Chairman DODD. But you said yourself that your organization believes in stronger legislation, you say you backed the Maryland law and the

Mr. ORTH. We do.

Chairman DODD. Then you must think there is some relationship between accessibility or availability of guns and crime.

Mr. ORTH. How are we going to control it?

Chairman DODD. That is another question.

Mr. ORTH. Well, I think that is the all-important question. Chairman DODD. It may be, but in your booklet, you do not even mention it. You list all the other items or factors that you think have some effect on crime, or, as you say it, create crime, but you do not mention this one. I think it is strange that you omit it. I think we will all agree that it has an effect on crime.

Senator HRUSKA. Mr. Chairman, as the Senator from Idaho testified yesterday, and on June 29, 1967, the Idaho Fish and Game Department, over the signature of the chairman and the signatures of the members of the commission, wrote me a letter which is quite complimentary of the legislative ability of the Senator from Nebraska. May I have it included in the record at a suitable point at the conclusion of Mr. Church's testimony?

Chairman DODD. By all means. I will put it in on my own behalf. (The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 72" and will be found on page 437.)

Senator HRUSKA. And a letter dated July 5 from the Outdoor Writers Association of America, Inc.

Chairman DODD. Yes, it may be put in at the conclusion of Senator Church's testimony.

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 73" will be found on page 437.)

Chairman DODD. While we are putting things in the record, there is an interesting item in the Tuesday, July 18, 1967, column, "The District Line," by Mr. Bill Gold on what we were talking about, so I will ask, without objection, that this may be included in the record. It has bearing. It has to do with misrepresentations that have been made by so many on S. 1 and the amendment. I think that ought to be included at the conclusion of General Orth's testimony.

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 74" and is as follows:)

EXHIBIT No. 74

[From the Washington Post, July 18, 1967]

THE DISTRICT LINE

(By Bill Gold)

GUN BILL'S LANGUAGE EXAMINED BY REES

Much mail has been received by Congressmen on the subject of the Administration's bill to regulate the traffic in guns. Rep. Thomas M. Rees (D-Calif.) noted that members of the National Rifle Association were telling him that the bill threatened to take away their right to bear arms. Weekend hunters had visions of the sheriff confiscating their shotguns.

Alarmed by all this, says Rees, he "decided to actually read the Administration bill an action considered almost subversive in some circles. It's

amazing what one can learn by reading the bill-as opposed to the flamboyant, alarmist editorials of the gun lovers."

There is, indeed, a great difference between reading bills and reading what people say about bills.

After Rees had finished his reading, he made this report to his California constituents:

"There is nothing in the bill to affect the weekend duck hunter unless he has been convicted of a felony or is presently under arrest or indictment, or wants to use a cannon or a machine gun in hunting ducks.

"Any law-abiding citizen in California, if the bill were passed, could still walk into a store and buy a gun just as he does now. Other than not being a con victed criminal or under indictment, the bill provides that the person must be over 21 to buy a pistol and over 18 to buy a rifle or a shotgun."

The bill provides, Rees finds, that one may not transport a hand gun to another state; but the hunter who crosses a state line may bring along his rifle or shotgun.

The Congressman adds that what the bill is really tough on are things like machine guns, bazookas, field artillery and sawed-off shotguns. If you want to hunt ducks with this type of ordnance, you're going to have to do to the in convenience of persuading your local police department that this is what you're really up to.

Says Rees: "The bill, in other words, does not deter the legitimate gun user or collector. Through a system of licensing the manufacturer, importer and dealer, and by prohibiting interstate shipment of arms except between licensed individuals, the bill provides a system to check the gun traffic which feeds the criminal world." He asks: "Why are the gun lovers up in arms? It is hard to figure."

Is it really so hard to figure, Mr. Congressman? Most of the people who have written letters blasting the bill have not read the text; they have read only what they've been told about it by the NRA and other gun interests. The NRA gets millions of dollars a year from companies that make and sell arms of al. kinds. Would you expect anybody in the gun trade to favor Government regulation? That would be akin to the auto industry naming Ralph Nader as its man of the year.

Mr. ORTH. Senator Dodd, may I include in the record at the end of my testimony yesterday one letter that I failed to include? I would like to read it into the record.

Chairman DODD. What is it?

Mr. ORTH. It is a letter from President Kennedy to me.

