Mr. PAGE. Yes. Chairman DODD. The States cannot do much about it. I have only one more question for you. Would you agree with a provision in either of our bills or any of the bills, that prohibited the shipment in interstate commerce of long guns if the shipment were in violation of State law? Mr. PAGE. I think we have already answered the question, sir. Chairman DODD. Maybe you have but I don't recall it. If you would answer it again, it would help me. Senator HRUSKA. Isn't that provision is in S. 1853. Chairman DODD. I have a point I wanted to make here. Mr. PAGE. We have accepted Chairman DODD. You don't approve, do you, of the shipment into a State of a long gun in violation of State law? Mr. PAGE. Of course not. This is one of the reasons for our support actually of S. 1853. Chairman DODD. Your position is that no long gun should be shipped into any State where the State law prohibits the possession or the purchase or whatever restriction there may be on the long gun? Mr. PAGE. Yes, sir. On page 10 of S. 1853-"It shall be unlawful for any person to transport or receive in the State where he resides firearms purchased"-if it would be unlawful for him to purchase or possess such firearms in the State where he resides. Chairman DODD. All right. I just wanted to make sure what your view was. Senator Hruska's bill does not apply to long guns. Mr. PAGE. The word used here was "firearms." Senator HRUSKA. That provision does apply to long guns. Chairman DODD. I thought your position was that the provisions of S. 1853 prohibiting the shipment or receipt in violation of State laws should be sufficient and applied only to handguns. Mr. PAGE. No, sir. I said that we supported S. 1853 on two pointsone, just this specific point which we have been discussing-that it forbade Chairman DODD. I wanted to make that clear. Mr. PAGE. The acquisition of firearms in a State if they are illegal in that State-that is the shipment within that State. Chairman DODD. Both handguns and long guns. Mr. PAGE. Contravention of State laws. And the other element is the handgun affidavit. Chairman DODD. This morning we got into a discussion about the testimony of Mr. Mark Benenson. As I understood Senator Hrusk"I was not here when Mr. Benenson testified-he made the point there are some 200 million guns of all kinds in the country, and 90 percent of them are long guns and 10 percent are handguns, and that 70 percent of the homicides are committed with the handguns, 30 percent of them with long arms. Well, he did say that. During the noon recess we checked it, we checked his testimony. But I find that the Bureau of the Census says that on domestic manufacture of firearms and on imported firearms. their figures show that 30 percent of the total were handguns. I thin what Mr. Benenson was saying is that he took a guess at 10 percent As a matter of fact, his exact testimony is that he guessed. Senator HRUSKA. Well, one has to do with inventory, and the other has to do with manufacture and import. Chairman DODD. I know. But my point is Mr. Benenson said "I think that is a fairly good guess. No one really knows, but it is a good guess." Now, I do not think the Census Bureau is guessing in that fashion. Senator HRUSKA. Where would the Census Bureau get its information? From the person that is getting polled for census. And do they all tell the truth about their guns? Have they a little motivation in not disclosing guns? Haven't people who are being counted for census, have they motivation for not disclosing a number of guns? Chairman DODD. I was talking about the census report of manufacturers. Senator HRUSKA. In order that Chairman DODD. I don't think they would lie about it. But the Census Bureau is talking about the manufacturers and the importers, not the possessors. Senator HRUSKA. Here is the exact testimony: Using the estimate that there may be 200 million firearms in the United States, or about one per person, it is a fair enough guess based upon production, sales of new and military surplus arms, imports, and common observation, that no more than a tenth of these are pistols. Chairman DODD. But this is all a guess. Senator HRUSKA. Indeed. Do you want to furnish a guess of your own? Chairman DODD. No. I was furnishing the figures of the Census Bureau, which cannot be described as a guess. I do not think they are letter perfect, but I think they are far more accurate than a guess. Senator HRUSKA. How does the Census language read? Chairman DODD. I can only tell you