STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE JOHN D. DINGELL

IN SUPPORT OF H. R. 5845

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON CRIME

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

JUNE 27, 1984

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to present my views in strong support of H. R. 5845, the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 1984, which was introduced by my good friend and colleague from Texas, Congressman Jack Brooks.

Mr. Chairman, H. R. 5845 is supported by the Democratic and Republican leadership of the House, and over 80 original cosponsors. The legislation is the result of a carefully crafted compromise by the Administration, the National Rifle Association, and the major police organizations involved in the drive to deal with the problem of so-called "cop killer" bullets. The bill would regulate the manufacture and distribution of certain types of ammunition which are specifically designed and marketed as armor-piercing. In addition, H. R. 5845 would impose a strict mandatory sentence for anyone who would use such ammunition during the commission of a violent felony.

Previous attempts to deal with the problem of

indiscriminate killing of police officers by banning ammunition

have been unsuccessful.

Legislation introduced prior to H. R. 5845,

H. R. 953, was imperfectly drawn, overly broad, and opposed by myself and many of my colleagues, and vigorously opposed by the National Rifle Association and millions of American sportsmen. This opposition arose because H. R. 953 reached

not only armor-piercing ammunition but numerous types of conventional ammunition used by law-abiding citizens for sporting purposes. Moreover, H. R. 953 would prohibit mere possession of this type of ammunition.

As an avid sportsman myself, and

The Departments of Treasury and Justice have worked diligently to craft legislation to outlaw armor-piercing bullets while not affecting the millions of rounds of ammunition used by law-abiding gun owners. as a Director of the National Rifle Association, I have made clear to the Administration that I would not support any legislation which did not meet these tests. I am pleased to say that H. R. 5845 meets these tests and represents a delicate balance of the concerns and interests on this issue. In its present form, H. R. 5845 is supported by the Administration, all major national law enforcement organizations, and sportsmens' groups including the National Rifle Association. The legislation protects the interests of police, and precludes the prosecution of firearms owners for possession of armor-piercing ammunition, which would be virtually impossible to enforce due to the look alike nature of ammunition.

Mr. Chairman, I reiterate that H. R. 5845, as

written, is widely supported by all the major interests who have been involved with efforts to restrict the manufacture and importation of certain types of armor-piercing bullets. It is supported by the House leadership on both sides of the aisle with a growing list of cosponsors. Any attempt to substantially alter the provisions of H. R. 5845, such as the addition of a provision requiring a "waiting period" for the purchase of handguns in the legislation, could very well disrupt the broad coalition now supporting the bill and endanger its chances for passage in the House. I therefore urge the Subcommittee to take expeditious action on H. R. 5845, without major modification, to ensure my continued support,

the support of my colleagues, and eventual passage by the

House.

Mr. BROOKS. Thank you very much.

Mr. HUGHES. Thank you very much, Jack, for your statement and for the support that you have offered to this legislative endeavor. It is my hope that we can develop some initiatives in this Congress. I realize that time is running short and it is very difficult, as you know, to try to move legislation that we already have in process. I think you know full well how difficult it is at this time, when we have so few legislative days remaining, but we are going to endeavor.

I sincerely believe that it is important for us to try to do something to ban the distribution of armor-piercing ammunition. And it is my hope that out of these hearings today will come some consensus on this.

Mr. BROOKS. I feel that if we can pass this bill in the House and the Senate in this session we will get the President to sign it. It will not solve all of the problems in the whole world but it will be a definite step forward in perserving and enhancing the utility of these lifesaving vests and the protection they offer American police officials. I think they are entitled to it. It is not a total solution and it won't solve everyone's concerns-the various groups that don't want you to give your little kids BB guns-but it will be a step forward, I think, toward saving peace officers lives.

Mr. HUGHES. We are going to hear from some experts today on the technical aspects of the legislation and, hopefully——

Mr. BROOKS. Definition is, of course, important, we understand that.

Mr. HUGHES [continuing]. With your cooperation, I am hopeful that we can do something. I share your concern that we do something substantive to attempt to protect the lives of law enforcement officers in particular, without unnecessarily treading on the legitimate sportsman in this country. That is the issue: trying to walk a fine line and balance any bill so that we don't penalize unduly the law-abiding citizen, but reach those that would engage in criminal activity.

Mr. BROOKS. Our best example of what can happen, even without armor-piercing bullets, is my colleague next to me, Mr. Biaggi.

Mr. HUGHES. Thank you. I have no further questions. The gentleman from Michigan?

Mr. SAWYER. No questions.

Mr. HUGHES. I know you have another hearing so we thank you for your testimony.

Mr. BROOKS. Thank you.

I think it would be good if they would get some water-generally the Judiciary Committee does not provide water because it keeps its testimony short and succinct. [Laughter.]

Since I have already quit, you might get water for the rest of them. Mr. HUGHES. We will note that for the record, Mr. Chairman, because I have wondered for some time what the secret was in trying to shorten these hearings.

Mr. SAWYER. Did you hear what Jim Wright said on the floor the other night about drinking water, that poem that he read, or did you miss that?

Mr. BROOKS. Did he say it was better than whiskey?

Mr. SAWYER. No, he said it was considerably worse. He had a little poem that recited all the things that you ingest when you drink water and, believe me, it didn't sound very good.

Mr. BROOKS. If you adulterate it with scotch or bourbon, you would answer that problem.

Mr. SAWYER. In the Judiciary Committee, we don't care much for adultery.

Mr. HUGHES. I am sure when historians look at this record a few years from now, they are going to be puzzled as to how we worked water into the hearing. Peace.

Our next witness this morning is Congressman Mario Biaggi of New York City. Congressman Biaggi was elected to Congress in 1968. Prior to that time, he served with the greatest distinction in the police department of the city of New York. He was the most decorated officer in the history of the department and was wounded some 10 times in the line of duty.

Congressman Biaggi is chairman of the Merchant Marine Subcommittee and has worked closely with the Judiciary Committee on legislation to meet the needs of law enforcement officers in the fight against crime. He has testified before the subcommittee many times on this and numerous issues.

It is my pleasure to work with Mario Biaggi on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee on which I serve. We have worked together on a lot of issues, both on that committee and in the area of crime. I don't think that there is any issue that bears on law enforcement that Mario Biaggi hasn't been involved in and taken a leadership role on.

It has been Mario Biaggi that has led the fight over the years to deal with armor-piercing bullets. We have had a lot of other voices join in of late but it has been Mario that has led this battle. It is Mario that has focused national attention upon the problem. It has been Mario Biaggi that has brought us to where we are today. We wouldn't be talking about a consensus legislation today if it weren't for Mario Biaggi.

I just want you to know, Mario, that I know I speak for a lot of our colleagues when I say thank you for your tremendous leadership role in this area. We have your statement which will be made a part of the record. You may proceed as you see fit.

TESTIMONY OF HON. MARIO BIAGGI, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. BIAGGI. Thank you very much for your kind remarks, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for your efforts in this undertaking.

It has been nearly 5 years since I have initiated the legislative effort to outlaw armor-piercing bullets that can penetrate the bulletproof vest worn by more than half of our Nation's 570,000 law enforcement officers.

This is my third appearance before your distinguished subcommittee on this issue. I have the highest level of confidence that we are fast approaching successful completion of that task. This confidence is based on the fact that we have achieved what appears to be a workable solution that can be supported by all. But, most importantly, the legislative product we are considering today would