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 .  