Senator THURMOND. Get page 51 of your report, and see how you explain that.

Attorney General CLARK. I am very familiar with the statistics, Senator. They are put out by the Department of Justice. . . . As Senator Hruska said earlier today, there is a great difference between Idaho and New Jersey. There are many differences. It is not a single difference. But if you are suggesting that Government is helpless, that it cannot control guns, that we ought to abandon all effort to try, then I disagree most emphatically. I think we can control guns, I think we can greatly reduce their use in crimes, I think we know that 60 percent of all murders in the United States are committed with firearms; and I think it is time we did something about it, sir.

Senator THURMOND. I am not suggesting that. I am suggesting that criminals are going to get their firearms. And I do not think innocent citizens should be deprived of getting firearms. I am suggesting that the Federal Government help the States to enforce their laws by prohibiting firearms to be sent through the mail into a State in violation of the State and local laws. And I am suggesting that a Federal law be passed that would make it unlawful for persons to bring a firearm into a State purchased elsewhere if it was unlawful to purchase it in his own State. Those are the things I think are going to count. And yet you want to try to control the whole field of firearms, which is unnecessary, and will place a great burden on a lot of people, and still will not get the results, as is shown in Massachusetts and New York, according to the figures of the FBI.

Now, I suggest to you that these statistics tend to prove that strict firearm laws do not effectively prevent series crime. What does prevent serious crime is better enforcement of present laws, stricter sentencing, and less attention given to technicalities of criminal procedure by our courts. Now, if you really want to help, you can recommend that honest confessions made without coercion or compulsion be admitted into evidence, whether there is a policeman present or not, or whether a man has been held a little longer than the Supreme Court says he can be held. These things should be offset. If we really want to go to the bottom of this crime situation there is a way to do it. And then if we would pass a Federal law along the lines I have indicated, in my judgment that would do the job. And it would be much more satisfactory than what you are recommending.

Now, you further state that ownership of guns among those legally entitled to own them will not be curtailed by this bill. Now, General Clark, I would like to read a statement by a witness who appeared here Thursday-speaking about the method of obtaining a skeet tournament gun. He said this:

One of the shooter's best sources is the classified directories of the Skeet Shooting Review, and Trap and Field, and similar magazines. Once he locates such a gun, perhaps three or four States distant, he will contact that advertiser by mail, perhaps desiring a more specific description, and if acceptable, that gun will be shipped to him by parcel post or express for his use if it fits, and so forth. If the gun is acceptable to the prospective purchaser, the money will be paid to the seller.

Gentlemen of the committee, the bill here before you for consideration, section 922, will positively prohibit just such a method of acquisition of firearms by mail order express as I have here described.

Now, General Clark

Chairman DODD. Who was that witness, Senator?

Senator THURMOND. Mr. McCracken.

Now, General Clark, I submit to you that this man's right to own such a gun will be curtailed by this bill if it passes, and don't you agree?

Attorney General CLARK. No, sir; I do not. I see no curtailment in the right of law-abiding citizens to obtain and own guns under this bill, and I see great benefit and enhancement to the public safety.

Senator THURMOND. On June 19, 1967, my newsletter was entitled "The Right to Bear Arms." There is one paragraph in this that I want to go in the record here and ask your comment.

In recent years, State laws governing the sale of firearms have been increasingly circumvented by mail-order sales of weapons. Dealers in weapons located outside State boundaries often do not comply with State laws restricting sales. Guns have been sold through the mails to children, persons of unsound mind, and people with long criminal records.

Some irresponsible mail-order merchants sell with impunity to anyone who has the price, since they do not have to obtain a license in the State where the purchaser lives, and are beyond the reach of the criminal laws of the State to which the gun is shipped. The problem is easily solved without overstepping the safeguards of the second amendment. Congress has the power to regulate interstate commerce. Therefore Congress can make it unlawful to ship arms in interstate commerce unless the sale is consistent with the law of the State to which the weapon is shipped. Congress should require the gun seller to obtain from the would-be purchaser a sworn statement that the buyer is not prevented by the law of his home State from purchasing the weapon. This should be coupled with a requirement that the seller prior to shipping the weapon send a copy of the sworn statement by registered mail to the chief law enforcement officer of the area in which the would-be purchaser lives. Failure to comply would be a Federal criminal offense. Legislation of this type would protect the rights of the States and the rights of the people without working any undue hardship on seller or buyer.

Now, it seems to me that is a reasonable approach.

