2016 Postmortem

It blocks suits intended to curtail lawful sale of handguns and "assault weapons", and such suits were the primary reason it passed.

Prior to its being passed, the Brady Campaign et al were trying to curtail handgun and "assault weapon" sales and alter gun design (e.g. mandate straight stocks over pistol-grip stocks, mandate 10-round magazine capacities, etc.) by suing gun companies, to try to get them to sign up to settlements that would impose such draconian rules. Smith & Wesson was the only one to take the bait (they were owned by a clueless UK holding company at the time), and the backlash by gun owners almost destroyed them until they backed out.

The biggest things hurting Dems on the gun issue aren't the stance on the PLCAA, as bad as that was. It's the attempts to criminalize "assault weapons", which is scare-speak for the most popular civilian rifles in U.S. homes, and "high-capacity magazines", scare-speak for any magazine with more than two thirds the capacity of an 1860s-vintage lever-action.

Saying "we don't want to ban your guns, we just want to ban your AR-15 and your Glock/Ruger/S&W pistol magazines" is ludicrous. It's like some Dems seriously believe that most gun owners just own bolt-action or pump-action "huntin' gunz", and refuse to listen to any information that challenges that fantasy.