generally what they told us at the noon recess. They said the figures on domestic manufacture of firearms and on imported firearms reflect that 30 percent of the total were handguns. Senator HRUSKA. That is right. The manufacture and the imports. But here we are dealing with the reservoir Chairman DODD. This is the opposite of what Benenson says. Senator HRUSKA. Not at all. One is talking about a vast reservoir of 200 million guns which are already in the pool. You are talking about manufacture and import, presumably current manufacture and import. Chairman DODD. Everything is included in the Census Bureau figures. Senator HRUSKA. Mr. Witness, have you any figures on this? Chairman DODD. Well, the Bureau of the Census figures cover 10 years. I think we can accept those, Senator Hruska, as being more accurate than the guess of a man, one man who said that it is his guess. And by the way, the Department also says that this guess that only 10 percent of the 200 million firearms in this country are handguns is an error. My point is that the Bureau of the Census is more credible, and should be given more validity than the testimony of Mr. Benenson, who is simply guessing. Anyway, I want to make that point for the record. You can leave it, or get your own figures, Senator, from the Bureau of the Census. But we run into an awful lot of that in these hearings. I do not war: to be disrespectful toward Mr. Benenson, but he kept referring to a guess, only a good guess. We have to get something better than a guess in considering this legislation. So where do you go? You go to experts who know. The Bureau of the Census, after making a 10-year study, is in a better position to give us information than a man who says he is making a guess, or a fairly good guess. Senator HRUSKA. Well, if they have figures for the last 10 years, they also are guessing, the Bureau of the Census, because the census of manufacturers occurs only once every 5 years. If they have figures for 10 years, they have to guess and no question about guessing. S if we are going to get into the field of guessing, and extrapolating figures, for which Government agencies are very famous, and quite adept on occasion, then we will have something else again. Chairman DODD. I do not understand how you can say the Bureau of the Census is guessing, when it carefully solicits the information from the manufacturers and the importers. Senator HRUSKA. But they take a census of manufacturers once every 5 years. Now, how do they fill the figures in for the intermediate 4 years? Chairman DODD. That is twice in 10 years. Senator HRUSKA. That is right. And yet they purport to give figure for 10 years. Chairman DODD. Isn't that more credible than a witness who says he is taking a fairly good guess. I do not know what his guess is based on I do not suppose anyone knows. Senator HRUSKA. Well Chairman DODD. Senator, I think you will agree with me, on reflec tion, that that guess was way wide of the mark, Mr. Perian has pointe out to me your statement in the Congressional Record, March 15, 1966, and the table which you put in, which shows the proportion is about one-third. Senator HRUSKA. From what page? Chairman Dodd. 5723. Senator HRUSKA. What is the caption? Chairman DODD. "Commerce in Firearms." It is over on the side of 5723. It shows pistols and revolvers, for example, quantity in 1963, 496,139 Rifles, 1,079,834. However, that chart is in error because the final f ures released by the Census Bureau show less rifles manufactured that were estimated in the chart you included at page 5723. on So it would make Mr. Benenson's figures look even more incorrect. Senator HRUSKA. Not at all. Mr. Benenson did not base his fig Chairman DODD. He said they are only 10 percent, and the percent by your own figures. Senator HRUSKA. Your figures are wrong, because says 10 percent, and you say 30 percent. Your figurenot mine. That is the converse of what you are tryi Chairman DODD. I want to show you and I a percent. Senator HRUSKA. But Mr. Benenson fo manufacture, but on a number of thin sense. He bases it upon production, which is the only figures the chairman has used-just production. Sales of new and military surplus arms, imports and common observation. And I submit when you have a reservoir of some 200 million firearms, you cannot discount that common observation with reservation to the percentage and proportion of handguns and long guns in that reservoir. Chairman DODD. I do not know what that common observation