Mr. FOOTE. Were they favorable or unfavorable? Mr. FOOTE. Yes, sir; we are going clear back to the thirties now. I don't know. Senator DODD. I won't speak for all of them--but some of them were opposed to it. Well, very well. That is all I have. Senator HRUSKA. I have no questions. But I do want to say I think this witness has brought us a point of view which will be very helpful to the committee in its final formulation of the legislation before us. Thank you, Mr. Foote, for appearing. Senator DODD. Senator Burdick? Senator BURDICK. Yes; I would like to ask a few questions. Mr. Foote, we have developed the thesis here that separates the sporting rifle from the handguns. You feel that there is a need for Federal regulation in the handgun area, but because of the nature of the hunting weapon or the long gun, it is not needed in that area? Mr. FOOTE. Yes, sir; reasonable regulation. I have read the Hickenlooper bill. That provides in mail-order weapons, notification of the local law enforcement authorities prior to shipment. Senator DODD. That bill is almost an exact copy of the bill I introduced, S. 14. Were you in favor of my bill? Mr. FOOTE. S. 14, sir? Senator DODD. Yes. Mr. FOOTE. I testified-I believe it was called 1975 at that timeafter it included the long arms, Senator, we drew some grave reservations. But on the basic-no objections were made when it was only involving pistols. Senator DODD. Did you speak for it? Mr. FOOTE. No, sir. Senator DODD. Very well. That is all. Senator HRUSKA. Mr. Witness, if you were called upon to speak for every bill that you were in favor of, would you be pretty busily occupied? Mr. FOOTE. Very busily occupied-although as active as my commission is in this field, I can assure this committee that, on conversation with them, they will at least supply a statement if, as, and when public hearings are undertaken on the Hickenlooper bill-if not supplying a witness-because they feel very strongly on this matter. The matter largely, Senator Burdick, is on concealability, and on reasonableness of the legislation. This involves a $10 fee rather than $100 dealer fee-a thousand percent increase rather than a 10,000percent increase. We feel it will help strengthen the Federal Firearms Act at a point where it is weak at the present time. We are not acquainted with law enforcement procedures in large metropolitan areas. But certainly in smaller areas, where people are more acquainted, there are some people who, because of background, because of mental instability, it would just be well if they didn't have a pistol. Out in our country, if someone so arms himself, it doesn't take too long for many individuals to know this, and the sheriff drops over and says, "George, I think you better leave that with me." That is sort of informal and extralegal, but that is how things work. and it works out very well. If he wants to appeal, he can go to court. Senator BURDICK. In other words, in addition to the factor of concealability, there is this factor of the attitude toward a weapon in the hunting areas of this country. Mr. FOOTE. That is right, sir. However, I must make the point that I am not overlooking the fact that handguns do have a legitimate sporting use of a more restricted nature than long arms do. Many States allow the use of handguns, and even in big-game hunting. It is very sporting type hunting. You have to become quite expert with them. And there are certainly legitimate target-shooting uses for handguns. Because of the nature and concealability of the weapon and its higher use in crime, that is the reason for our feelings on this matter. Senator BURDICK. Would you say there is a more healthy and educated attitude toward the hunting rifle in the western areas and the open areas because of the use they have been put to through the years? For example, I know that many small boys, 8, 12, 13, 14, learn to use a gun, go out to hunt with their fathers, and learn to use a weapon. Doesn't that create kind of a healthy attitude that you would not find with the similar use of a handgun in a metropolitan city? Mr. FOOTE. Yes, sir. We would concur in that statement. My boy is 10, and it is a great thing when Dad says, "All right, son, you may now take the weapon out of the guncase," and I unlock it for him, "and let's go out and see if you can get a rabbit." He only uses that with me. And it is a very, very healthy attitude, a very fine thing. Senator BURDICK. And because of the situation in the large cities, the youth of the cities are not afforded the same opportunity as we do in the Western States, for example. Mr. FOOTE. To some extent that is true-because of the lack of shooting ranges, for example. Although there are outstanding exceptions. There are places in our large metropolitan areas, rifle ranges, for example, where marksmanship