    [House Hearing, 117 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                       TOOLS TO COMBAT GUN TRAFFICKING AND
                      REDUCE GUN VIOLENCE IN OUR COMMUNITIES

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                               COMMITTEE ON RULES
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                            WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15, 2022

                                   __________

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                        Available via http://govinfo.gov
                 Printed for the use of the Committee on Rules

                                  __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    49-407                    WASHINGTON : 2022

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                               COMMITTEE ON RULES

                   James P. McGovern, Massachusetts, Chairman
    NORMA J. TORRES, California          TOM COLE, Oklahoma
    ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado                Ranking Republican
    JAMIE RASKIN, Maryland               MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas
    MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania       GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
    JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York          MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota
    MARK DeSAULNIER, California
    DEBORAH K. ROSS, North Carolina
    JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
                           Don Sisson, Staff Director
                 Kelly Dixon Chambers, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

                 Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget Process

                            Joseph D. Morelle, Chair
    MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania       MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas
    DEBORAH K. ROSS, North Carolina        Ranking Republican
    JOE NEGUSE, Colorado                 TOM COLE, Oklahoma
    JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts
                                     ------

              SUBCOMMITTEE ON RULES AND ORGANIZATION OF THE HOUSE

                       Norma J. Torres, California, Chair
    ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado              GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
      Vice Chair                           Ranking Republican
    MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
    TOM COLE, Oklahoma
    JOSEPH D. MORELLE, New York
    JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts
                                     ------

                      Subcommittee on Expedited Procedures

                         Jamie Raskin, Maryland, Chair
    DEBORAH K. ROSS, North Carolina      MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota
      Vice Chair                           Ranking Republican
    NORMA J. TORRES, California          TOM COLE, Oklahoma
    MARK DeSAULNIER, California
    JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts

                                     ------

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                                 June 15, 2022

                                                                       Page
    Opening Statements:
        Hon. Joseph D. Morelle, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of New York and Chairman of the Subcommittee on
          Legislative and Budget Process.............................     1
        Hon. Michael C. Burgess, a Representative in Congress from
          the State of Texas and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee
          on Legislative and Budget Process..........................     3
    Witness Testimony:
        Mr. Robert Wilcox, Director of Federal Policy, Everytown for
          Gun Safety Action Fund.....................................     6
            Prepared Statement.......................................     9
        Mr. Todd K. Baxter, Monroe County Sheriff, Rochester, New
          York.......................................................    13
            Prepared Statement.......................................    16
        Dr. Lois K. Lee, MD, MPH, FAAP, FACEP, Pediatric Emergency
          Medicine Physician, Boston Children's Hospital, Assistant
          Professor of Pediatrics at Harvard Medical School..........    29
            Prepared Statement.......................................    31
        Mr. William Napier LPC, Security/ATF Compliance Consultant...    36
            Prepared Statement.......................................    39
    Additional Material Submitted for the Record:
        Article by Todd J. Gillman, The Dallas Morning News, entitled
          ``Dallas gun trafficker used Texas license to carry to
          avoid background checks'', dated June 13, 2022.............    44
        Report by Brady: United Against Gun Violence, entitled
          ``Uncovering the Truth About Pennsylvania Crime Guns, April
          2022.......................................................    53
        Article by Megan Crepeau, The Chicago Tribune, entitled
          ``Aurora shooter should not have had a gun due to felony
          conviction, but state law failed to stop him'', dated
          February 16, 2019..........................................   106
        Curriculum Vitae and Truth in Testimony Forms for Witnesses
          Testifying Before the Committee............................   111

