(The information referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 140" and is as follows:)

EXHIBIT No. 140

[Press release JM No. 669]

BILLS SIGNED BY GOV. EDMUND G. BROWN, JULY 14, 1965

Gov. Edmund B. Brown today signed a series of bills designed to tighten the State's firearms control laws and help keep lethal weapons out of the hands of those who have no legitimate reason to possess them.

The measures were authored by Assemblymen Gordon Winton, Democrat, of Merced, Anthony C. Beilenson, Democrat, of Beverly Hills, and Richard J. Donovan, Republican, of National City. The Winton bills carry out most of the 1964 recommendations of the Governor to the assembly committee on criminal procedure.

"California's firearms laws even before passage of the new legislation were among the best in the Nation," the Governor said. "These measures strengthen them significantly.

"But I believe still tighter controls are required. The recent Hale Champion family kidnaping is a dramatic and timely reminder of that fact.

"I am still deeply concerned over the fact that there are a number of persons in this State who buy or possess concealable firearms without legitimate reason; persons who, because of criminal record, mental condition, age, or lack of training have no business owning a gun.

"Yet such persons have virtually free access to weapons which are designed primarily to kill. And more and more such weapons continue to flood the market."

Nonetheless, he said, "significant progress was made at the 1965 session, particularly in the area of increased penalties for firearms theft and illegal possession, and I commend the authors-particularly Assemblyman Winton-for their leadership in this area.

"The new legislation will result in an increased measure of public protection without infringing on the legitimate firearms rights of sportsmen and hunters, whose groups and associations fully supported these bills."

These were the measures signed:

Assembly bill 389, by Winton, making the theft of any kind of firearms-pistol, rifle, or shotgun-grand theft.

Assembly bill 390, by Winton, increasing the penalty for illegal possession or ownership of a concealable weapon from 5 to 15 years and prohibiting any person who has been convicted of a felony in which he used a firearm from owning or possesssing a firearm.

Assembly bill 391, by Winton, requiring that every person under 18 must be accompanied by a parent or guardian, or responsible adult trained in the use of firearms when carrying a concealable weapon.

Assembly bill 392, by Winton, requiring that the birthdate of the buyer, in addition to his signature and address, must be included in the dealer register of sale of a concealable firearm.

Assembly bill 393, by Winton, providing that no person previously committed to a mental institution may possess or own any firearms unless he has obtained a certificate from the head of the mental institution that he can do so without endangering others.

Assembly bill 1564, by Beilenson, increasing the waiting period on purchase of concealable firearms from 3 to 5 days to permit a more thorough check on the purchaser.

Assembly bill 395, by Donovan, redefining California's "machinegun" provisions to conform to Federal law.

Assembly bill 396, by Donovan, redefining "sawed-off shotgun" and bringing such weapons as the "enforcer," or sawed-off automatic carbine, under tighter control.

Assembly bill 397, by Donovan, exempting antique weapons from the dangerous weapons control law.

Senator DODD. You were kidnaped at gunpoint, I believe, were you not?

Mr. CHAMPION. That is right.

Senator DODD. You know, we have heard a lot of testimony here about the fact that rifles and shotguns are included in this bill. There have been several witnesses who proposed the inclusion of both types of weapons on the grounds that they are not used very much in the commission of crime. Our records show about 30 percent of crimes committed with guns include rifles and shotguns. That, it seems to me, would be a substantial amount. Certainly your experience sheds some light on that controversy.

Mr. CHAMPION. I might say that the men who had us originally had only hand weapons, and they were very anxious to obtain the other weapons. They felt that they were in a bad situation until they had them, and once they had the rifles, they then used the rifles as their primary weapons, both in the roadblock and at other times. They regarded them as the weapons that were really desirable as far as they were concerned.

Senator DODD. What is the nature of the fiery correspondence you have received since you have made known that you were to testify before this subcommittee?

Mr. CHAMPION. Well, I think the burden of it-and there is some. correctness in this-that we were not kidnaped because the firearms laws were not adequate, and that somehow, because I was arguing that we should change the firearms laws, that I was attempting to blame this sort of act on legitimate purchasers of firearms, and some of these people were quite resentful in their language about what they conceived to be my attitude here. Well, this was not my attitude, of course. As a matter of fact, my 10-year-old son had left a door unlocked that should have been locked, and it might not have happened in that case. But it would have happened to somebody else.

They were looking with guns in their hands for hostages, and actually the first time during the whole episode that the gun laws came into my mind was when they were making those purchases in Nevada while we sat out there in the car. They were buying guns in order to kill policemen, and they were not having to show any identification. They were not having to make any demonstration, apparently, who were two excons 2 weeks out of prison and really nothing to prevent them from obtaining the most lethal kind of weapons. I have not had a chance to answer all my correspondence yet, but I will try to make that clear to them when I do.

Senator DODD. What has been the general nature of the opposition to your firearms legislation in California?

Mr. CHAMPION. Well, it comes in various kinds. As I indicated in my testimony, there are different kinds of people. I think that the testimony that is the most seriously regarded and about which we are most concerned is the testimony that comes from sportsmen who do have a legitimate interest in under what circumstances they can obtain arms. My only feeling there is that they are not showing an understanding of our concern about the other kind of people who own arms. That the safest driver in the world has to obtain a license, has to register his automobile, has to do all sorts of things, has to pass tests showing competence to drive, and that for somebody to own a firearm. this is not an outrageous requirement. This is the burden of our discussion with them.

I regard them as responsible people who are seriously concerned. There are, of course, a lot of people I do not regard as responsible who are against it, but the sportsmen, I think, we take it most seriously. Senator DODD. Did these bandits say anything, make any comments on how easy it was for them to buy the weapons you have described? Mr. CHAMPION. Yes. Apparently they somehow-and this conversation was not pursued-they had earlier picked up shotguns, and I think in one case had cut down a shotgun and used it with other hostages. Then when they were going to be in a city, they had gotten rid of the weapons, but they were all sure they would be able to pick up more. There seemed to be no problem in their minds about their inability to get firearms when and where they needed them.

Senator DODD. I take it from your experience and from your statement, that you were well aware of the mockery that mail-order gun salesmen make of State law. We have found in the course of our investigation and hearings that some of the most indiscriminate mailorder houses are located in California.

Do you think there is anything that the State of California can do to tighten up the practices of these dealers, these mail-order dealers in California?

Mr. CHAMPION. I think probably there are many more things that we could and should do. I understand the attorney general, who is an expert witness in this field, as I am not, has testified before this committee. We did work in this session to tighten the laws substantially, and among other things the Governor, who was a former Attorney General, having been Attorney General of California for 8 years, has suggested that we should really investigate seriously the problem of total registration of firearms. He has not made that recommendation, but he has asked for a complete legislative investigation of that possibility.

Senator DODD. I think it would be of interest for you to know that I have asked the Treasury Department to thoroughly investigate the sale of two rifles which you described for us. They found some very interesting information. For example, on the first rifle which was purchased where your name was used, photostats of the records of gun stores questions indicated that the entry marked on the sale to Gray appears to have been entered in the book subsequent to the publicity surrounding the case which appeared in the press. There was no entry prior to that time.

Mr. CHAMPION. Apparently it may very well have been after the FBI called, because my information from the U.S. attorney's office is that they said there was no record of such a sale at the time they checked.

Senator DODD. Well, we asked for a more thorough investigation of this particular store.

The second sale also appears to have been completed in violation of the present Federal Firearms Act as you probably know. That is a matter of enforcement of the present act, of course, which certainly needs tightening up in my judgment.

I think your testimony, wholly aside from the grim drama of it, points up as well as perhaps any testimony could the fact that these long guns are used by the criminals and that we have got to do something about it in this country. I refer to the fact that witness after

witness here has said there is really no evidence that the long guns, as they call them, the rifles and shotguns, are used to any extent by criminals.

Mr. CHAMPION. One was held to my head for something like 20 minutes, so I can testify that at least once it was so used.

Senator DODD. I think your testimony will be helpful to us on this law certainly. I do not know what the committee will think about including these long guns in over-the-counter sales. I doubt that that would be advisable. But certainly the very least we can ask is. that mail-order sales be put under control. I am sure you agree. Mr. CHAMPION. I do indeed.

Senator DODD. Well, I thank you very much for coming here and giving us the story of your experience. Is there anything you want. to add?

Mr. CHAMPION. Nothing at all. Thank you very much, Senator.. Senator DODD. Thank you.

Our next witness is Mr. Daniel R. McLeod, attorney general of the State of South Carolina. With him is Mr. J. P. Strom, director of the South Carolina State Law Enforcement Division.

Attorney General McLeod, we will be glad to hear you.

STATEMENT OF DANIEL R. MCLEOD, ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, ACCOMPANIED BY J. P. STROM, DIRECTOR, SOUTH CAROLINA STATE LAW ENFORCEMENT DIVISION

Mr. MCLEOD. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate very much the opportunity to appear before this committee. As the chairman said a moment ago, I have with me Mr. J. P. Strom, chief of the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division. He has occupied this position for a period of 8 years. Prior thereto, he was assistant chief of the division for a period of 10 years. He has been engaged in law enforcement throughout his entire adult life with the exception of wartime service. He is a graduate of the FBI National Academy.

Chief Strom is now serving as national president of the FBI National Academy Associates.

For a number of years, we have been concerned in South Carolina with the serious problem presented by the ready availability of weapons to all persons.

When I assumed office in 1959, I submitted to the legislature the following recommendation with respect to this problem, and similar recommendations have been annually submitted since then:

The present existing laws relating to firearms are universally disregarded, and a more practicable means of controlling the indiscriminate purchase and possession of small firearms should be enacted.

A draft of proposed legislation will be made available to your body.

I am convinced that the law with respect to the carrying of concealed weapons should remain unchanged.

I believe also that the regulation of firearms can best be implemented by directing the force of the law toward persons rather than weapons. Consequently, it is my suggestion that you consider the advisability of prohibiting certain persons from possessing, carrying, et cetera, any weapon. Categories of persons who should be prohibited from possessing firearms would include(a) Convicted felons,

(b) Persons convicted of offenses involving the use of firearms,

(c) Insane persons,

(d) Persons of a designated minimum age, and

(e) Those declared by order of a court to be unfit to possess weapons. Solicitor B. O. Thomason, of the 13th judicial circuit, and I have prepared an outline of legislation incorporating what we consider desirable features. This will be made available to your honorable body.

It is noted that under present law, the sale, possession, transportation, et cetera, of small firearms is totally prohibited. In at least two counties (Greenville and Charleston), the grand juries have recommended that this law be totally enforced. This demand arose from the outgrowth of numerous shooting incidents involving small firearms.

That was the suggestion which was submitted to the legislature over a period of 5 years.

At the 1965 session of the general assembly, under the direct prompting of Solicitor B. O. Thomason of Greenville, S.C., the legislature adopted what we consider a model gun law. This law has the general effect of restricting sales of weapons to certain categories of persons deemed unfit, in accordance with the criteria established by the law, to acquire or possess a small firearm.

The problem has been recognized by various bodies in the State charged with investigation of law enforcement problems. The grand jury of Greenville County, on March 10, 1965, in its presentment to the court of general sessions, stated:

At our general sessions, we took cognizance of the numerous shootings that were taking place in Greenville County, a great number of which involved small caliber pistols. In our presentment, we recommend that some action be taken to change the present gun law, which is not enforceable in its present form, toa law which would be adequate enough to prevent these violations.

The grand jury pointed out that 42 persons were treated at the Greenville General Hospital for gunshot wounds during the first 2 months of 1965.

Similarly, the grand jury of Charleston County, S.C., in its September 1959 presentment stated:

This grand jury, at this term of court, met with the heads of the law enforcement agencies of the county. We have made certain recommendations as to the careless and haphazard sale of illegal firearms within the county. We have been assured by the heads of the city and county police departments, the State highway patrol, and the sheriff's office of their cooperation.

At its December 1959 term, the grand jury reported:

This grand jury has consulted, at this term of court, with Chief William F. Kelly of the Charleston City Police Department and the director of the county police department, relative to the illegal sale of firearms in the city and county of Charleston. We have been assured by these gentlemen that a meeting has been held and that plans are in process for enforcing the State law which prohibits the sale of pistols, and that the law relative to same is to be strictly enforced.

In addition to that, Mr. Chairman, I have another grand jury report, which I will quote just briefly from, dated 1964, December 1964.

Throughout the past year we have seen time and again that the vast majority of killings in this county have resulted from the fact that a small pistol was being carried by the assailant. The grand jury feels that this is certainly one of the most serious problems that it has run into during the past year, and therefore strongly recommends that the county officials cause a thorough study to be made of this problem