Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

" handguns and recording of subsequent sales. As we all know ese records are not now centralized, and further, on second sales there is no requirement for recordkeeping.

[ocr errors]

Ire are other approaches to the problem, like the Harrington5 Bingham approach of barring manufacture, sale and posWe have the Mikva approach, with others, of abandoning tre and sale, but allowing present possession. We have the son of the taxing power, and finally, the observation in your ent that frequently when we legislate, we are not legislating tvely. I have begun to feel the weight of trying to raise this n in a responsible way, to crystalize what ought to be done, then try to get accomplished legislatively as much as we can. I was glad that I was able to interrupt you, because I wanted both , and Congressman Dellums to catch that to better understand my infot so we can make this an even more meaningful hearing. M. HARRINGTON. I certainly could not add anything in terms of

of your conclusion and general sympathy for the position you cried any more to what my hope might be. I just would not want to contribute to the building of an illusion when it to either what we might do on the House side, or what might vre on the Senate side that will not really go of necessity to the

y core problems that I do not think in many quarters are and But, I do not have any thing further to add, Mr. Chairman, VIs has been patient, and I do not really want to intrude on *** further.

I hope that we could cooperate to any extent with your comon ary information developed in the past from the Alcohol, ward Firearms, or any efforts that might be useful in dealing ten aufs turing side which may be helpful to what you already

[ocr errors]

V. CONYERS, Well, thank you very much. I count you as one of efends and strongest supporters in the effort that this subcomgrdertaken.

[ocr errors]

d so now to ask Congressman Dellums to join us. He is closest associates in the Congress, a man whom I have come wt for his forceful and clear articulation of the problems that arber, or fronted with.

ije serves in the Congress on the Armed Services Committee where vers with peace and justice, and his opposition to the war ** hira distip-tion. And of course, he is on the District of a Coremittee, and more recently was appointed to the Select tre on Inteligence.

we welcome you before this subcommittee. We know of the glow of a relative that touched all of your friends, not only a Caterem best across the Nation, and we are very pleased to

[ocr errors]

LIMONY OF HON RONALD V DELLUMS. A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

M. Dennems. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am deeply apprentive dard generous remarks.

IV

Witnesses continued

Serr, Harold A., former Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Page Firearms, Department of the Treasury

2618

Prepared statement.

2627

Shields, Nelson T., executive director, National Council To Control

Handguns

2923

Prepared statement..

2918

Smith, Hon. Virginia, a Representative in Congress from the State of Nebraska__.

2588

Snyder, John M., Director of Public Affairs, Citizens Committee for the Right To Keep and Bear Arms..

2739

Prepared statement

2730

Steinberg, David J., exeuctuve director, National Council for a
Responsible Firearms Policy -

2618

Prepared statement.__

2619

Welles, Edward O., executive director, National Council to Control

Handguns --

2636

Prepared statement..

2640

Additional material

"A Brief Case for Handgun Control and Doing Something About It
Now" (National Council To Control Handguns)__
Fromme's Gun Sold as Surplus By Government, from the Washington
Star, Sept. 7, 1975__

2926

2752

History of handgun used by Lynette Fromme in attempt to assasinate President Gerald R. Ford at Sacremento, Calif., on Sept. 5, 1975.. McClory, Hon. Robert, a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois, letter dated July 15, 1975, to Mark Borinsky, chairman, the National Council to Control Handguns.

2754

2669

Statements of Representatives of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and
Firearms Relevant to the Bureau's Resources--
The Army Civilian Markmanship Program (National Board for the
Promotion of Rifle Practice) memorandum dated September 24,
1975-

2760

2964

APPENDIXES

Appendix 1-Correspondence, statements, and articles relating to firearms

[blocks in formation]

Appendix 3-Additional correspondence and statements submitted for the record

3415

FIREARMS LEGISLATION

WEDNESDAY, MAY 14, 1975

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME OF THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,
Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:15 a.m., in room 2237, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John Conyers, Jr. [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.

