal partners in faith . 
evangelical lutheran church in america . 
hadassah the women 's zionist organization of america . 
help network . 
league of women voters of the u.s. legal community against violence . 
national council of jewish women . 
national council of women 's organization . 
national research center for women & amp ; families . 
physicians for social responsibility . 
presbyterian church ( usa ) . 
public citizen . 
religious action center of reform judaism . 
states united to prevent gun violence . 
the american jewish committee . 
the ms. foundation for women . 
the society of public health education ( sophe ) . 
the united states conference of mayors . 
unitarian universalist association of congregations . 
veteran feminists of america . 
women 's institute for freedom of the press . 
arizona physicians for social responsibility -- arizona chapter arkansas arkansas coalition against domestic violence . 
california khadafy foundation for non-violence . 
concerned citizens of leisure world . 
sisters of saint joseph of orange . 
physicians for social responsibility . 
marin friends meeting . 
orange county substance abuse prevention network . 
youth alive . 
gray panthers . 
society of public health education . 
physicians for social responsibility -- sacramento . 
orange county citizens for the prevention of gun violence . 
violence prevention coalition of orange county . 
women against gun violence . 
long beach coalition for the prevention of gun violence . 
alameda county million mom march chapter . 
contra costa county million mom march chapter . 
los angeles county west million mom march chapter . 
marin county million mom march chapter napa . 
solano county million mom march chapter . 
nevada county million mom march chapter . 
orange county million mom march chapter . 
sacramento valley million mom march chapter . 
san diego county million mom march chapter . 
san fernando valley million mom march chapter . 
santa clarita million mom march chapter . 
silicon valley/santa clara county million mom march chapter . 
sonoma county million mom march chapter . 
south bay/long beach million mom march chapter . 
colorado colorado progressive coalition . 
physicians for social responsibility -- colorado chapter . 
colorado ceasefire capitol fund . 
denver million mom march chapter . 
connecticut hog river music , llc . 
society of public health education . 
greater new haven n.o.w . 
new england coalition to prevent gun violence . 
central connecticut million mom march chapter . 
fairfield county million mom march chapter . 
district of columbia life after homicide . 
society of public health education -- national capitol area chapter . 
district of columbia million mom march chapter . 
florida irc coalition against gun violence . 
florida coalition to stop gun violence . 
vero beach coalition against gun violence . 
central florida million mom march chapter . 
northeast florida million mom march chapter . 
south florida million mom march chapter . 
tampa bay million mom march chapter . 
georgia american public health association . 
georgia federation of professional health education . 
metro atlanta million mom march chapter . 
illinois citizens resource for children . 
episcopal peace fellowship chicago consumer coalition . 
chicago survivors million mom march chapter . 
north suburban chicagoland million mom march chapter . 
southwest chicagoland million mom march chapter . 
springfield million mom march chapter . 
indiana hispanic/african american public policy institute . 
infinite inc . 
hoosiers concerned about gun violence . 
iowa university of iowa cph/cbh . 
iowans for the prevention of gun violence . 
kentucky lexington and central kentucky million mom march chapter . 
maine action committee of peace action . 
maine citizens against handgun violence . 
new england coalition to prevent gun violence . 
southern maine million mom march chapter . 
maryland life after homicide . 
maryland consumer rights coalition , inc . 
ceasefire maryland . 
montgomery county million mom march chapter . 
massachusetts the sandbox foundation . 
stop handgun violence . 
greater boston million mom march chapter . 
massachusetts 's consumers ' coalition . 
new england coalition to prevent gun violence . 
michigan league of women voters of michigan . 
michigan partnership to prevent gun violence . 
detroit million mom march chapter . 
east metro detroit million mom march chapter . 
mid-michigan/lansing million mom march chapter . 
novi million mom march chapter . 
southwest michigan million mom march chapter . 
west metro detroit/washtenaw county million mom march chapter . 
minnesota citizens for a safer minnesota . 
the healing circle . 
league of women voters of duluth . 
northland minnesota million mom march chapter . 
twin cities million mom march chapter . 
missouri missouri society for public health education . 
nevada new hampshire new hampshire million mom march chapter . 
new england coalition to prevent gun violence . 
new jersey union for reform judaism , njwhvc . 
woodbridge homeowners for quality of life . 
coalition for peace action . 
society of public health education . 
