INTERSTATE SHIPMENT OF FIREARMS

THURSDAY, JANUARY 30, 1964

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,

Washington, D.C.

The committee met at 10 a.m., in room 5110, New Senate Office Building, the Honorable Howard W. Cannon presiding.

Senator CANNON. The hearing will come to order.

We are very happy today to have here the President pro tempore of the U.S. Senate, the distinguished senior Senator from the State of Arizona, who will introduce the first witness.

Senator Hayden, we are very pleased to have you appear before our committee this morning.

Senator HAYDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator MAGNUSON. As chairman of this committee, I want to welcome my old friend Carl Hayden. I think the record should show that he is an expert on firearms, having been the rootingest-tootingest sheriff that Arizona ever had in its early days.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Mr. Chairman, I think Senator Hayden was captain in the Arizona National Guard. He took a rifle team to Camp Perry, Ohio, and is a national rifle champion. Is that not correct, Senator Hayden, that you participated in the national meets?

Senator HAYDEN. Yes, but not quite that. I will tell you about it. Senator YARBOROUGH. I know he is a great rifleman, a tremendous marksman, and has a tremendous record in his active officer days.

STATEMENT OF HON. CARL HAYDEN, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ARIZONA

Senator HAYDEN. Mr. Chairman, I was a captain in the National Guard of Arizona when we cleared off the sagebrush from a thousandyard rifle range and as a result of the practice that my company had there, about half of the membership of the Arizona rifle team at Camp Perry, Ohio, in my time came from that company.

I did make a record at Camp Perry, in a match that involved 800, 900, and a thousand yards. At 900 yards I hit the bull's-eye 15 consecutive times, which is known as a possible.

I visited a battlefield in France after the First World War, where a comparatively small force of marines were attacked by a very large force of Germans. The marines picked out an individual German and promptly killed or wounded him. As a result, when that attack was about halfway to them, the Germans fled, thereby demonstrating the value of accurate rifle firing.

From a member of the National Rifle Association, which opposes features of this bill, upon the theory that it impinges on the constitutional right "of the people to keep and bear arms." Mr. Chairman, at this time I also present a statement by the Honorable Paul Fannin, Governor of Arizona, expressing his views with respect to the bill now under consideration by your committee.

Senator CANNON. We will be happy to receive that statement, Senator Hayden, and to include it in the record.

(The statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF Gov. PAUL FANNIN, OF ARIZONA, OPPOSING S. 1975

As Governor of Arizona it is my duty to uphold the constitution and laws of Arizona and to protect the rights and property of Arizona citizens. A study of S. 1975 by Senator Thomas Dodd convinces me this bill would infringe the rights of our citizens under our constitution and convert to the whims of a Federal agency the time-honored principle that a man is innocent until proven guilty. This bill would also impose a restraint on trade that would virtually wipe out the lifework and businesses of a number of our citizens, some of whom are known nationwide for the quality of their work in building fine rifles, and accurizing rifles for this country's leading competitive shooters, including some of the top marksmen of the Air Force and the Army. These are such men as Roy Dunlap of Tucson, Warren Drake of Phoenix, formerly top armorer for the U.S. Army's marksmanship training unit; George J. Stidworthy, Jr.; and the Atkinson & Marquardt Co., of Prescott, not to mention William Sukalle of Phoenix, dean of the country custom barrelmakers. All of these depend upon mail-order business for their existence, but theirs is not a traffic in cheap arms with criminals. Some of the rifles they turn out cost hundreds of dollars, and their barrels draw premium prices throughout the country.

I believe it is significant that a large majority of the States adopted strong constitutional provisions to guarantee the right of their citizens to keep and bear arms. And it cannot be argued that these provisions were a product of the frontier because Arizona's constitution was adopted in 1910, some 30 years after the last Indian war. It says: "The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the State shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain, or employ an armed body of men."

Our State, indeed no State, and very few communities, west of the Mississippi has a problem relating to mail-order firearms, unless it be one created by failure of the Congress to restrict the importation of worthless, cheap foreign pistols, and castoff foreign military rifles into this country. This is the real problem, but only Congress can solve it.

We have no difficulty in Arizona. Our laws governing possession of firearms forbid possession of a pistol by persons convicted of specified crimes of violence until such time as they have discharged their debt to society, and are pardoned. We do not allow any permit to carry a concealed weapon, a chief source of trouble in other States. And we require written consent of a parent or guardian for sale or gift of a firearm or ammunition to minors. Our laws are sensible and for that reason they pose no enforcement problem because people comply with them. We have derived no benefit from the Federal Firearms Act that is apparent to me, and the only good it could do would be to merely provide that common carriers comply with State laws in making delivery of packages containing firearms.

Criminals pay no attention to it, and it is impossible to apprehend them until they have committed a more serious crime, and they always are charged with the State offense. The most serious crime in our State in 1963 was the murder of Sheriff Tarr, of Mohave County, who was shot down by an ex-convict who bought a pistol in Las Vegas, Nev., and transported it across the State line. Sheriff Tarr mortally wounded his assailant, however, as he was falling and no prosecution was possible.

