setting up any real safeguard to prevent the illegal acquisition of fireams by the irresponsible, the criminal, the mentally disturbed, or the inexperienced youth. GERALD E. EDDY, Director, Michigan Department of Conservation. Senator WARREN G. MAGNUSON, JEFFERSON CITY, Mo., January 20, 1964. Chairman, Senate Committee on Commerce, Unable to apear in person at hearings on firearms bills but want to go un record as opposed to police control or compulsory registration of hunting weapons. Principal need is control of the irresponsible individual or criminal, not undue restrictions on firearms themselves. Requirement for affidavit of responsibility from purchasers would not be objectionable. Urge you carefully consider needs of hunters and sportsmen in any gun legislation recommended by your committee. WILLIAM F. TOWELL, Director, Missouri Conservation Commission. HELENA, MONT., January 22, 1964. Senator WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Chairman, Senate Commerce Committee, On January 20, the Montana Fish and Game Commission went on record as opposing Federal or State legislation that will cause the strict registration and regulation of gun ownership by private citizens and affect their right to bear arms. FRANK H. DUNKLE, State Fish and Game Director. JANUARY 29, 1964. Hon. WARREN MAGNUSON, Chairman, Senate Committee on Commerce, By official action of Nevada Fish and Game Commission, January 26, strongly oppose any Federal legislation requiring police permit registration of all guns. Will not oppose requirement of affidavits on mail-order sale of revolvers and pistols that buyer is not a convicted felon, teenager, mental defective, or narcotic addict. More restrictive legislation only penalizes the law-abiding citizen, and does not further prevent crime. Will appreciate any assistance you can give in preventing undesirable legislation. FRANK W. GROVES, Director, Nevada Fish and Game Commission. CONCORD, N.H., January 22, 1964. Senator WARREN MAGNUSON, Chairman, Senate Commerce Committee, Washington, D.C.: Urge that you firmly resist legislation which would make registration of firearms mandatory. Either directly or indirectly. Believe we can live with S. 1975 if amendments proposed on December 12 concerning affidavit on mail-order guns are adopted. Sportsmen's interests in this matter identical with those of National Rifle Association; hence we take the same position they have officially adopted. Requirement for advance approval by police officer would amount to registration and give veto power to said official. RALPH D. CARPENTER, STATE OF NEW YORK, CONSERVATION Department, · Hon. WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Chairman, Senate Committee on Commerce, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: I understand that the Senate Committee on Firearms is holding hearings on several firearms bills. The New York State Conservation Department favors the strongest possible deterrents and penalties for the use of firearms in the commission of crimes. We have, however, a major responsibility in providing outdoor recreation for the citizens of New York and are very much concerned about the privilege of citizens to use shotguns and rifles for recreational purposes. In the last license year, there were more than 715,000 residents of New York who held licenses to hunt. There were also more than 25,000 nonresidents who purchased licenses to hunt in New York. In addition, there are many citizens who possess and use rifles and shotguns but who do not purchase hunting licenses. For example, owners, lessees and resident members of their immediate families, actually occupying and cultivating farmlands, are permitted to hunt on their lands, except for deer and bear, without a license. According to the 1959 U.S. Census of Agriculture, there are 82,356 farms in New York, the occupants of which would qualify under this exception. There are also a large but unknown number of people who have rifles and shotguns and use them mainly for target practice or trap and skeet shooting. Based on the known figures, I feel certain that there are more than a million citizens of New York who have and use shotguns and rifles for recreational purposes. I should urge, therefore, that in considering proposals for further regulation of firearms the most careful attention be given to the need for such regulations and their potential effectiveness in the prevention of crime and to the impact of such regulations on the legitimate ownership and use of firearms for recreational purposes. I should hope that regulations which might needlessly limit or restrict a law-abiding person's privilege to possess and use shotguns and rifles for recreational purposes would be avoided. Sincerely, H. G. WILM, Commissioner. STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, WILDLIFE RESOURCES COMMISSION, Raleigh, N.C., January 21, 1964. Hon. WARREN MAGNUSON, Chairman, Senate Committee on Commerce, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: As the executive director of the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission, I believe that I can speak for the