ceasefire nj . 
bergen/passaic county million mom march chapter . 
essex county million mom march chapter . 
mercer county million mom march chapter . 
shore county million mom march chapter . 
new york men elevating leadership . 
mothers against guns , inc . 
ny chapter of the society for public health education . 
new yorkers against gun violence ( na ygv ) . 
lenox hill school based primary care program . 
new york public interest research group . 
brooklyn king 's million mom march chapter . 
broome county million mom march chapter . 
capitol region million mom march chapter . 
manhattan million mom march chapter . 
nassau county million mom march chapter . 
queens million mom march chapter . 
suffolk county million mom march chapter . 
westchester county million mom march chapter . 
north carolina north carolinians against gun violence . 
forsyth mothers and others million mom march chapter . 
wake county million mom march chapter . 
west triangle million mom march chapter . 
ohio women against gun violence . 
inter-religious partners in action of greater cleveland . 
diocesan social action office of cleveland . 
ohio coalition against gun violence . 
cleveland million mom march chapter . 
greater cincinnati million mom march chapter . 
oklahoma oklahomans for gun safety million mom march chapter . 
university of oklahoma . 
oregon oregon consumer league . 
ceasefire oregon . 
physicians for social responsibility -- oregon . 
lane county ( eugene ) million mom march chapter . 
multnomah county ( portland ) million mom march chapter . 
pennsylvania not fair ! 
ceasefire pennsylvania . 
allegheny county million mom march chapter . 
center county million mom march chapter . 
montgomery and delaware county million mom march chapter . 
philadelphia million mom march chapter . 
rhode island rhode island million mom march chapter . 
new england coalition to prevent gun violence . 
texas austin physicians for social responsibility . 
central texas ( austin ) million mom march chapter . 
dallas million mom march chapter . 
south texas million mom march chapter . 
utah peace and justice commission of salt lake catholic diocese . 
gun violence prevention campaign of utah . 
salt lake city million mom march chapter . 
vermont new england coalition to prevent gun violence . 
virginia va interfaith center for public policy . 
charlottesville million mom march chapter . 
hampton roads million mom march chapter . 
northern virginia million mom march chapter . 
richmond million mom march chapter . 
roanoke million mom march chapter . 
washington clark county ( vancouver ) million mom march chapter . 
wisconsin mothers against gun violence . 
peace and justice committee of the elca of greater milwaukee . 
milwaukee million mom march chapter . 
wisconsin anti-violence effort . 
law school , ann arbor , mi . 
dear senators and representatives : as a professor of law at the university of michigan law school , i write to alert you to the legal implications of s. 397 and h.r. 800 , the `` protection of lawful commerce in arms act. '' my colleagues , who join me in signing this letter , are professors at law schools around the country . 
this bill would represent a substantial and radical departure from traditional principles of american tort law . 
though described as an effort to limit the unwarranted expansion of tort liability , the bill would in fact represent a dramatic narrowing of traditional tort principles by providing one industry with a literally unprecedented immunity from liability for the foreseeable consequences of negligent conduct . 
s. 397 and h.r. 800 , described as `` a bill to prohibit civil liability actions from being brought or continued against manufacturers , distributors , dealers , or importers of firearms or ammunition for damages resulting from the misuse of their products by others , '' would largely immunize those in the firearms industry from liability for negligence . 
this would represent a sharp break with traditional principles of tort liability . 
no other industry enjoys or has ever enjoyed such a blanket freedom from responsibility for the foreseeable and preventable consequences of negligent conduct . 
it might be suggested that the bill would merely preclude what traditional tort law ought to be understood to preclude in any event -- lawsuits for damages resulting from third party misconduct , and in particular from the criminal misuse of firearms . 
this argument , however , rests on a fundamental misunderstanding of american tort law . 
american law has never embraced a rule freeing defendants from liability for the foreseeable consequences of their negligence merely because those consequences may include the criminal conduct of third parties . 
numerous cases from every american jurisdiction could be cited here , but let the restatement ( second ) of torts suffice : `` 449 . 
tortious or criminal acts the probability of which makes actor 's conduct negligent `` if the likelihood that a third person may act in a particular manner is the hazard or one of the hazards which makes the actor negligent , such an act whether innocent , negligent , intentionally tortious , or criminal does not prevent the actor from being liable for harm caused thereby. '' ( emphasis supplied ) similarly , actors may be liable if their negligence enables or facilitates foreseeable third party criminal conduct . 
