"(1) Members of the militia, National Guard, Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, the organized reserves and other armed forces of the State and the United States, when on duty, or when training or preparing themselves for military duty, or while subject to recall or mobilization;

"(2) Citizens of this Commonwealth subject to duty in the armed forces under State or Federal laws, when on duty, or when training or preparing themselves for military duty.

"(3) Persons carrying out or training for duly authorized civil defense duties.

"(4) Sheriffs, marshals, prison or jail wardens, constables, policemen of the Commonwealth or its political subdivisions, game protectors, fish wardens, forest officials, revenue officers, or other peace or law enforcement officers, their deputies and assistants; and also full-time paid peace officers of other states and of the Federal Government who are carrying out official duties while in Pennsylvania;

"(5) Officers or employees of this Commonwealth or the United States duly authorized to carry a concealed weapon;

"(6) Agents, messengers and other employees of common carriers, banks, express companies, armored car carriers, mail carriers and business firms, whose duties require them to protect moneys, valuables, and other property in the discharge of such duties;

"(7) Regularly enrolled members of any organization duly authorized to purchase or receive firearms from the United States or from this Commonwealth, or regularly enrolled members of any club organized for target, trap, or skeet shooting, while at, or going to or from a place of assembly or shooting practice; or regularly enrolled members of any club organized for modern or antique firearms collecting, while such members are at or going to or from collectors' gun shows, conventions, or exhibits;

"(8) A person while lawfully engaged in fishing, camping, or hunting, or while going to or returning from a fishing, camping, or hunting place;

"(9) A person engaged in the business of manufacturing, repairing, or dealing in firearms, or the agent or representative of any such person, having in his possession, using, or carrying a firearm in the usual or ordinary course of such business;

"(10) A person firing a firearm for testing or target practice under safe conditions and in a safe place not prohibited by law, or while going to or from said place;

"(11) A person firing a firearm in a safe and secure indoor range for testing or target practice;

"(12) Any person traveling by private conveyance when the firearm is securely encased and not in the person's manual possession;

"(13) Any person while carrying a firearm unloaded and in a secure wrapper, concealed or otherwise, from the place of purchase to his home or place of business, or to a place of repair or back to his home or place of business, or in moving from one place of abode or business to another;

"(14) A person possessing firearms at his home or place of business. "(d) Construction. This section shall be liberally construed to carry out the declaration of policy contained herein and in favor of the constitutional and common law rights to keep and bear arms for lawful purposes. This section shall be supplemental and additional to existing rights to bear arms now guaranteed by law and decisions of the courts of this Commonwealth and of the United States, and nothing herein shall impair or diminish any of such rights.

"(e) Remedies. Every citizen of the United States shall have the right to enforce and protect his rights under this section by one or more proceedings in the courts of the United States, or of this Commonwealth, by action for injunction, mandamus. prohibition, habeas corpus, for damages, or for other legal or equitable remedies; and in addition he shall have all the rights, remedies and privileges of the laws of the United States or this Commonwealth dealing with civil rights. It shall be the duty of every public official and employe thereof to aid and assist every citizen to exercise and protect his rights hereunder."

Section 2. If any provision of this act, or the application thereof to any person or circumstances, is held invalid, the remainder of the act, and the application of such provision to other persons or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby. Section 3. All acts and parts of acts, general, local and special, are repealed in so far as inconsistent with the provisions hereof.

Mr. KILLEEN. I may say that I think Mr. Gomberg's comments L this area certainly reflect, or must reflect, his initial interest in this ordinance, because he is one of the prime movers to have this ordinance passed. In fact, he was probably the strongest proponent of the legislation.

Chairman DODD. What was his official title?

Mr. KILLEEN. He was executive secretary of the Philadelphia Crime Board.

Chairman DODD. Senator Hruska had to go to another meeting and has to leave the hearing. I do not want it thought that it is for lack of interest.

I want to give you a chance to conclude your testimony, but I an greatly perplexed over your figures, your total number of homicides for 1964, 1965, and 1966. They are at great variance with the figures of the Philadelphia Police Department and the FBI.

Dr. FILLINGER. In anticipation of this comment, sir, this is why I brought all of my records for 1967.

Chairman DODD. How did you get better and more accurate recort than the Philadelphia police and the FBI?

Dr. FILLINGER. I can tell you.

Chairman DODD. Tell us.

Dr. FILLINGER. If they will come over-and they do- and look at every homicide victim, and they do, let me tell you where some of the variations in their records are. In their records of homicides, they do not include justifiable homicides. Thy do not include vehicular homicides.