sportsmen of North Carolina and many other gun-owning citizens in opposition to any legislation that would require the registration of all firearms. It is our strong belief that placing complete control of the ownership of firearms in the hands of police authority, whether this authority be Federal, State, or local, would be in violation of the inherent constitutional right of Americans to bear arms. Further, we believe that if further restrictions are needed with regard to firearms, these restrictions should pertain to the illegal use of firearms, not to their ownership. We sincerely hope that the passage of any legislation proposed or now under consideration will have been done in a spirit of equanimity, rather than in a moment of national indignation. Cordially and sincerely, CLYDE P. PATTON. ASSOCIATION OF NORTHEAST GAME, FISH, AND February 4, 1964. Hon. WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Chairman, Senate Committee on Commerce, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: At their annual meeting on January 20, 1964, the Association of Northeast Game, Fish, and Conservation Commissioners adopted the following statement: "The Association of Northeast Game, Fish, and Conservation Commissioners supports the strongest possible deterrents and penalties for the use of firearms in the commission of crimes, but is very much concerned about any legislative proposal that may deprive law-abiding citizens of the opportunity to use firearms in the pursuit of healthful outdoor recreation through the sports of hunting and shooting." Sincerely yours, NORMAN G. WILDER, Secretary. THE STATE OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME, DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: I share the great concern of other State wildlife administrators regarding the present firearms control bills which are now the subject of hearings before your committee. In lieu of my inability to be present during these hearings I would appreciate the following brief remarks being read and considered at that time. We vigorously oppose passage of any law requiring police permit registration of all guns. Basic objection here is that such a law would be a serious stumbling block in the management of our recreation and wildlife programs. Legislation dealing with the criminal element, mental defective, or narcotic addict may possibly help the program being considered and be worthy of attention. Sincerely, HAROLD S. CRANE, Director. LETTERS FROM SPORTS AND CONSERVATION GROUPS The following includes a selection of typical comments and resolutions from organizations in the sports, firearms, and conservation fields, concluding with a list of all such organizations who wrote to the Committee on Commerce expressing views of their memberships on this topic. BROWN COUNTY CONSERVATION ALLIANCE, CHAIRMAN, SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: I request that this letter be recorded with the committee minutes in respect to any hearings on any and all legislative bills which propose restrictive legislation of any kind on the purchase and sale of firearms. Please record our organization as firmly opposed to all presently proposed Senate bills and House resolutions except as to provisions requiring proof of age in mail order situations. All other proposed restrictions would be completely meaningless and less to prevent the criminal or abnormal elements of our society from carrying out the dastardly type of act committed in Dallas, Tex., on November 22, 1963. Additional restrictive laws would only further infringe on the constitutional right of law abiding ciitzens to bear arms. The abuses which are possible and must be expected under the present proposals will be heaped upon the innocent-the criminal element will be driven underground to secure his weap ons and police authorities will have even less chance to trace his weapons. The erosion of constitutional rights by legislation of this type typically occurs after some act which outrages decent men. We urge all members of the Senate Commerce Committee and House Ways and Means Committee to consider the broad, long range effects of these proposals on all of the people, not merely the inconvenience it would cause another Lee Harvey Oswald. Very truly yours, RICHARD J. STEINBRINCK, President. COLORADO WILDLIFE FEDERATION, INC., OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, Wheat Ridge, Colo., January 20, 1964. Hon. WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Chairman, Commerce Committee, DEAR SENATOR: I understand hearings are to be held on January 23-24 and 29-30 on firearms regulation S. 1975. Please be advised that Colorado Wildlife Federation, Inc., an organization of sportsmen in Colorado are opposed to such regulation and passed the attached resolution at their annual meeting January 12, 1964. The right of the law-abiding citizen to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed Disarming the law-abiding citizens will not keep the lawless from securing guns and will only make it easier for the lawless to pursue their trade knowing the citizen is unarmed. .. We urge that the matter of