training can be taught on the boys club basis, Boy Scout basis, father-son basis. But they are certainly, I would concur, not as readily available, there are not as many as the opportunities that exist in your country and mine, sir. Senator BURDICK. There is also a distinction to be made upon the type and character of the weapons; is there not? For example, if one is bent upon crime, he certainly is not going to take a long gun-he is going to take a concealed weapon. Mr. FooTE. In most instances I believe that is correct. Senator BURDICK. Did you ever see a .30-30 used in a stickup-it is usually a revolver. Mr. FOOTE. Yes, sir; a much higher incidence of use. Senator BURDICK. Is it your opinion we can make a logical and reasonable distinction, then, between the long hunting gun and the concealable handgun in legislation? Mr. FooTE. Yes; it is. Senator BURDICK. Is that what you would like to see happen here? Mr. FOOTE. Yes, sir. Senator BURDICK. Thank you. Senator DODD. I think you said in your testimony that-you were objecting to the authority conferred on the Secretary of the Treasury in this bill to determine who may engage in the business as a dealer or manufacturer of firearms. I think you said that you knew many persons who operate out of the basements of their homes. Mr. FOOTE. Yes, sir. Senator DODD. Do you know many persons who do this? Mr. FOOTE. Yes, sir. Senator DODD. Can you give their names and addresses? Senator DODD. Are they presently licensed under the Federal Firearms Act? Mr. FOOTE. Yes, sir. Senator DODD. All of them? Mr. FOOTE. Yes, sir. Senator DODD. They haven't been oppressively treated by the Secretary of the Treasury? Mr. FOOTE. No, sir. The authority about who may or who may not engage is not contained in the present law, as long as the man is not a convicted felon and does not violate the provisions of the present law, whereas you could not describe these as business premises. I would give an example, a gentleman by the name of Floyd Flader, of rural route 8, in Lincoln. He operates 640 acres of land. He operates a reloading operation, a very fine one, in the basement of his farm home. He supplies all the practice ammunition for the Lincoln Police Department. There is a question in many people's minds-is this a business premise? It is not commonly so construed. Here is a store or a manufacturing plant. This is where Floyd happens to operate. I raise the point under the language of this law, which is broader, that the Secretary of the Treasury could say, "Well, this is a home, not a business premise." Senator DODD. Is that why you are concerned? Mr. FOOTE. That is part of our concern ; yes, sir. Senator DODD. That is all. I take it you are worried about the architectural design of the building. You think that would trouble the Secretary of the Treasury sufficiently to warrant you opposing this part of the bill? Mr. FOOTE. Senator, the opening is there. I don't know what the Secretary of the Treasury could do in this field. He does not have this power today. But were this legislation enacted, he would have this power. Also, a matter of trade connections and experience. Senator DODD. I don't know. Some of you witnesses have a pretty dim view of public officials, it seems to me. Mr. FOOTE. Well, Senator, I am a bureaucrat myself. I have seen some things happen in Government that we could all wonder about. Senator DODD. It seems to me every witness who opposes this bill comes here and says what a terrible thing it is to give the Secretary of the Treasury any power to regulate the sale of firearms, as if he were some kind of a monster who tries to oppress the American people. But he has been administering the Federal Firearms Act, the National Firearms Act, for 25 or 30 years. And a lot of other things besides. 49-588-65-38 I think this is part of the folklore of this country that doesn't make much sense. That is all I have. Senator HRUSKA. Well, Mr. Chairman, I would like to suggest that those who come here advocating this measure and similar measures condemn just as severely all citizenry of this Nation to a point of regulation and a point of supervision and surveillance which doesn't reflect too well on them. Now, it is one thing to comment on those who oppose this legislation and comment on their apprehension about what bureaucrats do, and so on. It is another thing to comment on those who favor it and say all of these people, whether they are potential criminals within urban centers, or whether they are law-abiding citizens in the vast reaches of the Middle West, that they should all be equated. And I don't believe they should. Now, it is true the Secretary of the Treasury has administered the Federal Firearms Act for many, many years. Had he been guilty. however, of any overreaching or any oppressive acts, I would wager that