means. Senator HRUSKA. Common observation is a good educated guess based upon spot checks, and spot checks are not to be frowned upon in statistics. Gallup makes his living making spot checks, and making extrapolations. And it is something more certain than taking only one element of several elements which Mr. Benenson uses, and then say he is all wrong. Chairman DODD. I did not say he is all wrong. I said he is about 20 percent wide of the mark. Senator HRUSKA. Based on one category of figures. Covering a period of 5 years. Chairman DODD. It is an important category. It is somewhat distasteful to me, arguing over statistics. But that Benenson testimony that I reviewed this noon recess bothered me. The Library of Congress provided us with some data on foreign imports, for example, in 1955; 66,864 pistols and revolvers; only 14,000 rifles. Senator HRUSKA. Those figures again, please. Chairman DODD. Why don't I put the whole thing in the record? Senator HRUSKA. Because I have some figures here, and I want to know if they told the same story to you as to me. What year is it for? Chairman DODD. 1955; 66,864 pistols and revolvers. Senator HRUSKA. I have later figures. If you put it in the recordChairman DODD. I have the figures for 1963 and will insert them in the record, and you can put in what you like, if there is no objection to that. Senator HRUSKA. No. (The information referred to was marked "Exhibit No. 113" and is as follows:) EXHIBIT No. 113 CENSUS BUREAU FIGURES ON FIREARMS MANUFACTURED FOR Mr. Paul Bevard, Bureau of the Consus, furnished the Subcommittee the following final figures with regard Mr. PAGE. Thank you very much, sir, for the opportunity. Chairman DODD. Thank you for taking the time to come here. Senator HRUSKA. Mr. Page, may I ask you a few questions? Mr. PAGE. Yes, sir. Senator HRUSKA. Let me ask you to turn to page 14 of Amendment 90. That is commonly known as the administration bill. Starting at line 8 it says: It shall be unlawful for a licensed dealer, among others, to sell or deliver any firearms Skipping down to line 17— any firearms to any person who the licensee knows or has reasonable cause to believe is not lawfully entitled to receive or possess such firearms by reason of any state or local law, regulation or ordinance applicable at the place of same, delivery, or other disposition of the firearm. By-what would be your idea of what reasonable cause to believe is on the part of that seller? Mr. PAGE. I have no knowledge of what intuitive processes the dealer would be expected to go through. I suspect the only thing that he could do would be to demand of his customer some kind of signed or sworn statement of some sort. Senator HRUSKA. This bill, Amendment 90, does not provide for any affidavit or any statement. Mr. PAGE. No. I am aware of that. And yet the requirements or the dealer here in this whole section would seem to require that he would have to set up in self-defense some kind of affidavit procedure for his customers. Senator HRUSKA. Of course this is a test that would apply not only to interstate sales, but even to intrastate sales. Mr. PAGE. Yes, sir. Senator HRUSKA. It says "No dealer shall deliver any firearm to any person, unless he has reasonable cause to believe," and so on. Now, under those circumstances, what do you think about the in.pact upon any misgiving that a dealer may have in his head, and he will say rather than risk the heavy penalties of violating the Federal law, "I won't sell you a gun." And then what becomes of the rights and the demands that perfectly legitimate people have to buy a gun? Are they frustrated? Mr. PAGE. They are very clearly frustrated. The load on the dealer would simply be too great. Senator HRUSKA. We have a similar provision, of course, in S. 1, and it also goes into there is a similar provision and there is a little dif ferent language. It says: Without ascertaining through a reliable means of identification customary used in good commerical practice which shall be noted on the licensee's record Now, the dealer won't know what that usual business practice is. will he? He might have one idea of usual business practice. The enforcer of this law might have another idea. Mr. PAGE. That seems to be clear. Senator HRUSKA. That is on page 14, S. 1, the bottom of the page. line 23 and following. 14: Now, here is another one which appears in S. 1. It appears at pa It shall be unlawful for any licensed dealer to send or otherwise dispose of any firearm to any person— |