More than 30 state legislatures across the nation have already acted to prohibit localities from filing these junk lawsuits, and now, members of both parties in Congress recognize that a federal remedy is needed. S. 659 has attracted more than 50 co-sponsors.

Specifically, S. 659 seeks "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." S. 659 requires that any "qualified civil liability action" pending on the legislation's date of enactment be immediately dismissed by the court in which the action was brought.

The legislation, further seeks to "preserve a citizen's access to a supply of firearms and ammunition for all lawful purposes, including hunting, self-defense, collecting, and competitive or recreational shooting." S. 659 finds that:

(1) Citizens have a right, protected by the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, to keep and bear arms.

(2) Lawsuits have been commenced against manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms that operate as designed and intended, which seek money damages and other relief for the harm caused by the misuse of firearms by third parties, including criminals.

(3) The manufacture, importation, possession, sale, and use of firearms and ammunition in the United States are heavily regulated by Federal, State, and local laws. Such Federal laws include the Gun Control Act of 1968, the National Firearms Act, and the Arms Export Control Act.

(4) Businesses in the United States that are engaged in interstate and foreign commerce through the lawful design, manufacture, marketing, distribution, importation, or sale to the public of firearms or ammunition that has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce are not, and should not be, liable for the harm caused by those who criminally or unlawfully misuse firearm products or ammunition products that function as designed and intended.

(5) The possibility of imposing liability on an entire industry for harm that is solely caused by others is an abuse of the legal system, erodes public confidence in our Nation's laws, threatens the diminution of a basic constitutional right and civil liberty, invites the disassembly and destabilization of other industries and economic sectors lawfully competing in the free enterprise system of the United States, and constitutes an unreasonable burden on interstate and foreign commerce of the United States.

(6) The liability actions commenced or contemplated by the Federal Government, States, municipalities, and private interest groups are based on theories without foundation in hundreds of years of the common law and jurisprudence of the United States and do not represent a bona fide expansion of the common law. The possible sustaining of these actions by a maverick judicial officer or petit jury would expand civil liability in a manner never contemplated by the framers of the Constitution, by Congress, or by the legislatures of the several States. Such an expansion of liability would constitute a deprivation of the rights, privileges, and immunities guaranteed to a citizen of the United States under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

In product liability cases, plaintiffs traditionally have been able to sue for compensation for injuries because: 1) a product was defective, 2) the defect posed an unreasonable danger to the user, and 3) the defect caused the injury. A "defective" product is one that doesn't operate as a reasonable manufacturer would design and make it, as a reasonable consumer would expect, or as other products of its type. Courts uniformly have held that a defect must exist in the product at the time it was sold, and that a plaintiff's injury must have been the result of that defect. Defendants can't be held liable for injuries that occur only because a properly operating product is criminally or negligently misused.

S. 659 seeks to prohibit causes of action against firearms/ammunition industry products for "the harm caused by the criminal or unlawful misuse of firearm products or ammunition products by others when the product functioned as designed and intended." It also seeks to protect the First Amendment right of manufacturers, distributors, dealers, and importers of firearms or ammunition products, and trade associations, "to speak freely, to assemble peaceably, and to petition the Government for a redress of their grievances."

S. 659 defines "qualified civil liability action" as "a civil action brought by any person against a manufacturer or seller of a qualified product, or a trade association, for damages resulting from the criminal or unlawful misuse of a qualified product by the person or a third party." The definition does not include:

(1) an action brought against a transferor convicted for transferring a firearm knowing it would be used in a crime of violence or drug trafficking crime, by a party directly harmed by the conduct of which the transferee is so convicted;

(2) an action brought against a seller for supplying a firearm or ammunition to another person when one knows, or should know, that other person is likely to, and does, use the product in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical injury to the person and others or negligence per se;

(3) an action in which a manufacturer or seller knowingly and willfully violated a State or Federal statute applicable to the sale or marketing of the product, and the violation was a proximate cause of the harm for which relief is sought;

(4) an action for breach of contract or warranty in connection with the purchase of the product; or

(5) an action for physical injuries or property damage resulting directly from a defect in design or manufacture of the product, when used as intended.