Despite the previous postings, we do need lawsuit protection if the firearms industry is going to contnue to exist, despite previous victories in court. The situation is this, a new theory will be proposed, which will serve as the basis for a new lawsuit, frivolous though it may be. The action will commence, and because it is a new theory, the matter will not be dismissed on res judicata grounds (meaning no dismissal due to the previous case), and will be fully litigated at the expense of the industry. Here's where the real fun starts. Other cities/states will see the new theory, and they will institute similar actions in other jurisidictions, which will not be bound by res judicata (new theory) or even a victory by the gun industry in the first case, as the ruling in the first jurisidction will be non-binding. Then, even if the cases are won at the trial level, appeals will follow, and more appeals still, especially since the government lawyers are salaried, and can undertake this action as one of many on a desk, at no additional expense to the city/state. Meanwhile, the gun industry will start to feel the pain of having to actually pay for each attorney in each action for every hour of work done, not having salaried attorneys in every state.
And, say the industry survives this round of suits. It only takes a creative lawyer to think of yet a third theory, and start the whole process again. Eventually, the cost of defending against all of these suits will drive the gun industry into bankruptcy.
So, in my opinion, even a built in lock on a firearm, as unpleasant as it might be, is worth it if teh Feds can pass a law protecting against these actions.