                      TOOLS TO COMBAT GUN TRAFFICKING AND
                     REDUCE GUN VIOLENCE IN OUR COMMUNITIES

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, JUNE 15, 2022

                              House of Representatives,
     Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget Process, Committee
                                                      on Rules,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 11:33 a.m., in
    Room H-313, The Capitol, Hon. Joseph D. Morelle [chairman of
    the subcommittee] presiding.
        Present: Representatives Morelle, Scanlon, Ross, McGovern,
    and Burgess.
        Mr. Morelle. The Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget
    Process of the Committee on Rules will come to order.
        And I want to begin by thanking our witnesses, who we will
    hear from in just a few moments, and thank each of you for
    being here today for your participation.
        I would like to thank my colleagues on the Rules Committee
    for joining me as well, the chairman of the standing Committee
    on Rules, the Honorable Mr. McGovern, who I am really grateful
    to for helping to organize this and for being here this
    morning, and my friend and colleague, the ranking member of the
    subcommittee, Mr. Burgess. And we are delighted to have you all
    here.
        Our Nation is reeling from a recent series of senseless
    mass shootings in Buffalo, Uvalde, Tulsa, and too many
    neighborhoods across the country. As we all know, these
    tragedies have become far too common. There have been more than
    200 mass shootings already in 2022, which is more shootings
    than there have been days of the year.
        And our Nation is experiencing an undeniable surge in gun
    violence across the board. More than 45,000 people were killed
    by guns in 2020, which is an increase of 15 percent from the
    previous year. And, according to a recent analysis published in
    the New England Journal of Medicine, firearm deaths have now
    replaced motor vehicle accidents as the leading cause of death
    for children in this country, which I will admit is a fact I
    continue to repeat and continue having a hard time even
    processing.
        My community of Rochester, New York, had a record-setting
    year of homicides in 2021 and, sadly, is on track potentially
    for another year like that in 2022.
        So today's hearing will focus on actions that Congress can
    consider to better combat gun trafficking and ensure that
    illegal guns do not make their way to the streets of our
    communities. And those actions include ensuring that ATF has
    the necessary tools and resources to track and police gun
    trafficking, as well as critical funding streams for gun
    violence prevention research.
        Gun trafficking, defined as the diversion of firearms from
    the legal market into the hands of those who cannot legally
    possess them, is a major contributor to gun violence Americans
    are experiencing each day. So many of the guns that show up at
    a crime scene originated as a legal sale from a licensed
    dealer.
        According to Everytown--and we appreciate Everytown for
    being here--for Gun Safety, analysis of ATF data, almost 1.3
    million guns were used in a crime and traceable by law
    enforcement from 2016 to 2020. Of those 1.3 million guns,
    nearly 40 percent were used in a crime within 3 years, raising
    the prospect that the gun was likely purchased with the intent
    to be used in a crime at the time of sale. And 72 percent of
    those guns came from a State without background checks.
        So many of these guns are diverted to the illegal market
    through straw purchases, which is where an individual legally
    purchases a firearm for someone who is prohibited from legally
    possessing a firearm themselves.
        Gun trafficking can also undermine comprehensive gun laws
    at the State level as guns often move from State to State and
    move from States with weaker gun laws into States with stronger
    ones.
        In a report issued by the New York State attorney general,
    found that 74 percent of guns used as crimes in New York State
    between 2010 and 2015 were originally purchased legally out of
    State. So other methods of diversion include gun theft and
    irresponsible conduct by some Federal firearm licensees, or gun
    dealers. According to recent data from ATF, around 18,700
    firearms are reported lost or stolen from gun dealers each
    year, many of those firearms later traced to violent crime.
        Despite this, law enforcement is limited in what they can
    do to curb the flow of stolen firearms onto the streets. So
    Federal law requires right now pharmacies to lock their
    controlled substances away at night. It seems reasonable. Yet
    federally licensed gun dealers are not required to take basic
    precautions to protect their stock. The result is that
    thousands of guns are not properly secured, and many dealers