I appeal to you, gentlemen, not to be carried away by the hysteria of our President's assassination. The antigun people of our country have seized upon this as an opening wedge to disarm the citizens of this country so they will quickly forget the skill of marksmanship. But I must remind you that our country must depend on its citizenry in time of grave peril, and there never is time to train expert marksmen.

Senator HAYDEN. I now introduce Mr. Ben Avery, an outstanding member of the staff of Arizona's leading newspaper and a member of the National Rifle Association. His testimony will be based on years of experience on how the use of firearms is of benefit to our Nation.

Mr. Avery.

Senator CANNON. Mr. Avery, we are happy to have you appear here today.

THE

STATEMENT OF BEN AVERY, SECRETARY-TREASURER, ARIZONA REPUBLIC, PHOENIX, ARIZ., REPRESENTING THE ARIZONA STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION

Mr. AVERY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Senator Hayden.

Gentlemen, I would like, first, to thank you for the opportunity to appear here to help stem the tide of unreasoning emotionalism aimed, apparently, at disarming the American people because of a tragedy that all of the laws in the world could not prevent.

I have served as chairman of the committee in Arizona for the past 17 years that has written all of our State laws. This committee is composed of law enforcement officers, members of the American Legion, the county attorneys, as well as the National Rifle Association members.

I would like to apologize for changing my statement text. However, only in the last few days has it been possible for me to learn what has been happening here in Washington. I am sure that millions of other Americans are deeply interested in what is going on here, know even less, because as a newspaperman I write about such things every day and see the wire service. I am sure that those who propose having the American people apply to the alcohol and tobacco tax office for an affidavit form, then fill it out and have it notarized, do not realize what real hardship and inconvenience a law such as this could impose on a large segment of our population.

I hope my testimony can point up how this law would be a real restraint of trade and imposition on millions of rural residents of our Nation who would have to comply with it because they are honest citizens, while the criminal would not be affected because his profession is breaking the law.

I firmly believe that the citizen who would be hurt by this law does not realize what it would do, nor how it would be administered. However, throughout the West, and in many Midwest and Eastern States, millions of rural residents still order many of the articles

Senator THURMOND. Mr. Chairman, I can't hear the witness.

Senator CANNON. Mr. Avery, would you pull the microphone a little closer, please.

Mr. AVERY. Yes, sir.

We have one corner of Arizona where the people cannot even buy anything from their county seat without having it sent through another State because they are cut off by the Grand Canyon. Most of them even have to buy their clothes and food in Nevada or Utah.

Throughout these rural areas, many people do not go to town more than three or four times a year. The star route mailman brings them most of their needs, or they send to town by neighbors for needed

29-119-64- -14

items. To these rural Americans, the gun still is an implement of protection of their persons and property against wild animals, and for supplementing their larder. In Alaska, which I have visited, I wonder how you would explain to one of the natives who lives 1,500 miles from the nearest store, that he would have to go to town and fill out an affidavit to order a gun by mail.

But even for the residents of small towns in America, have you considered how the law-abiding citizen will be able to easily get a form from the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Unit-an agency that most of them never even heard of; do you know how discouraging it is now sometimes to get a form and apply for and get a license as a dealer in such areas?

I would urge this committee, before passing such a law, to hold hearings throughout the country so more of the affected honest citizens can learn what this bill would do. I believe it is time for Congress to look behind the Federal Firearms Act and the National Firearms Act. In the light of the number of arrests made under them, examine the effect they have on our country, because everything has changed since the 1930's, when they were enacted, mainly to deal with the gang wars that resulted from the prohibition era. That era is gone now-its warlords wiped out mainly for violating income tax laws, not the Federal or National Firearms Acts.

But we have other problems. The other day a friend of mine in Scottsdale, Ariz., bought an AR-15 and some thousands of rounds of ammunition from a firearms company and he is having a ball firing it full automatic at targets out in the desert against a sandbank. I think he told me he paid $175 plus a $200 transfer tax on it. That is less than my 30-06 match rifle cost. But this man was harming no one, nor was he disturbing anyone. He was shooting on his own land. If this should become a problem in Arizona, we can handle it by State law.

However, for the past few years, I have been captain of our State rifle team. Now, this is a job that Senator Hayden once had. We haven't been doing as well as he did, however. And the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax Unit will not even allow us to train citizens of good repute in the use of our present service rifle, the M14, after it is welded so it will not fire full automatic. It seems there is a technicality in the wording of the law which in referring to automatic weapons includes "or weapons manufactured for automatic fire."

There is no question that our service rifle of the future must have full automatic capability, but if we are not to permit training of civilians in the use of the service rifle, our country will be seriously weakened when an emergency comes.

The National Rifle Association executive committee has expressed its belief that the bill as now amended complies with the standards for legislation established by the National Rifle Association. From my long experience in this field, and as a member of the committee that drafted the NRA policy statement, I must disagree wholeheartedly, and I hope also that after more study of the effects of the bill as amended, Mr. Orth also has changed his views.

With that preface, I would like to discuss the bill.

First I would like to say that it is evident that Mr. Orth and other members of the staff of the National Rifle Association, and Senator