thus , car dealers who negligently leave vehicles unattended , railroads who negligently manage trains , hotel operators who negligently fail to secure rooms , and contractors who negligently leave dangerous equipment unguarded are all potentially liable if their conduct creates an unreasonable and foreseeable risk of third party misconduct , including illegal behavior , leading to harm . 
in keeping with these principles , cases have found that sellers of firearms and other products ( whether manufacturers , distributors or dealers ) may be liable for negligently supplying customers or downstream sellers whose negligence , in turn , results in injuries caused by third party criminal or negligent conduct . 
in other words , if the very reason one 's conduct is negligent is because it creates a foreseeable risk of illegal third party conduct , that illegal conduct does not sever the causal connection between the negligence and the consequent harm . 
of course , defendants are not automatically liable for illegal s. 397 and h.r. 800 would abrogate this firmly established principle of tort law . 
under this bill , the firearms industry would be the one and only business in which actors would be free utterly to disregard the risk , no matter how high or foreseeable , that their conduct might be creating or exacerbating a potentially preventable risk of third party misconduct . 
gun and ammunition makers , distributors , importers , and sellers would , unlike any other business or individual , be free to take no precautions against even the most foreseeable and easily preventable harms resulting from the illegal actions of third parties . 
and they could engage in this negligent conduct persistently , even with the specific intent of profiting from sales of guns that are foreseeably headed to criminal hands . 
under this bill , a firearms dealer , distributor , or manufacturer could park an unguarded open pickup truck it might appear from the face of the bill that s. 397 and h.r. 800 would leave open the possibility of tort liability for truly egregious misconduct , by virtue of several exceptions set forth in section 4 ( 5 ) ( i ) . 
those exceptions , however , are in fact quite narrow , and would give those in the firearm industry little incentive to attend to the risks of foreseeable third party misconduct . 
one exception , for example would purport to permit certain actions for `` negligent entrustment. '' the bill goes on , however , to define `` negligent entrustment '' extremely narrowly . 
the exception applies only to sellers , for example , and would not apply to distributors or manufacturers , no matter how egregious their conduct . 
even as to sellers , the exception would apply only where the particular person to whom a seller supplies a firearm is one whom the seller knows or ought to know will use it to cause harm . 
the `` negligent entrustment '' exception would , therefore , not permit any action based on reckless distribution practices , negligent sales to gun traffickers who supply criminals ( as in the above example ) , careless handling of firearms , lack of security , or any of a myriad potentially negligent acts . 
another exception would leave open the possibility of liability for certain statutory violations , variously defined , including those described under the heading of negligence per se . 
statutory violations , however , represent just a narrow special case of negligence liability . 
no jurisdiction attempts to legislate standards of care as to every detail of life , even in a regulated industry ; and there is no need . 
why is there no need ? 
because general principles of tort law make clear that the mere absence of a specific statutory prohibition is not carte blanche for unreasonable or dangerous behavior . 
s. 397 and h.r. 800 would turn this traditional framework on its head ; and free those in the firearms industry to behave as carelessly as they would like , so long as the conduct has not been specifically my aim here is simply to provide information , and insure that you are not inadvertently misled about the meaning and scope of s. 397 and h.r. 800 . 
as currently drafted , this bill would not simply protect against the expansion of tort liability , as has been suggested , but would in fact dramatically limit the application of longstanding and otherwise universally applicable tort principles . 
it provides to firearms makers and distributors a literally unprecedented form of tort immunity not enjoyed or even dreamed of by any other industry . 
professor sherman j. clark , university of michigan law school ; professor richard l. abel , ucla law school ; professor barbara bader aldave , university of oregon school of law ; professor mark f. anderson , temple university beasley school of law ; professor emeritus james francis bailey , iii indiana university school of law ; professor elizabeth bartholet , harvard law school ; professor peter a bell , syracuse university college of law ; professor margaret berger , brooklyn law school ; professor m. gregg bloche , georgetown university law center ; professor michael c. blumm , lewis and clark law school ; professor carl t. bogus , roger williams university school of law ; professor cynthia grant bowman , northwestern university school of law ; director of the macarthur justice mr. speaker , i yield back the balance of my time . 