Chairman DODD. A justifiable homicide is not a crime, is it?

Dr. FILLINGER. It is not a crime; it is a homicide. It is a killing. I am not defining whether it is criminal or not.

They do not include cases which are difficult from the legal point of view to prove, but which are without doubt, from the medical standpoint, a homicide.

Chairman DODD. Well, anyway, we will put in your figures, and I will give you a copy of those supplied to us, both for the record. Dr. FILLINGER. Thank you, sir.

Chairman DODD. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Mr. Quinn Tamm.

STATEMENT OF QUINN TAMM, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE

Mr. TAMM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman DODD. Mr. Tamm, I know you have been here before. Ya are certainly one of the best qualified people in this country on this subject. Your record is a distinguished one, as indicated in earl hearings-former Assistant Director of the Federal Bureau of Irvesgation; executive director now of the International Association of Chiefs of Police.

I will place all of these in the record.

(The biographical sketch of Mr. Tamm follows:)

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF MR. QUINN TAMM

Mr. Tamm received a Bachelor of Science degree from the University ♫ Virginia in 1934. He then worked with the Federal Bureau of Investigative

and in 1961 retired as the Assistant Director of the Bureau. After his retirement, he became the Executive Director of the IACP.

Mr. Tamm is a member of the American Society of Association Executives and the American Society of Industrial Security. He is on the Advisory Counsel for the President's Commission for Traffic Safety and is also on the Executive Committee of the National Committee of Traffic Ordinances.

Chairman DODD. We are grateful to you for returning and giving us the benefit of your current views.

Mr. TAMM. Thank you very much, Senator. I think because of the time, I will submit my statement. I would like to say a few things with regard to gun legislation.

I first would like to start by heartily endorsing the testimony of Governor Hughes. He spoke from a great deal of experience.

I represent 6,200 U.S. police executives, who comprise the majority of our international membership, and I welcome the opportunity on their behalf to present our views concerning the pending firearms legislation.

I would like to mention that we of the police have evolved a name for the age in which we are rather precariously living now in America. It is a grim name, but we believe a most appropriate one-the age of snipers.

Until the past few years of social strife in this Nation, sniping was a tactic almost exclusively confined to infantry combat between warring nations. Now this means of inflicting death by Americans upon other Americans has become an appallingly standard tactic of the vicious malcontent, the misguided and the subversive to use against constituted authority to demonstrate their discontent with real and imagined social and economic inequities.

In Detroit, this deadly procedure was refined to the point where snipers were roaming in squads. They were reported as firing upon two police precinct stations, a fire station, and a National Guard Command Center. The final death toll in Detroit has exceeded that of the Watts holocaust.

It is too early yet to know how much of the carnage that has taken place in the many cities of our Nation was caused by unauthorized and illegal possession of firearms, but even the death of one citizen, one policeman, or one fireman, is too great and too bitter a price to

pay.

When irresponsibles were incited into lethal action by agitator H. Rap Brown, in Cambridge, screaming that "it's time for Cambridge to burn, baby *** you better get yourselves some guns," they obviously had no trouble in doing just this getting guns.

I would like to make it clear that the police concern is not confined to a single racial element. The illegal possession and use of firearms by anyone in situations of this nature is equally deplorable and contravenes our national tradition of law and order. The possession of arms by those who would turn our communities into a Hitlerian dictatorship of armed might is as reprehensible as it is by those who would, by armed means, attempt to solve the problems of social differences. Countless theories have been propounded, and I am sure there are more to come, concerning the causes of the violence that has devastated our cities. However, there is one factor that has not received the attention it should. That is the easy availability of firearms in this country. In every one of these outbreaks of violence, firearms of all types

have become immediately available and placed into use by the dissident.

We of the police believe these social conflagrations could be much more effectively kept under control or confined to controllable proportions if the availability of lethal weapons was controlled by the proper Federal legislation, and generally denied to all but those of duly constituted authority.

Also in this connection, I think it should be made a matter of record that assaults on the police officers have grown at an alarming rate in the past few years, and indicate a threat to law and order that calls for the most serious consideration by every American.

During the 6-year period of 1960 through 1965, 278 American police officers were murdered in the line of duty. Ninety-six percent of all these murdered were killed by rifles, shotguns, or handguns, with handguns most predominant. Certainly, when the totals for the pat 2 years, 1966 and 1967, with civil riots normal summer occurrences, are added, these totals will be even more frightening.