Present: Representatives Conyers, Hughes, McClory, and Ashbrook. Also present: Maurice A. Barboza, counsel; and Constantine J. Gekas, associate counsel.

Mr. CONYERS. The subcommittee will come to order.

Today, the Subcommittee on Crime of the House Judiciary Committee continues hearings on firearms legislation. What we have been attempting to do is to increase our modest knowledge of the effects of the efforts of the Government to control firearms violence. In this regard, we are privileged to hear from two of our colleagues in Congress this morning, Congressman Harrington, as well as the gentleman from California, Ron Dellums. Additionally we will have Mr. Owen Quarnberg of the Utah County Sheriff's Department who will be accompanied and introduced by our colleague, Gunn McKay. Finally, we will have a gun shop owner from Leesport, Pa., Mr. William Kerschner, who will be introduced by his Member in the Congress, Gus Yatron.

I welcome now Michael Harrington, who serves with great distinction in the Congress on the National Relations Committee and the Government Operations on Intelligence, the CIA Committee.

Congressman Harrington brings a great background and has been before the Judiciary Committee with increasing frequency over the last several years. I welcome him as a colleague and as a personal friend. I note that his prepared statement is before the subcommittee and will be introduced into the record at this point, which will then free Congressman Harrington to make his presentation in whatever manner he chooses.

Welcome, Mr. Harrington, you may begin.

TESTIMONY OF HON. MICHAEL J. HARRINGTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS

Mr. HARRINGTON. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the efforts of rehabilitation that you have just afforded me, and my appreciation particularly to Ron Dellums who was patient in letting me precede him

this morning. I have another committee meeting dealing with a broader issue of arms control, which I would like to attend, and that is my reason for my request to go first this morning.

I also appreciate the subtle word of warning of need to be appreciative of the schedule you have, and I will attempt to honor it. I do have a statement, and I appreciate that it is being made a part of the record, and I would like to perhaps paraphrase it, if I could for a few minutes, and talk to some of the concerns that I think have engendered my interest.

[The prepared statement of Hon. Michael J. Harrington follows.]

STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL J. HARRINGTON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSACHUSETTS

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss what I consider to be one of the most important issues facing this Congress-the issue of gun control.

Attorney General Levi, in a welcomed statement on the need for stronger gun control measures, was quoted as saying that "the test of our government may lie in its ability to open thoughful discussion on issues marked by deep emotional divisions."

I fully agree with Mr. Levi's statement, but would further suggest that the test of our government may also lie in its ability to meet, head-on, its responsibility to act in the best interest of its citizens.

By the Attorney Generals' standards, our government has clearly proved to be unequal to the challenge-thoughtful and creative discussion has never characterized Congressional debate on the subject of gun control. If we use effective governmental action as the measure, we may conclude that we have failed to live up to our responsibility to govern in the national interest.

Congressional and Executive failure to institute a realistic gun control program has served as a damning indictment of our avowed willingness to provide effective national leadership in areas of vital importance to the safety and well-being of each and every citizen. The result of our acquiescence in the critical area of gun control is directly reflected in the 25,000 gun deaths that occur in this country each year.

We have, through our inaction, contributed to the institutionalization of violence as a way of life in America.

Clearly, we have not acted alone in this endeavor. Historical factors unique to the United States such as our nostalgia for the American frontier and our reference for self-reliance and rugged individualism have provided the underpinnings upon which our gun culture rests.

Our failure to provide leadership, however, is a direct result of our ability or unwillingness to disregard politically expedient half-measures such as the 1968 Gun Control Act, and directly confront these traditional inclinations which threaten our society.

That is, of course, a difficult route to take. Traditionally, the political pressures which have been brought to bear on wavering legislators have been extremely persuasive. The ability of the pro-gun lobby to elicit letters from its constituency is phenomenal. The fear of becoming a target singled out for political retribution also serves as a major deterrent against bucking the parochial interests of the pro-gun forces.

The pro-gun lobby has also effectively used the media to misrepresent the gun control issue and play to fears about race, governmental domination and subversion.