Another approach is along the line that the distinguished Senator from Nebraska, Senator Hruska, has provided in his bill. But it seems to me we are going entirely too far, to adopt the administration bill that has been suggested here. No one wants crime. There are many things that can be done.

At the same time, there seems to be a tendency today to take away more and more of the rights of the people. There seems to be a tendency today for the Federal Government to regulate more and more where it is not necessary. Where it is necessary I am in favor of it-just like I am in favor here of making it unlawful to mail firearms into a State in violation of State anl local laws. And I am in favor of making it unlawful for persons to bring firearms into a State purchased elsewhere, if it were unlawful to purchase it in the home

State.

But to go further than that, and other than to curb the traffic in the so-called destructive weapons or devices such as rockets, grenades, bazookas, mines, and so forth, seems to me to be going entirely too far. And I regret that the Justice Department, and I regret that the administration is going as far as they are in recommending the provisions that they have in the administration bill.

I am getting more and more concerned about more and more centralized power. It looks like almost every bill the administration comes to Capitol Hill now, it takes away some of the freedom of the people, to centralize the Government to deprive the States of some of their powers.

82-646-67- -61

I want to thank you very much for coming back this afternoon and testifying, General Clark.

Attorney General CLARK. Thank you, sir, Senator Thurmond. Senator THURMOND. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your courtesy and kindness.

Senator DODD. I am glad to have you ask the questions. I, too, thank the Attorney General for coming back. We all know he is a very busy man. I know it was inadvertent on your part, Senator Thurmond, because I know you so well-I know you would not intentionally de this. But I think you referred to the FBI report with respect to firearms, the FBI report referred to all types of firearms, not just the handguns. I am very sure I am right about that. I have an excerp from the report.

Attorney General CLARK. That is my recollection.

Senator THURMOND. I was just referring to the report of the Attor ney General.

Chairman DODD. I thought it would help clarify the record if I made that observation, because the FBI report does indeed include all types of firearms. There are discussions about handguns and other guns. But the overall purpose of the report is to deal with all types of firearms.

I thought you might be interested, Mr. Attorney General and the is not in the form of a question, but primarily to get something on the record. Our own studies and consultations with officials of Los Angele show that of the 700 guns stolen in Watts during the riot, only thre were confiscated in the hands of those arrested-only three of the T* guns that were stolen and looted. On the other hand, there were 115 individual firearms arrests in the same group of arrestees-39 with rifles and shotguns, and 76 with pistols and revolvers.

I want to make that statement for the record, because there has bee: so much talk about this sniping and shooting being the result of the looting of pawnshops or sporting goods shops where rifles and pistolare sold. The record does not bear that out. Apparently the looting. like all of the other looting, was not really associated too much w ti the shooting and the sniping and the attendant violence. That is what we know to be the fact from the Watts situation.

And then I thought you would be interested to know, Mr. Attorney General, that we have been told by the Treasury Department that t checked 56 dealers in Delaware, New York, Virginia, and Marylane 1 week ago, and found that 690 New Jersey residents had purchase: rifles, shotguns, and handguns in just 1 day. And this was just abet the time of the trouble in Newark.

So our problem is much broader than just rioters looting gunshors If we do not get some control over this traffic, they are going to go oz doing it. I do not know who they were in specific details. But 6.* people buying rifles and shotguns and handguns in 1 day

Attorney General CLARK. Senator, I believe that statistic refers : the purchases that were discovered on 1 day of inspection. I think the purchases had taken place over a period of a year preceding De inspection.

Chairman DODD. I did not know that.

Attorney General CLARK. It is a lot of guns either way.
Chairman DODD. I may have been misinformed.

Attorney General CLARK. It is a lot of guns either way. Those are the purchases disclosed by 1 day's inspection. If you made more days' inspection, you would find more guns purchased. I do not believe those were purchases on that day.

Chairman DODD. In any event, it is an interesting fact.

Senator Thurmond, do you have any further questions?
Senator THURMOND. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman DODD. Thank you, Senator Thurmond. I want to thank the Attorney General again for his lucid and highly intelligent understanding of this problem as I see it. I marvel at his ability to handle facts and statistics and his general knowledgeability about this subject. I do not think we have had a better witness. I do not know that we have had as good a one on this whole subject.

I am grateful to him. And I am sure I speak for the whole subcommittee.

Attorney General CLARK. Thank you, sir.

Chairman DODD. That concludes our hearings for today. We will meet Monday at 10:30 a.m.

(Whereupon, at 3:05 p.m. the subcommittee was adjourned, to reconvene subject to the call of the Chair.)