By way of contrast, in England where the use of firearms is rigidly supervised and is largely restricted to only those who absolutely need them in the course of their duty, only 19 sworn police were killed, 13 by gunfire, during the period from January 1, 1946, through September 30, 1966. During the same period of time, 1,014 American police officers were killed in line of duty.

Three hundred and sixty-two persons were involved in the incidents resulting in the deaths of the 278 police officers. Of these 362, 76 percent had prior records of arrest and some 181 had previously been arrested for crimes of assault.

The police of our Nation are dedicated men and women, sworn by the most solemn oath to protect the lives, liberties, and properties of all citizens. Is it too much to ask that our citizens, through their elected representatives, deny the enemies of our society the capability to murder these protectors?

Is it too much to ask that convicted felons be denied the opportunity to secure firearms?

Is it too much to ask that deranged youths like Charles Whitman be denied the opportunity to collect an arsenal that would do credit to a military platoon and kill 15 innocents from a Texas University tower?

Is it too much to ask that deadly weapons be denied to snipers and prevent them from keeping an army at bay while our cities are burn-d. looted, and devastated?

The law enforcement officials from every level of government who constitute our association do not believe so, and they have gone oe record with their belief.

At the IACP Annual Conference in October 1965, as the Senator knows, our members adopted a resolution supporting proposed Federal legislation which would amend the Federal Firearms Act te restrict the widespread traffic in firearms moving in or otherwise af fecting interstate or foreign commerce.

We of the police feel that it may properly be a matter of concer to this subcommittee to consider the points brought out in an editorial | in the Washington Star of Sunday, July 30, 1967. I quote from th editorial entitled, "Are the Riots Spontaneous or Planned!" as follows:

Perhaps there has been no conspiracy, and if not it follows that there would be no evidence of one. For our part, we are not aware of the existence of any such evidence in the strict sense of the term.

There is, however, a considerable body of information to suggest that there has been a conspiracy.

In the absence of any planning or organization or training, it is difficult to account for the widespread sniper activity in Detroit. In a dispatch from Havana a few days ago, Stokely Carmichael is quoted as follows: "In Newark, we are applying the tactics of guerrilla warfare. We are preparing groups of urban guerrillas for our defense in the cities." Chicago's Mayor Daley has said: "We know this is a national program of outlawry and violence." Some other local officials have said much the same thing.

In its issue of July 28, Life Magazine tells of a "clandestine" meeting between its reporters and some of the Newark snipers. These snipers belong to an organized group of former civil rights workers in Mississippi. According to the magazine, one of the snipers said there were more than 50 members of the group, more than half coming from Newark. "Others had been moved in for the action from California, Ohio, Pennyslvania." This certainly is not inconsistent with the remarks attributed to Stokely Carmichael in Havana.

One of the factors that has been a matter of concern to the police is the position taken in this matter of firearms control by certain organizations. The most vocal leaders in the opposition to the legislation being considered by the Congress are the spokesmen for the National Rifle Association. Whether these spokesmen truly represent the unanimous thinking of their membership is moot, in my opinion.

In an editorial in the May 1967, issue of "The American Rifleman" magazine published by that organization, it is suggested that citizens arm themselves and join posses and unorganized militia to protect their communities against riots.

Speaking for the law enforcement officers of our association, I issued the following statement, in part:

In sounding the alarm to fight anarchy with anarchy, NRA displays a recklessness which does a terrible disservice to our citizens and the police. Responsible citizens and police executives throughout this nation should not fail to reject this senseless call to arms.

As an Association, the IACP has often spoken out for measures designed to better control the sale and distribution of non-sporting weapons. In encouraging rather than dissuading violence, NRA has made us even stronger in our conviction that armed posses and unorganized militia are not the answer to the disturbances which have occurred in our cities.

I do not propose to question the sincerity of purpose of these spokesmen, at this time, but I do feel that in my official capacity, I must question their understanding of the problem. Whether their understanding is influenced by the impressive number of their advertisers offering guns of all types for sale by mail order could well be a matter of speculation.

I noted in my perusal of the July 1967 issue of their magazine the following insert:

The general public expects all gun transactions to be conducted with such proper precautions as to deter undesirable persons from obtaining firearms. Accordingly, gun advertisers of "The Rifleman” are required by NRA to obtain from all mail-order purchasers evidence of a Federal Firearms license or a "signed statement" (quoted below) from individual purchasers, before shipping any cartridge firearm (rifle, shotgun, handgun). The suggested signed statement reads as follows:

Please send this coupon, properly filled in, with your order for any cartridge firearm. To: (Name of Rifleman Advertiser). I certify that I am 18 years or more of age; that I have never been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year-that I am not a fugitive from justice; that I