interstate movement becomes traceable and, therefore, their mishandling and misuse, policeable. With such a provision, it then becomes the responsibility of the respective States to dovetail their firearms control legislation with Federal provisions, and without elaborate administrative machinery. That "rifles and shotguns" remain excluded from interstate control in the administration's bill, is a serious concern. In Chicago, it is a widely known fact that a shotgun or rifle is a "status symbol" among youth gangs whose activities have disrupted the lives of citizens in entire communities. The omission of any controls on the traffic of rifles and shotguns could, conceivably, give rise to a new type of warfare on our city streets. Can anyone defend the sale and circulation of rifles and shotguns to children, criminals, narcotic addicts, and the mentally disturbed or retarded in crowded city areas? If not, then why shouldn't they be subject to the same controls as handguns. We have instances where children have sold several packages of some product and for a reward received a rifle in the mail-all without the knowledge or consent of their parents. We strongly urge that some curtailment of rifles and shotguns in interstate commerce be amended to the present bill. The failure to subject these firearms to controls seems to me to be an unnecessary and illogical compromise. Chairman DODD. If I may interrupt, I think you will find that S. 1, with Amendment No. 90, does exercise control over rifles and shotguns. Mr. LIVERMORE. It exercises some control, but my reading of it indicated that this was a differential in the control over handguns, and that which applied to rifles and shotguns. Is that correct, Senator? Chairman DODD. There is a difference, yes. Mr. LIVERMORE. There is a difference. Chairman DODD. But they aren't excluded altogether. Mr. LIVERMORE. No, I understand it is not excluded, but I think what I am suggesting is that the problem in rifles and handguns from the point of view of their use in crowded city areas is even more difficult, although not so frequently used as the use of handguns. It is harder to trace. It can be shot from a greater distance, a greater amenity on the part of the user, and in many ways is more lethal than the cheap and often inaccurate handguns which are used. I should like to make it plain that we are not opposed to the responsible use and possession of firearms. We have made this plain in Chicago and Illinois. We have made this a matter of record and the legislation we backed in Illinois clearly supported the right of responsible people to possess weapons. We did not get any support for this from the NRA because we took this position. The NRA has insisted upon the right of people to possess weapons secretly-not to let the police know who owns what weapons not to permit the ownership of weapons to be traced and these concerns seems to me to override any other considerations in their opposition to gun legislation. But the daily tragedy on the streets of our communities-the death and wounding of children and parents-the fear which the traffic in weapons has created, as well as the historic tragedy of the assassi nation of a President-all speak to the urgency of effective Federal and State legislation. Congress should lead the way in supporting law and order as a condition for progress by effective control over traffic in weapons of death and terror. I appreciate the chance to be heard, and perhaps there are some questions. Chairman DODD. Well, we are glad you came. You appeared before this committee some 5 or 6 years ago. Mr. LIVERMORE. I believe that is right. Chairman DODD. You testified concerning the Juvenile Delinquency Act. Mr. LIVERMORE. That is correct. Chairman DODD. Well, I should have remembered that when I first asked you to testify. You helped to get that bill passed. It was, as you know, passed; so maybe you are a good omen for this one. Mr. LIVERMORE. Let us hope so. Chairman DODD. Anyway, you are certainly qualified to testify, and I think your statement will be read with interest by all members of the subcommittee. Mr. LIVERMORE. Thank you very much. Chairman DODD. I thank you very much for taking the time to come here. Mr. LIVERMORE. Thank you. Chairman DODD. I also thank Mayor Daley, for having you represent him. Just a minute, Mr. Livermore. Senator Hruska, I think, has some questions. Do you mind waiting a minute of two? Senator Hruska has some questions and he is at a conference meeting, but I will be glad to ask the questions as soon as they get here. Mr. LIVERMORE. Fine. Chairman DODD. You may have been here earlier. I don't know whether you heard it or not. There was some discussion between members of the subcommittee and other witnesses in regard to riots in Newark. Do you know if firearms played any role in the Chicago riots of last year? Mr. LIVERMORE. They play a role, I think, in all of the disturbances in communities these days. They play a role in the day-to-day work of law enforcement officials, doctors, professional people, fire departments who have to go about their business. This is a source of hazard to all kinds of officials and citizens. Chairman DODD. These are the questions submitted by Senator Hruska, and I will ask them for him. 1. Do you consider the new Illinois law a good