Chairman DODD. By all means.

Mr. ORTH (reading):

Mr. FRANKLIN L. ORTH,

Executive Vice President,

THE WHITE House, Washington, March 20, 1961.

National Rifle Association of America,

Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. ORTH: On the occasion of Patriots Day, I wish to offer my congratulations and best wishes to the National Rifle Association of America which over the past years has done credit to our country by the outstanding achievements of its members in the art of shooting.

Through competitive matches and sports in coordination with the National Board for the Promotion of Rifle Practice, the association fills an important role in our national defense effort, and fosters in an active and meaningful fashion the spirit of the Minutemen.

I am pleased to accept life membership in the National Rifle Association and extend to your organization every good wish for continued success. Sincerely,

JOHN KENNEDY.

Senator HRUSKA. I have a copy of a letter which was addressed to you on July 18 from the American Farm Bureau Federation. Has that been included in the record?

Chairman DODD. No. We will have to include it.

Senator HRUSKA. Yes; that ought to go into the record.

Chairman DODD. Very well. We will include it at the conclusion of General Orth's testimony.

(The document referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 75" and is as follows:)

EXHIBIT No. 75

Hon. TпомAS J. DODD,

AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION,
Washington, D.C., July 18, 1967.

Chairman, Subcommittee To Investigate Juvenile Delinquency,
U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR DODD: Your letter inviting the American Farm Bureau Federation to present a statement at the Subcommittee's hearings on proposed legislation dealing with control of firearms is greatly appreciated. Farm Bureau has a paid up membership of 1,703,908 member families in more than 2,770 County Farm Bureaus, and we have a continuing interest in practical regulation of firearms based on realistic rather than emotional considerations.

Farm Bureau's long-standing policy with respect to this matter reads: "The Constitution of the United States guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms. We therefore oppose any federal legislation requiring registration of firearms.

Most American farmers and ranchers keep one or more handguns, rifles, and shotguns on their farms and ranches for sporting purposes, for use against predatory animals, and for protection of their lives and property should the need arise. Our policy on Registration of Firearms is predicated upon this fact, and this policy never was intended to endorse individual ownership of such weapons as mortars, bazookas, machineguns, and other destructive devices included in the scope of the legislation before your Subcommittee.

The provision in Amendment 90 to S. 1 which would prohibit purchases by mail of rifles and shotguns customarily used by farmers and ranchers appears to be sufficiently restrictive as to cause undue hardship to farmers and ranchers in the more remote areas of the nation. Dealers in these areas generally maintain limited supplies of rifles and shotguns; and, should purchases by mail be prohibited, the farmer or rancher desiring a model or type not customarily included in a small stock would be compelled to travel to the place of business of a dealer handling a larger supply.

We respectfully recommend that the Subcommittee give appropriate consideration to this matter in connection with the proposed legislation.

We also direct your attention to another matter of concern peculiar to farmers and ranchers which could be overlooked in the earnest desire to regulate major traffic in weapons. In establishing a system of license fees for business concerns dealing in firearms and ammunition, it is imperative that the rural merchant not be regulated out of the business of handling a relatively small volume of shotgun and rifle ammunition of the type customarily used by farmers and ranchers. Because of the very small margin of profit in this type of ammunition, many storekeepers in reality maintain supplies for sale primarily as a service to their customers. Consequently, imposition of excessive and unrealistic license fees doubtless would compel some of these merchants-most likely those in the more remote rural areas to discontinue handling ammunition. As a result, the greatest hardship in obtaining ammunition would result to those farmers and ranchers who actually have the greatest need for such ammunition.

We should appreciate your including this letter in the record of the Subcommittee's hearings on S. 1, Amendment No. 90, S. 1853, and S. 1854.

Sincerely,

JOHN C. LYNN, Legislative Director.

Chairman DODD. We thank you very much, gentlemen, for your patience and the time you have taken to come here and testify. As Senator Kennedy has pointed out, coming back today was an in

convenience.

Mr. ORTH. Thank you, sir.

Mr. GLASSEN. We thank you, sir.

Mr. ORTH. I have sent for all the bulletins this year, Senator, and they should be here within the next few minutes.

Chairman DODD. Well, I am grateful. That will help us.

We will recess until 1:15.

(Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the hearing recessed to reconvene a 1:15 p.m. the same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION

Senator HRUSKA (presiding). The subcommittee will come to order. The chairman will be along in a few minutes. He has asked that I open the meeting and call as our first witness this afternoon in continuation of these hearings, Robert T. Dennis, assistant conservation director, Izaak Walton League of America.

Is Mr. Dennis here?

STATEMENT OF ROBERT T. DENNIS, ASSISTANT CONSERVATION DIRECTOR, IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA

Mr. DENNIS. I am Robert T. Dennis, assistant conservation director of the Izaak Walton League of America. The league is a nationwide organization of citizens dedicated to wise and proper management and use of the Nation's natural resources. As is true of other conservation associations, the league's membership base is constituted of sportsmen-we estimate that more than 80 percent of our members own firearms. We, therefore, appreciate this opportunity to comment on the legislation before you today.

Mr. Chairman, we have been here before. We presented carefully detailed testimony during the last Congress. In accordance with your request, we refer the committee to that statement while reviewing the central points here.

The Izaak Walton League strongly supports sound firearms laws. We support proposals which would:

1. Provide and require enforcement of strict penalties for criminal misuse of firearms.

2. Strictly control purchase, ownership, and use of war and gangster weapons-machineguns, bazookas, antitank guns, sawed-off shotguns, silencers, and the like.

3. End bulk imports of cheap firearms, notably handguns, which have no value for sporting, target, or home protection purposes.

4. Prevent gun sales to the demonstrably insane or irresponsible, ar d to convicted criminals.

5. Prevent gun sales to juveniles, unless parental consent is clearly demonstrated.

6. Prevent traffic in firearms which are stolen or lacking serial numbers.

7. Require clear notice that firearms are in packages being shipped or mailed.

8. Set manufacturers', importers', and dealers' license fees at level: which cover the reasonable cost of processing license applications,

Particularly at the Federal level, we would support language elentiy spelling out the rights of firearms owners, users, and would-be pur

chasers, so that restrictive legislation would be placed in proper context.

On the other hand, the league does not support proposals which would:

1. Outlaw individual ownership or use of firearms.

2. Make it impossible for law-abiding citizens to purchase sporting quality handguns, rifles, and shotguns of their choice.

3. Make it difficult or demeaning to purchase ammunition.

4. Require registration of firearms.

5. Require prior approval or licensing by police or other authority of firearms purchase by citizens.

6. Make it difficult to have firearms repaired, reworked, or modified.

7. Make it burdensome for a person to transport a firearm from one State to another for lawful purposes.

Mr. Chairman, under these policies the Izaak Walton League of America cannot support enactment of S. 1 or Amendment No. 90. We can and do support S. 1853 and S. 1854-a comprehensive package which should be enacted into law.

Thank you for considering our views.

Senator HRUSKA. Mr. Dennis, I want to thank you for that statement. I especially appreciate the endorsement of my two bills.

On page 2 of your statement, your second item, you indicate that the league would not support a proposal to make it impossible for lawabiding citizens to purchase sporting quality handguns, rifles, and shotguns of their choice.

I presume by this you include the method of purchase, that is, specifically mail-order sales and over-the-counter sales? In other words, you would oppose either a total ban of mail-order or over-thecounter sales of firearms?

Mr. DENNIS. Yes, sir. We spent some time looking into the mailorder ban as proposed in S. 1 and believe that in practice it would mean that certain citizens would be unable to buy firearms of their choice. Perhaps they could go to their local dealer, but I believe you pointed out yesterday, some of the dealers which we would regard as local dealers are pretty small operations and it might be very difficult for a citizen to get a particular brand or particular model for something through such a dealer.

Now, we do not regard the type of affidavit procedure that you have suggested as making it impossible. It may be a slight inconvenience, but certainly, any legitimate citizen who wished to buy a firearm through the mail it seems to me, seems to us, our members, would have no objection to filing such a document and it would permit in our view local authorities to enforce local and State laws.

Senator HRUSKA. On page 1 you indicated you would support an end to bulk imports of cheap firearms, notably handguns, which have no value for sporting, target, or home protection purposes.

I assume that you were referring to the starter pistols or the socalled Saturday Night Specials. These are items of new commercial manufacture, both domestic and foreign. You do not necessarily include, however, military surplus imports, particularly rifles, such as the Mauser and Enfield, do you?