This amendment was an attempt to reword SB1805. The term ``reasonably foreseeable'' would have meant the reasonable anticipation that harm or injury is likely to result.

The definition change allowed criminal use as 'reasonably foreseeable' and therefore the protections of SB1805 would have been gutted in criminal use cases by this amendment.

According to Sen. Craig: "Although the legislation does not prohibit reasonable suit in product defect cases where a firearm or ammunition is used in a reasonably foreseeable manner, there is also no open door for antigun activist lawyers to claim that firearms are defective products just because they can be used in crime. For this reason I certainly urge that my colleagues oppose the Bingaman amendment."