one? Mr. LIVERMORE. I suppose that-I think the answer to that would be "No." Chairman DODD. The second question he asks: what are the provisions of this law. Mr. LIVERMORE. The provisions in the law are that certain categories of people may not possess or purchase weapons. These categories are juveniles, people with a history of mental disorder, criminals, and narcotic addicts, and on that there is agreement. The second important aspect of the law is that it requires a permit issued by State authority to possess weapons. It is a license to own firearms and to buy them. And in this respect we hope that it will relate to existing firearms legislation with respect to some restrictions on interstate sales. But the law which we the essence of firearms legislation at a local level, in our judgment, is to establish a responsible ownership relationship between the owner of a firearm and one or more weapons, so that you can trace the transfer, so that transfer and possession of firearms is policeable. Now, at the local level, we feel this is the essence of effective firearms control, but this runs directly head-on into a major source of opposition from many groups; but in particular, the rifle associations. Chairman DODD. The third question: the villages you refer to are in Illinois, for the most part, aren't they? Mr. LIVERMORE. I beg your pardon? Chairman DODD. The villages you refer to are in Illinois for the most part, are they? Mr. LIVERMORE. The villages are outside of Chicago, in Illinois, but the situation in Ohio, which is about a little over a hundred miles away, is a difficult one. If you travel through there on the throughway, they sell handguns from cracker barrels. Of course, there is an enormous amount of commerce there. And then we are also adjacent to Indiana, which has a little bit more lax laws. Chairman DODD. And the fourth question is: Would the provision of S. 1853 dealing with mail-order sales be of any use to Chicago, even though you favor a complete ban on mail-order sales? Mr. LIVERMORE. This is the bill introduced by Mr. Hruska, Senator Hruska? Chairman DODD. Senator Hruska. Mr. LIVERMORE. Well, I feel as though one of the problems in gun legislation is to try to maintain some simplicity in its administration, and I have some question about whether the kind of provision for an affidavit being sent to the dealer and then back to the local law enforcement body would in effect be effective in a large city; whether it wouldn't be a cumbersome inconvenience to the legitimate purchasers, to the manufacturers, and to the law enforcement people. I think it would not, in effect, accomplish what we would like by way of Federal help in the enforcement of laws governing traffic in weapons. Chairman DODD. All right. Thank you very much, Mr. Livermore, once again. Mr. LIVERMORE. Thank you, Senator, and members of the committee. Chairman DODD. There are no further witnesses. We will recess this hearing now until 2 p.m. tomorrow afternoon. (Whereupon, at 5 p.m., the subcommittee adjourned, to reconvene Wednesday, July 19, 1967, at 2 p.m.) FEDERAL FIREARMS ACT WEDNESDAY, JULY 19, 1967 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON JUVENILE DELINQUENCY, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee (composed of Senators Dodd, Hart, Bayh, Burdick, Tydings, Kennedy of Massachusetts, Hruska, Fong, and Thurmond) met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m., in room 2228, New Senate Office Building, Senator Thomas J. Dodd (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senators Dodd (presiding), Kennedy, Hruska, and Thurmond. Also present: Carl L. Perian, staff director; Bernard Tannenbaum, special counsel; Richard W. Velde, minority counsel; William C. Mooney, chief investigator; Eugene W. Gleason, editorial director; Peter Freivalds, research director; and Richard C. Sheridan, assistant minority counsel. Chairman DODD. I call the hearing to order. We are very honored, I might say, as well as pleased in every respect, that the distinguished senior Senator from Idaho, Senator Frank Church, is here to give his views on the several bills before us concerning more reasonable gun control legislation in the United States. Senator Church is a distinguished Member of the Senate, a friend of all of us on the subcommittee, and I may say we are glad to hear from him in any circumstances. STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK CHURCH, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF IDAHO Senator CHURCH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, the people of Idaho are overwhelmingly opposed to the new Federal gun legislation. The proof is laid out before you, opposing the enactment of new Federal gun laws, signed by nearly 44,000 Idaho residents. In my hand, I hold five letters from Idaho, favoring stronger Federal gun controls, the total number I have received. The ratio of opponents to proponents, as registered with my office, is nearly 10,000 to 1. If there is a better way to ascertain the opinion of the people of my State on the subject of Federal legislation regulating the purchase of firearms, I do not know of it. These petitions are not the work of any lobbying organization; the signatures bear no correlation with the membership list of the National Rifle Association or any other organized group. |