The House-approved measure on legal immunity for firearms manufacturers and dealers, expected to come up for a Senate vote, would do nothing to make streets safer.

Quite the opposite: The bill would relieve most pressure on gun makers to develop safer weapons, or to weed out rogue gun dealers who illegally channel weapons to criminals.

Imagine the injustice, as well, of scuttling pending legal action on behalf of victims of the Washington, D.C. snipers. The lawsuit ban would halt those and many other legal claims against the gun industry.

The stakes are as high as they get, especially on streets plagued by gunplay. Just ask the more than 2,500 mourners who crowded into a Philadelphia church yesterday for the funeral of 10-year-old Faheem Thomas-Childs. The third-grader was shot on his way to school when he got caught in the cross fire of a gang fight.

Among senators from this region, it would be unconscionable for U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter (R., Pa.) to back gun immunity legislation so obviously at odds with his core constituency in Philadelphia and the suburbs.

What Specter and his Senate colleagues coulddo to protect the public is take two steps that pollsters say most Americans support: Renew the national assault-weapons ban, and close the loophole that lets certain buyers at gun shows duck background checks.

Both enjoy bipartisan support and President Bush's backing. As a result, some lawmakers may seek to pass the immunity bill by packaging it with the weapons ban and gun-show checks.

But resisting such a move is another difficult choice senators must make. The immunity bill deserves to fail as much as the other measures need to pass.