STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN M. ZWACH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA Mr. ZWACH. Mr. Chairman, in spite of the fact that there are reported to be some 20,000 Federal, State, and local gun laws, crime in American continues to soar. Figures from States and cities having the toughest gun laws show no appreciable drop in the crime rate. In fact some areas with the most restrictive gun laws also have the highest crime rates. In New York City, with its restrictive Sullivan law, murders have more than doubled, from 295 in the 1950's to 702 in 1965. Since restrictive gun legislation was adopted in Philadelphia in March of 1965, both crime and murder have increased. The constitution guarantees American citizens the right to bear arms, yet some of the proposed firearms legislation would put greater restrictions on the ordinary citizen, the farmer, the sportsman and the gun collector than it would on the criminal who it means to keep under control. We all see what is happening in the criminal courts today. Confessed murderers, rapists, and armed robbers are being turned loose by the courts after their apprehension by the police because of quirks and loopholes in the laws or law enforcement procedures. Mr. Chairman, I propose a simple, easily understood, no loophole gun law. It provides simply that anyone using or having in their possession a firearm while in the commission or attempted commission of any robbery, assault, murder, rape, burglary, kidnaping, or homicide other than involuntary manslaughter-shall be imprisoned for 25 years. This language is clear. It provides a mandatory 25 years sentence on the criminal who carries or uses a gun in the commission of a crime. Fear of punishment, I believe, is one of the greatest deterrents to crime. Certainly if this law is adopted the criminal will know just exactly what penalty he will face should he take a gun and commit an illegal act. This law, I point out, has no restrictions against the purchasing of firearms. It imposes no regulations against the ownership of firearms. But it certainly carries a heavy, easily understood penalty for their criminal use. Mr. Chairman, I have received a number of letters from my constituents favoring passage of this piece of legislation. I have not received a single letter opposing this bill. I would like to quote from just a couple of the scores of letters I have received: Hon. JOHN M. ZWACH, TRACY, MINN. DEAR JOHN: As one who has had a life-long interest in hunting and target shooting, I would like to protest, vigorously, the adoption of legislation pending in Congress which will require the registration of all firearms, and which, if adopted, will take the place of the Federal Firearms Act of 1938, with its amendments. This act is clearly directed at the criminal and not the gun. Further, I believe that if existing laws are enforced, they will be entirely adequate. Emotionalism is overriding common sense when guns are described as “murder" or "lethal" weapons whose purpose is to kill. This description overlooks, completely, the existence of shooting as a sport. A gun, to the sportsman, is a piece of equipment as necessary to hunting and target shooting as the bat is to the baseball player and the nine-iron to the golfer. (Incidentally, both the bat and nine-iron have been used as murder weapons). National Safety Council figures for 1965 show that 2400 persons were killed by firearms accidents, but this was just 2% of the total. Motor vehicles accounted for 46%, falls for 18%, fires and burns for 8%, drownings for 7%, railroad accidents for 2.5%, yet we hear of no pending legislation against automobiles, ladders, or boats. More important, firearms accident death rate per 100,000 persons has fallen from 2.3 to 1.3 in the past 60 years. The majority of gun owners would gladly support reasonable gun legislation if it would actually reduce crime, but statistics repeatedly prove that restrictive gun laws do not reduce crime. I agree with Governor Connally that "we should hit hard at the unlawful use of firearms, rather than experiment with gun laws that might disarm law-abiding citizens in the midst of a crime wave." Sincerely yours, CLYDE ROGGINS. And from another letter from an industrialist, "It is our feeling that you are getting at the nub of the big problem with reference to guns. In other words, you are hitting the fellow who misuses guns and that is supposed to be the objective of the other bills." Mr. Chairman, I urge that the subcommittee and committee take favorable action on this legislation, H.R. 6067. Acting Chairman CORMAN. The subcommittee has received the following letters, statements, and resolutions for the record: CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, HON. EMANUEL CELLER, Chairman, Judiciary Committee, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: When the Committee considers firearm legislation during this Congress, it would be very much appreciated both by me and by Mr. Carberry if the enclosed correspondence could be included for consideration. This letter is from a