firearms control be tabled until it can be considered at a more sane time. Very truly yours, A. J. CHRISTIANSEN, President. RESOLUTION 16. FIREARMS REGULATION Whereas there seems to be a constant threat to the right of individuals to own and possess firearms, such threats being in the form of firearms registration laws and/or police veto power over the purchase of firearms; and Whereas Colorado Wildlife Federation, Inc., believes sincerely that the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That this organization request all our elected officials in Washington, D.C., to oppose all such laws as may be introduced into Congress; and be it Further resolved, That this organization specifically request Senator Peter Dominick, who is a member of the District of Columbia Committee, to keep watch for the addition of H.R. 5608 (the District of Columbia Sullivan Act) to the District of Columbia omnibus crime bill and should it be thus introduced insist on its removal before the bill clears committee. Adopted January 12, 1964. Attest: A. J. CHRISTIANSEN, RESOLUTION 18. REGULATION OF FIREARMS Whereas Thomas L. Kimball presented excellent testimony in favor of the right to keep and bear arms free of unnecessary harassment and needless restriction from any source, at the Dodd committee hearings; and Whereas this Colorado Wildlife Federation, Inc., believes these and many more forthright words are needed to help elected representatives of the people realize we do not want these rights tampered with, we now commend said Thomas L. Kimball for the fine job he is doing in leading us in preserving this right: Therefore be it Resolved, That this organization express its appreciation to National Wildlife Federation for including "Gun Law" coverage in its weekly Conservation News Reports. DEAR SENATOR: I understand hearings are to be held on January 29-30 on firearms regulations, specifically S. 1975, and humbly ask the following to be included in the record. I am L. W. Hunnicut of Rangely, Colo., chairman of the firearms committee of Colorado Wildlife Federation, Inc. We have been following with much interest the Dodd firearms bill, S. 1975. In the beginning the conditions of this bill were intended to control the purchase of firearms, specifically handguns, by minors (juvenile delinquents) and others (addicts, felons, fugitives from justice, etc.) throug mail order, thereby circumventing local law officers. It would also help regulate some of the sellers of cheap, inferior grade firearms and help diminish the sale of many foreign surplus firearms which range from poorly designed to downright dangerous. These reasons we consider desirable, although this gun bill seems rather far reaching for a committee that was supposed to investigate juvenile delinquency. However, we will grant that juvenile delinquency and unauthorized firearms possession are, to a point at least, probably related. Then we find the words (sec. 3(d)) "as the Secretary may be regulation prescribe" which seems to circumvent the authority and duties of Congress to any views that one person may have or, in a moment of crisis, and before calm reasoning has had time to reassert itself, may be convinced it might be better to approve. As an example of what can happen we find that after the assassination of President Kennedy, the Honorable Thomas J. Dodd made some changes in this bill, which, I understand, have subsequently been withdrawn, which would have imposed a very dangerous situation upon this country and the peace-loving people who live in it. Here I am referring to the part where a police officer would have to return a signed statement that notice had been received of a firearms purchase by mail, before the firearm could be sent to the purchaser. This police veto power over the purchase of firearms could lead to severe discriminatory practices. If anyone who understands the situation as well as Senator Dodd must, after the hearings he has conducted in his subcommittee, can be persuaded, while under stress, to adopt such an amendment as this, what can be expected from the floor of the Senate if this bill is allowed to reach that level at this time. We have some wild thinking as to how the elimination of guns will suddenly remove all the bad and leave the good, but this concept seems to have worked just the opposite everywhere in the world it has been tried. Might I state: America is free and great because of guns-not in spite of them. No other country in the world has the high standard of living we enjoy here and neither does any other country have the freedom of possession and use of arms we have here. While I could go into great detail as to the reasons the two are inescapably locked together, I will not attempt to do so here as I am sure your hearings will bring all this out better than I can present it. But, must we lose all the sincere effort and time that has been devoted to the problem of firearms and juvenile delinquency because of an unfortunate experience? May we sincerely request the original Dodd bill (draft-June 1, 1962) be submitted to the Senate floor on a suspension of the rules procedure whereby |