INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, Fla. — A Florida bill advancing through the legislature could make it harder for people to sue gun manufacturers, even in cases where firearms malfunction or injure law enforcement officers.
House Bill 1551 would shield manufacturers from certain product liability claims, specifically those related to the absence of optional safety features. The legislation comes after an Indian River County deputy was shot when his firearm allegedly misfired during a training exercise two years ago.
WATCH BELOW: Florida bill could shield gun makers from lawsuits over missing safety features
Indian River County Sheriff Eric Flowers testified Tuesday before a Florida House Civil Justice and Claims Subcommittee, warning lawmakers about the potential impact of the bill.
"As a law enforcement leader — that scares the hell out of me," Flowers said.
The deputy, Zach Seldes, was injured in 2023 when his Sig Sauer P320 pistol fired while still in its holster, hitting him in the calf. His lawsuit is one of more than 100 filed nationwide claiming the P320 can fire without the trigger being pulled.
"I have no dog in this fight, I'm not suing Sig, I'm not doing any of that, but Zach is. And he deserves what he deserves for his injuries," Flowers said.
"Zach [Seldes] over here didn't buy the P320, his department did," added Roger Holmes, a former law enforcement officer and firearms expert who also testified. "He may win his case, or he may lose his case, but he deserves his right to go to a jury in the State of Florida and make his case.”
State Rep. Meg Weinberger, R-Palm Beach Gardens, was one of several lawmakers from both parties who questioned whether the bill could weaken consumer protections.
"I'm more concerned about the accountability," Weinberger said in the subcommittee meeting. "If it is indeed an issue with the firearm, I feel SIG has a moral ... they need to make it right."
However, Weinberger also said she was torn over the legislation.
"We own several SIGs. I mean, I carry a SIG. That's my carry gun," Weinberger told WPTV reporter Kate Hussey. "I think they have a great gun, but then you speak to so many law enforcement officers, and you hear these issues that they've had, and, you know, have they fixed the issue for everybody? Or, you know, are you just kind of left out to dry?"
The bill's sponsor, state Rep. Wyman Duggan, R-Jacksonville, argued people could still sue over true defects — just not because a gun lacks optional safety features.
"If you elect to buy a product with certain options or features, you cannot come back and claim that the absence of those features is a defect," Duggan said.
Attorney Aaron Bass, who isn't involved in any Sig Sauer cases, said the law would limit some types of lawsuits but wouldn't block all claims.
"I don't think it prevents that deputy — or someone in a similar situation — from suing," Bass said. "The legislature is allowed to make laws that limit our ability to sue certain people, certain companies, certain types of companies. And there is a legitimate public interest in the legislature having to do that. In this case, it's limiting what you can sue for in terms of this sort of defect, that sort of defect."
However, attorney Bob Zimmerman, who represents 130 clients suing Sig Sauer, including eight in Florida, felt it would have impacted his clients had it been in effect at the time they filed suit.
"This law would preclude law enforcement officers, it would put them at risk of not being able to pursue claims against the manufacturer, and it would prevent people from pursuing this manufacturer who are law-abiding gun owners," Zimmerman said. "This is a handout to a specific manufacturer and does not help a single person in Florida."
"What is the point of the bill? How could it benefit Florida?" Hussey asked Weinberger.
"As the bill moves, these are the important questions we need to be asking," Weinberger replied.
The bill advanced out of committee in a 13-4 vote and now heads to its next stop in the legislature. If passed, the law would not impact current cases but would only apply to future lawsuits.
Sig Sauer and Duggan did not respond to requests for comment.
This story was reported on-air by a journalist and has been converted to this platform with the assistance of AI. Our editorial team verifies all reporting on all platforms for fairness and accuracy.