constituent, Jim Carberry, of Placerville, California who is physically handicapped but makes his livelihood as a gunsmith, doing most of his business through the mails. Mr. Carberry brings, perhaps, a new factor to the Committee's attention, one which I feel warrants some thought since there probably are many similarly handicapped who, rather than expecting others to care for them, are trying to provide adequately for themselves in this field. Sincerely yours, Enclosure. HAROLD T. (Bizz) JOHNSON, PLACERVILLE, CALIF., Congressman Bizz JOHNSON, I realize that you can not hope to read every letter that comes into your office but I do hope you will be shown this one. A few years ago I sent to the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Printing Office, and for 45¢ received a very helpful book: "Small Business Enterprises For The Severely Handicapped." On page 52 this book says gun smithing is a good thing for some handicapped persons to take up. It goes on to explain what is needed, lists gun smithing schools, etc. I followed this advice as this type of work fit in rather well with my form of handicap, also I was familiar with the use of small tools. Since then I have met two other severely handicapped persons in the gun business. I have heard of several others also. Most of my business is done thru the U.S. Mail. I have a California resale permit and a Federal Fire Arms License. Because I can not drive a car or otherwise get around by myself, what work I do depends altogether on the Post Office. Our administration is pushing hard for an "Anti fire arm Law". Most of this is aimed at the "mail order" end of it. Also cries have been heard to drastically raise the cost of a Federal Fire Arms permit. This would do nothing but hurt people such as myself. We hear much government sponsored propaganda to "Help the Handicapped" etc. hope you can call this to the attention of other law makers with whom you work. I know you have been in Placerville several times. I would like to talk more with you on this if you could drop in some time while in the neighborhood. Respectfully yours, JIM CARBERRY, CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., March 14, 1967. Hon. EMANUEL CELLER, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR COLLEAGUE: Enclosed please find a letter which I received from one of my constituents, Mr. Christopher Lunding, regarding firearms. I would appreciate your making his letter part of the record. With every good wish, THOMAS P. O'NEILL, JR. Member of Congress. CAMBRIDGE, MASS., March 6, 1967. Hon. THOMAS P. O'NEILL, Washington, D.C. DEAR SIR: I write you to urge that you withhold your support from H.R. 5384, introduced into the House on February 15 by Rep. Celler. This Bill would outlaw all interestate sales of firearms, except between licensed dealers. Now is a time when President Johnson and numerous like-minded individuals are carrying on a concerted campaign to place restrictions upon the sale of firearms, for what everyone would agree is the most admirable of reasons: to keep guns from the hands of criminals. The motive is unasailable; H.R. 5384 is not. It is faulty in many ways, but to me the most condemning thing about it is that it regulates beyond the amount necessary to secure its objective. In hampering the criminal it penalizes the sportsman. If one agrees that some sort of attempt must be made to limit what has come to be known as the "firearms menace," rejection of the Celler Bill is not enough. We must propose an alternative. Two Bills currently under consideration do this. One attempt is made in your own Bill, H.R. 3993. Another approach, seen most recently in H.R. 1454, sponsored by Rep. Wyatt of Oregon, would provide a mandatory penalty for the carrying or use of a firearm during the commission of some crimes. These two Bills, if enacted, provide a necessary and sufficient restriction on the scale of firearms and deterrent on their use. Your Bill will keep firearms sold interstate out of the hands of criminals; H.R. 1454 and other similar Bills (H.R.'s 360, 542, 1007) will hopefully deter criminals from the use of firearms, which is the aim of all those who clamor for firearms control. I hope you will continue to initiate and support such constructive legislation. Rep. Celler's Bill seeks to stop a leak by smashing the plumbing. Its restrictions are clumsy in accomplishing their purpose and over-inclusive. They do nothing at all to deter the criminal. For these reasons I respectfully urge you to oppose H.R. 5384. My concern is not emotional; I do not oppose responsible firearms control legislation like H.R. 3993. H.R. 5384 should be defeated because its unselective limitation harms the honest sportsman as well as depriving the criminal of some access to one of his many accessories. I thank you for your kind attention and continue in my support in your laudable attempts to gain enactment of rational firearms control legislation. Yours very truly, CHRISTOPHER LUNDING. THE OHIO GUN COLLECTORS ASSOCIATION, INC. February 19, 1967. Hon. EMANUEL CELLER, Chairman, Judiciary Committee, House