The highly emotional argument most frequently echoed by the pro-gun constituency is the claim to a constitutional "right" to bear arms." This claim is often made in ignorance of the numerous Supreme Court decisions which have consistently held that the Second Amendment to the Constitution refers not to an individual right to bear arms but rather to the right of a state to maintain a well armed militia. The fierce emotional fervor attached to this concern perhaps best illustrates the degree to which the gun lobby has shaped public opinion to serve its goals.

Our uniquely American gun culture has now assumed a tone of immediacy in reaction to the sharp growth in the nations' crime rate. Millions of citizens

genuinely fear their neighborhood streets after dark, and their notion of defending ones' self and one's family rather than relying solely on the police, has apparently gained great appeal, despite the proven impracticality and ineffectuality of such efforts.

There are now approximately 40 million privately owned handguns and an additional 2.5 million enter circulation each year. Yet, we find ourselves lending legitimacy to gun control proposals which we know will not address the full scope of our handgun problem.

Legislation which would ban the "Saturday Night Special" or mandate registration and licensing are measures which have extremely limited application. Much like the emasculated Gun Control Act of 1968, these provisions will have little impact on the numbers of deaths and injuries by handguns each year.

This is particularly true of the "Saturday Night Special" legislation now being considered by this Subcommittee. In addition to the difficulties encountered in finding a definition for "Saturday Night Specials" which is not easily circumvented by the manufacturer, a wealth of documentary evidence indicates that only a small percentage of voilent crimes are committed with these cheap, poorly manufactured handguns.

Studies conducted by the New York City Police Department have determined that less than 30 percent of the firearms seized from arrested perpetrators were "Saturday Night Specials". Another study by the same source reports that within a fifteen day period seven police officers were killed with handguns. None of the handguns used in these crimes were identified as "Specials". This same study emphasized that while "Saturday Night Specials" are an important part of the handgun problem, eliminating them would not come close to fully eradicating the problem. In fact, I would suggest that "Saturday Night Special" legislation might in some ways prove counter-productive.

It has become apparent that the major handgun manufacturers in this country quietly support banning the "Special." This is not totally unexpected since such a measure would eliminate existing competition from roughly 300 small manufacturers. The top ten manufacturers would then be free to totally monopolize the handgun market and as a result, be financially capable of marketing what are now expensive revolvers and pistols for considerably less. I am firmly convinced that the passage of "Saturday Night Special" legislation would not only fail to reduce the alarming amount of violent crime presently being committed, but would also play into the hands of the major gun manufacturers who share perhaps the greatest responsibility for the maintenance and cultivation of this country's obsession with guns.

Although licensing and registration measures provide a more logical, enforcible alternative to "Saturday Night Specials" legislation, they too are similarly lacking in scope. Legislation of this nature would require that each gun be registered and that each owner be licensed after the completion of a thorough police check. These provisions would of course restrict the availability of handguns to those who are theoretically responsible lawabiding citizens. It has been amply demonstrated, however, that accidents or "crimes of passion" between people who are either related or acquainted account for approximately 73% of handgun deaths yearly. Licensing and registration legislation is, in the final analysis, another inadequate measure which has gained legitimacy in our avoidance of the difficult but necessary solution.

Former Attorney General Ramsey Clark in his book "Crime in America" stated the case well when he wrote:

"If government is incapable of keeping guns from the potential criminal while permitting them to law-abiding citizens then perhaps government is inadequate to the times. The only alternative is to remove guns from the American scene."

I strongly arge the Subcommittee to avoid proposals which do not go to the heart of the problem and follow the responsible precedent set by other nations by imposing a total ban on the private possession of all handguns.

Tokyo, a city of ten million had three handgun murders in 1973, as compared to New York City which had 800 murders committed by handguns in the same year-a rate which is 266 times that of Tokyo. In England and Wales, with a combined population of 50 million, there were 35 murders committed with firearms compared to 13,072 murders committed in the United States.

I have proposed legislation which would eliminate the handgun from the home and the streets by prohibiting the sale, manufacture and possession of the weapons.

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »