by reaching where state law cannot reach: to the out-of-state shipper. In addition to solving the problem of mail order sales this approach could be made to apply to any individual who bought a weapon in one state, and then transported it into another state, in violation of the second state's laws.

We feel that this approach has the advantage of continuing state control of firearms, while filling the one gap in effective enforcement of state law. H.R. 5384, with its prohibition of all interstate sales of shotguns, rifles, and pistols except between federal licensees, and its pre-empting of state gun laws when there is a conflict between the two, unnecessarily extends federal control to an area which, both practically and constitutionally, is best left to state regulation. Libery Lobby's position is based on our belief that matters of basic criminal law are best left under state jurisdiction. It is for this reason that we decided, after giving the matter careful consideration, against supporting H.R. 360 and H.R. 6137 (which would set up a mandatory 10 year sentence for the use of firearms in the commission of major crimes of violence) as alternatives to the legislation under consideration today. Legislation setting up new federal crimes will necessarily bring with it the need for more federal enforcement officers, and will bring them into areas of law enforcement traditionally left to the states. Congress should be wary of taking steps which lead in the direction of a national police force, warned against so often by F.B.I. Director J. Edgar Hoover. It is our belief that the approach we have proposed as an alternative to H.R. 5384 meets the need which caused this legislation to be introduced, without its drawbacks and dangers.

Thank you.

Mr. CORMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Jaffe.

Any questions?

This committee stands adjourned until 10 a.m. Monday. (Whereupon, at 12:55 p.m., the subcommittee recessed to reconvene at 10 a.m., Monday, April 10, 1967.)

ANTI-CRIME PROGRAM

FRIDAY, APRIL 10, 1967

SUBCOMMITTEE No. 5

OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY,

Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 2141 Rayburn Office Building, Hon. James C. Corman presiding.

Present: Representatives Celler, chairman, Corman, McCulloch, Mathias, McClory, Railsback and Biester.

Also present: William R. Foley, Esq., General Counsel and Donald E. Santarelli, Esq., associate counsel.

The CHAIRMAN. The subcommittee will please come to order. We are continuing the hearings on H.R. 5384, the State Firearms Control Assistance Act of 1967.

We are pleased to have as our first witness a distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary, the Honorable John Dowdy, from the State of Texas.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN DOWDY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Mr. DowDY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you a prepared statement?

Mr. DowDY. It is very short. I wanted to save time for the people who are here from out of town.

The CHAIRMAN. We will make your statement part of the record. Mr. Dowdy. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I appreciate this opportunity to testify in person before this committee on this important matter. I have appeared both here and in the Senate because I feel that this proposal is dangerous and it invades the liberty and constitutionally guaranteed rights of the people of this Nation. Many of the people of my district, which is located in the southeast area of Texas, have advised me of their strong opposition to H.R. 5384 and related bills. They feel that any of them would be a serious and unnecessary encroachment on their actual possession of firearms and certainly I have shared that opinion.

I represent the Second Congressional District of Texas, which is comprised of 18 counties with an area of more than 15,000 square miles and a population of about 400,000. Living in an essentially rural area, many of my people were taught the proper and skillful use of firearms at a tender age, and I was one of them.

Stalking the deer, shooting the high-flying goose, or hunting quail, doves, squirrels, and rabbits is as much a part of the life of the people my area as is the daily commuter ride for less fortunate individuals.

of

77-540 0-67- -40

Only a few days ago, the FBI arrested a number of persons in New York and charged them with illegally securing draft deferments for their sons. In my district, the fathers and sons prefer to participate in the more wholesome activity of hunting, such as during the annual Boy Scout father-son deer hunt which attracts participants from a wide area of east Texas.

I believe the ramifications of this bill, which would prohibit the shipment of firearms in interstate commerce to any person other than a licensed individual represents a threat to our national defense capabilities.

Their familiarity with firearms, which we know has long been a source of recreation, has enabled great number of the young men of my district to more than hold their own as members of our Armed Forces in times of national emergency in days past. And, even today, in this age of so-called sophisticated weaponry, it is still true because the brushfire engagements in which our country is presently involved continue to prove that our best weapon is the foot soldier, the infantryman, or the marine who knows how to shoot straight and make each one of his shots count.

Skilled use of firearms results only after a great deal of practice either in the field or on the range. The availability of the equipment necessary for such practice is a prime factor in the development of such skills. This type of equipment is available in my district in the small hardware store, the occasional-very occasional-sports shop, or in other outlets that cater to the hunter primarily as a convenience to the patron.

In most instances, the sales of rifles, shotguns, and ammunition is not the source of a great deal of profit for the storekeeper. Indeed, figures, show that the average hardware store makes less than $100 net profit annually from the sale of firearms and ammunition. I am firmly convinced that precious few of these small businessmen could afford the rise in dealers' fees that is contemplated by H.R. 5384.

Even if a few dealers could afford such a fee, they would be so few and far between in an area as large as my district as to be of very little benefit to most of the people, and benefit only those few people who live close by, and certainly not the majority of my constituents. The outcome of this rise in dealers' fees-which could be called class legislation as far as I am concerned, since only the more wealthy dealer could afford the fee-together with the prohibition of the interstate shipment of firearms except only to the licensed few would at first be a gradual, but soon drastic, curtailment of the peaceful use of firearms by the law-abiding citizen, not only in my district but in many like areas throughout the Nation.

The effect of the barriers raised by this bill to the peaceful use of firearms will be felt in time in the ranks of our Armed Forces, and in the cadre of regulars who, on so many occasions, have been called on to train our civilian soldiers in the arts of warfare on such short notice and with so little time. In war there is no substitute for experienced fighting personnel and good marksmen. However, when the opportunities to gain the experience under more leisurely circumstances are curtailed to a point of virtual nonexistence, then the Nation as a whole must suffer.

I am well aware of the need for some control of the accessibility of firearms to those individuals who would use them in such manner as to jeopardize life, limb, and property. I cannot support, however, any legislation having the effect of punishing the vast majority of our people by taking away existing freedoms in an effort to curtail the possible wrongdoings of an infinitesimal segment of our population. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before your subcommittee, and for these assigned reasons, among others, I am opposed to H.R. 5384.

(Mr. Dowdy's prepared statement follows:)

STATEMENT OF HONORABLE JOHN DOWDY, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Committee: Many of the people of my district, which is located in the heart of the forest area of East Texas, have advised me of their strong opposition to H.R. 5384, which they feel is a serious and unnecessary encroachment on their peaceful possession and use of firearms. I share that opinion.

I represent the Second Congressional District of Texas, which is comprised of 18 counties with an area of more than 15,000 square miles and a population of about 400,000. Living in an essentially rural area, many of my people were taught the proper and skillful use of firearms at a tender age, and I was one of them.

Stalking the deer, shooting the high-flying goose, or hunting quail, doves, squirrels and rabbits is as much a part of the life of the people of my area as is the daily commuter ride for less fortunate individuals.

Only a few days ago, the FBI arrested a number of persons in New York and charged them with illegally securing draft deferments for their sons. In my district, the fathers and sons prefer to participate in the more wholesome activity of hunting, such as during the annual Boy Scout Father-Son Deer Hunt which attracts participants from a wide area of East Texas.

I believe the ramifications of this bill, which would prohibit the shipment of firearms in interstate commerce to any person other than a licensed individual represents a threat to our national defense capabilities.

Their familiarity with firearms, which we know has long been a source of recreation, has enabled great numbers of the young men of my district to more than hold their own as members of our Armed Forces in times of national emergency in days past. And, even today, in this age of so-called sophisticated weaponry, it is still true because the brush-fire engagements in which our country is presently involved continue to prove that our best weapon is the foot soldier, the infantryman, or the Marine who knows how to shoot straight and make each one of his shots count.

Skilled use of fireams results only after a great deal of practice either in the field or on the range. The availability of the equipment necessary for such practice is a prime factor in the development of such skills. This type of equipment is available in my district in the small hardware store, the occasional-very occasional-sports shop, or in other outlets that cater to the hunter primarily as a convenience to the patron.

In most instances, the sales of rifles, shotguns and ammunition is not the source of a great deal of profit for the storekeeper. Indeed, figures show that the average hardware store makes less than $100 net profit annually from the sale of firearms and ammunition. I am firmly convinced that precious few of these small businessmen could afford the rise in dealers fees that is contemplated by H.R. 5384.

Even if a few dealers could afford such a fee, they would be so few and far between in an area as large as my district as to be of very little benefit to most of the people, and benefit only those few people who live close by, and certainly not the majority of my constituents. The outcome of this rise in dealer's feeswhich could be called class legislation as far as I am concerned, since only the more wealthy dealer could afford the fee-together with the prohibition of the interstate shipment of firearms except only to the licensed few would be at first a gradual, but soon a drastic, curtailment of the peaceful use of firearms by the

law-abiding citizen, not only in my district but in many like areas throughout the nation.

The effect of the barriers raised by this bill to the peaceful use of firearms will be felt in time in the ranks of our Armed Forces, and in the cadre of regulars who, on so many occasions, have been called on to train our civilian soldiers in the arts of warfare on such short notice and with so little time. In war there is no substitute for experienced fighting personnel and good marksmen. However, when the opportunities to gain the experience under more leisurely circumstances are curtailed to a point of virtual nonexistence, then the Nation as a whole must suffer.

I am well aware of the need for some control of the accessibility of firearms to those individuals who would use them in such manner as to jeopardize life, limb and property. I cannot support, however, any legislation having the effect of punishing the vast majority of our people by taking away existing freedoms in an effort to curtail the bossible wrongdoings of an infinitesimal segment of our population.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before your subcommittee, and for these reasons I am opposed to H.R. 5384.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Dowdy.

Our next witness is Mrs. E. D. Pearce, president of the General Federation of Women's Clubs, Washington, D.C. We are pleased to welcome you before this committee.

STATEMENT OF MRS. JOE D. CHITTENDEN, DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH, GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS

Mrs. CHITTENDEN. Mr. Chairman, Mrs. Pearce regrets very much that she is unable to be here today but she asked me to represent her, if it is all right with you.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course, will you please state your name, and continue with your statement.

Mrs. CHITTENDEN. Thank you. I am Mrs. Joe D. Chittenden, director of research, General Federation of Women's Clubs, 1734 N Street, NW., Washington, D.C.

Mr. Chairman, gentlemen, though this statement is brief, it nonetheless speaks the sincere sentiments of the 800,000 members of the General Federation of Women's Clubs. Our members have worked for 76 years to make our country a better and safer place in which to live. It was, in fact, for this reason that the GFWC was organized and that is the reason we speak out today in support of strict regulation of the mail-order sale and shipment of firearms.

The legislation being considered here today does, of course, cover areas of gun control other than mail-order sales, but since our policies are established by resolutions and the resolution which permits us to make this statement today does not touch upon any other provision of this legislation-we must confine ourselves to only that section of the bill which deals with mail-order sales. We are very much concerned about the ever-increasing incidence of criminal acts and we feel that restricting the availability of firearms is one step that must be taken. Each member of the GFWC could write to you in support of this provision and perhaps each would express her thoughts in a different way-but what she would mean is that she wants our country to be a safe place in which to live and to raise her children, Restricting mailorder sale of firearms certainly is not the whole solution but we strongly believe it would help.

Thank you.