there would be bills introduced in the Congress to say he shall not do certain things, if he went beyond his pale. And the fact that he hasn't is to his credit. Senator HRUSKA. It is to his credit. And yet his authority is being extended here. He is being authorized and directed to get into vast areas which many of us feel he should not. That is why we oppose some aspects of this bill-not all of them, but some of them. Senator DODD. Very well. That is all, Mr. Foote. Mr. FOOTE. Thank you, sir. Senator HRUSKA. Mr. Chairman, May I ask there be inserted in the record at the beginning, with the other opening remarks, a statement I have prepared? Senator DODD. Yes. Chief Brostron, chief of police, St. Louis, Mo., accompanied by Maj. Adolph Jacobsmeyer. Chief, we are very glad you are here. We look forward to hearing you testify. You go right ahead. STATEMENT OF CURTIS BROSTRON, CHIEF OF POLICE, ST. LOUIS, MO., ACCOMPANIED BY ADOLPH JACOBSMEYER Mr. BROSTRON. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Curtis Brostron. I am chief of police of the Police Department of the City of St. Louis. It is the responsibility of our department to protect the life and property of about 750,000 people who sleep in St. Louis, and we have the impact of a million and a half to two million people from the metropolitan area in the city of St. Louis every day at high noon. In addition to protecting their life and property, we are charged with the prevention of crime, with the preservation of peace, with the management and control of traffic, so that people may not get injured in accidents, and to enforce all the laws. We feel very fortunate that we have a police department that contains many dedicated police officers who do a tremendous job in fulfilling this obligation. We receive a great deal of support from responsible citizens, and from our mass media in St. Louis, to help us to manage and control crime. But at our very best, we cannot hope to eliminate it without the support of responsible citizenry, which we hope we will always continue to have, and legislation in any form that might help our police officers manage and control crime. Therefore, as chief of police of St. Louis, I am strongly in favor of Senate bill No. 1592, since I feel it will at the very least make the acquisition of firearms more difficult for persons with criminal intent. For others, the increased difficulty in obtaining firearms will perhaps remove temptation, particularly in the case of juveniles. I have with me today Maj. Adolf Jacobsmeyer, who has had many years of service in the department and who has spent a great deal of those years working in the field of juveniles, and he will address himself to some of the pertinent problems in that area. It is my opinion that many criminals would not commit a crime if they did not have the built-in threat of a gun to use. Here again, many juveniles feel like big men when they get the power of a gun in their hands, and consequently get big ideas. I cannot answer any questions as to hardships that may be imposed upon importers or manufacturers as a result of this bill, but as a law enforcement official, with over 35 years of experience in the field, I can tell you with complete sincerity and candor that firearms create many problems for police departments. The ease with which guns can be obtained increases crime and the danger of the police officers doing their duty. In St. Louis it is unlawful to buy, sell, transport, or have in actual possession a machinegun. Likewise, it is against the law to carry a concealed weapon. In this regard we have worked very closely with the local task unit on anything that would pertain to the length of weapons or anything like a machinegun. The crime of carrying concealed weapons is a particular problem the law enforcement agencies face. During the period from June 1, 1964, to May 31, 1965, 658 persons in St. Louis were arrested on the charge of carrying concealed weapons. Of these, 414 carried revolvers, 207 pistols, 12 had 22 caliber rifles, 7 high-powered rifles, and 17 had shotguns. Our percentage in obtaining warrants for those arrested is about 15 percent. During the past few months of this year, our percentage of warrants issued is better because we have a new attorney who has issued more warrants in these cases and authorized prosecution. But the problem remains that it is extremely difficult to make a legal search of an individual only suspected of carrying a concealed weapon. It is true we are getting a gun off the street when we arrest the suspect, but the individual arrested more often than not is free to go right back out and obtain another gun with which to commit a crime. In addition to the concealed weapon charges, a total of 772 other felonies involving firearms were committed in St. Louis the past 12 |