Michigan House Bill HB5760

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/18/26
• Refer: 3/18/26

Caption

Torts: defenses; firearm manufacturer immunity from liability to local units of government; abolish. Amends sec. 15 of 1927 PA 372 (MCL 28.435). TIE BAR WITH: HB 5758'26, HB 5759'26

Summary

HB 5760 amends Michigan’s firearm sales and liability law, specifically Section 15 of the Firearms Act, to require federally licensed firearms dealers to include safety-related items and information with most firearm sales. Under the bill, a dealer could not sell a firearm unless the transaction includes either a trigger lock or a secure gun case/storage container, unless the buyer provides one and keeps proof of purchase. Dealers would also have to provide free safety literature, a warning about penalties for improper storage under existing law, and lethal means counseling materials prepared by the Department of Health and Human Services. The bill also requires signed compliance statements from both dealer and purchaser, record retention for six years, and conspicuous posting of notices about unlawful firearm storage. The bill further addresses civil liability and enforcement. It states that compliant federally licensed dealers are not liable for damages arising from the use or misuse of a firearm, and it limits civil actions by political subdivisions against firearm or ammunition producers, reserving such actions to the state attorney general except for narrow contract, warranty, and product-defect claims involving government-owned firearms or ammunition. Violations of the section would be punishable as misdemeanors for initial offenses and escalate to higher misdemeanor and felony penalties for repeat violations. The bill also defines key terms such as “produce,” “political subdivision,” and “firearm or ammunition” broadly to include components and a wide range of manufacturing and distribution activities.

Impact

HB 5760 would amend MCL 28.435 to impose new point-of-sale requirements on federally licensed firearms dealers in Michigan and to expand statutory protections for firearm manufacturers and sellers against certain local-government lawsuits. It would affect dealers, purchasers, and firearm-related businesses by mandating safety devices or secure storage containers, required disclosures, and recordkeeping, while also creating criminal penalties for noncompliance. In addition, it would restrict local units of government from bringing civil actions against firearm and ammunition producers, leaving enforcement primarily to the state attorney general and preserving only narrow exceptions for certain government-owned product claims.

Sentiment

The available context shows no recorded committee testimony or votes, so there is no direct evidence of support or opposition from hearings. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears to combine firearm safety measures with liability protections for the firearms industry, suggesting an effort to balance public-safety concerns with limits on litigation. The absence of transcript discussion and vote history means the overall sentiment cannot be measured from the provided materials.

Contention

The main points of contention likely involve two separate policy areas: firearm safety requirements and tort-liability limits. Supporters would likely emphasize the added storage devices, safety literature, and counseling materials as measures to reduce accidental shootings and unsafe storage, while opponents may view the mandates as burdensome on dealers or as indirect regulation of lawful firearm sales. A second likely controversy is the bill’s restriction on civil actions by political subdivisions against firearm manufacturers and sellers, which could be criticized by local governments and gun-violence prevention advocates as limiting accountability, while supporters may argue it prevents expansive local litigation and clarifies existing law.