of Representatives, U.S. Capitol, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CELLER: I would like to protest the passage of H.B. 5384 on the following grounds: It infringes on my rights, as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, to possess and and bear arms. It will not deter the criminal from using firearms in the commission of a crime. I would be very much in favor of a bill which would aim heavy Federal Penalties at the criminal who uses a firearm in the commission of a crime. Sincerely, B. E. BRENNAN. President. INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS, Utica, N.Y., March 7, 1967. Congressman EMANUEL CELLER, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMAN CELLER: Enclosed is a copy of a resolution endorsed by District Lodge 157, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers. Whereas the peaceful use of firearms is a source of relaxtion and reward to many of our members; and Whereas said peaceful use at times necessitates the use of mail or other forms of interstate commerce; and Whereas House Bill 5384 and Senate Bill S1 Amendment 90, would seriously interfere with that use by prohibiting said interstate commerce by individuals; and Whereas said bills may result in eventual elimination of firearms, thus denying our children and their progeny the right, should they so desire, to the enjoyment of that peaceful use now known to our members; and Whereas we are in favor of punishing the misuse of firearms, therefore Be it resolved that District Lodge 157, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers is opposed to H-5384 and S-1 Amendment 90, and recommends legislation providing severe mandatory penalties for the criminal misuse of firearms in lieu thereof." DEAR REPRESENTATIVE CELLER: At a recent meeting of the Executive Board, Pistol Division, Connecticut State Rifle & Revolver Association, the following resolution was adopted: "THAT, the Pistol Division-CSR&RA unanimously recommends the disapproval of H.R. 5384, SR 1856 and 8.1 and further that the Committee unanimously supports HR 360, by Robert Casey (22nd Dist.-Tex.) HR 542, by Ed Edmondson, (2nd Dist-Okla.) HR 1007 by John M. Murphy (16th Dist-N.Y.) H.R. 999 by John M. Murphy (16th Dist. N.Y.) and HR 2830 by Robert L. F. Sikes (1st DistFlorida). It is the opinion of the entire committee that the Firearms Acts of the 1930's can be amended to include a logical and workable Mail-order amendment. No new firearms laws are needed. Enforcement of the laws all ready written is needed. The Committee feels compelled to support the bills outlined above in light of the three they oppose in the previous paragraph. Sincerely, RICHARD G. BEAULIEU, Connecticut State Pistol Director. Hon. EMANUEL CELLER, THE CAPITOL CITY RIFLE & PISTOL CLUB, INC., Representative from New York, House of Representatives, DEAR REPRESENTATIVE CELLER: Speaking four our entire membership of over one-hundred senior members, we wish to go on record as opposing H.R. 5384, SR-1 and SR-1856. We also wish to go on record as recommending an enforceable amendment for the purchase of firearms through the mails, to the Federal Firearms Act of 1938 and the National Firearms Act of 1933. We are in agreement that no new firearms laws are needed. As Mark Twain once said, "If a person had a mind to do another 'in'-no law in the land will stop him." Sincerely, E. E. WATSON, Secretary. HONESDALE, PA., March 9, 1967. CHAIRMAN, Subcommittee No. 5 DEAR SIR: I write in reference to H.R. 5384 the House version of Amendment 90. We believe this piece of legislation to be restrictive and not in the best interest of the American Citizen. With the recent court rulings giving the criminal broad protective rights, we should be thinking in terms of easing the restrictions on acquiring firearms for the law abiding and responsible citizens who have the right to protect themselves and their property. A classic example of this is the city of Orlando Florida where the Police Dept. conducted classes in self-defense to more than 2400 Women of the city, where in the first six weeks following the beginning of the program there was only one attempted break in, while previous to this program there were a lot of breaking and entry, rape, prowlers and burglary. We feel the first step in reducing crime is to take off the kid gloves in handling the criminal. He has (as the court declares) his right to council, but he has No Right to a life or way of crime at the expense of the law abiding and responsible citizen, who you want to hamper and prohibit His Right to protect himself and property. We strongly urge all responsible citizens to use the power of their vote to secure public officials to uphold their rights and moral dignity, instead of coddling the criminal who crys in his beer after being caught in a life of crime at Our expense-We are Tired of this Nonesense. On behalf of the Honesdale Rifle & Pistol Club-I submit this letter to you, and request it be included in the official record of the hearings on H.R. 5384. Sincerely, HOWARD W. LORING. Secretary, Honesdale Rifle and Pistol Club. |