    are repeatedly burglarized without experiencing really any
    consequences for failing to secure dangerous weapons.
        So I have worked with others and am proud to sponsor the
    Gun Theft Prevention Act, H.R. 4423, which would take a number
    of steps to increase oversight of gun dealers and grant ATF the
    tools to hold repeat offenders accountable.
        Although ATF's goal is to inspect each license holder at
    least once every 3 years, a recent report indicated that ATF
    only inspects each gun shop once every 7 years, making it
    virtually impossible to ensure that dealers are maintaining
    compliance with even the most basic and, in my view, limited
    requirements. So my legislation would require ATF to inspect
    all gun dealers every 3 years and give them the resources
    needed to do that.
        The Gun Theft Prevention Act would also require ATF to
    perform annual inspections of high-risk dealers. And we have
    heard pushback from the industry that claims that high-risk
    dealers and the claims about them are overblown, that dealers
    selling a high volume of firearms will inevitably be
    responsible for more guns that are involved in crimes.
        However, the data clearly states otherwise. In a report
    issued by ATF, the agency found that 1.2 percent of gun dealers
    were responsible for over 50 percent of crime guns later found
    on the street. I will say that again: 1.2 percent of dealers
    responsible for over 50 percent of guns found on the streets in
    the commission of crimes. Eighty-seven percent of gun dealers
    were found to have no violations at all.
        So it is imperative that we grant ATF the resources they
    need to properly target bad actors and hold them accountable
    despite attempts from the industry to spin this effort as
    unnecessary.
        It is also important to note that the problem is getting
    worse. Between 2013 and 2017, the number of firearms stolen in
    gun-dealer burglaries more than doubled, and the number of
    firearms stolen in gun-dealer robberies tripled.
        So I look forward to hearing from your testimony on the
    importance of adequately funding gun violence prevention
    research, despite the staggering number--numbers on gun
    violence, which I mentioned previously, the restrictions on
    data collection, and research allowed to be performed by CDC or
    the National Institute of Health. And I am sure Dr. Lee has
    some comments to make about that.
        The Dickey amendment, which is an appropriations rider
    first passed in 1996, expressly prohibited such Federal
    investments for more than two decades. And, although Congress
    began funding 12.5 million each for the CDC and NIH annually in
    2019, much more is needed after years of neglect on this issue.
        So I look forward to today's discussion, appreciate the
    chance to give some opening remarks and hopefully give context
    for this, and I hope we will engage in a constructive dialogue
    which will lead to actionable steps that we can take to better
    combat gun trafficking and protect our communities from the
    epidemic of gun violence.
        And, with that, let me now turn to my friend and colleague
    on the Rules Committee and the ranking member of this
    subcommittee, Dr. Burgess, for any remarks he wishes to make,
    sir.
        Dr. Burgess. So thank you, Chairman Morelle. Thank you for
    holding this hearing today.
        Thanks for our witnesses for being here and helping us deal
    with the issues of trafficking and criminal violence in our
    communities.
        I especially want to welcome Mr. Bill Napier, who possesses
    years of experience as a security analyst, a firearms
    compliance consultant, and a law enforcement officer. Mr.
    Napier helped launch Operation Secure Store to prevent the
    theft of firearms.
        Recent shootings in your State and my State underscore the
    need to keep firearms out of the hands of dangerous individuals
    and to prevent their theft and to remove illegal firearms from
    commerce.
        So, certainly, I look forward, Mr. Napier, to hearing more
    about Operation Secure Store and any efforts that we at the
    Federal level can undertake to keep America safe.
        Now, yesterday, back home, in the Dallas Morning News, it
    was reported that the Department of Justice, in conjunction
    with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, out of the
    Dallas Field Division, announced the indictment of a man who
    purchased over 90 guns illegally and then resold them. Many of
    these guns were used in crimes, including homicide, aggravated
    assault, and drug trafficking. The person was also charged with
    making false statements during the purchase of a firearm.
        Unfortunately, according to a Department of Justice
    inspector general report from 2018, only 1 percent of
    individuals who lie on their background forms, form 4473, ever
    are prosecuted. Even worse, ATF does not recover all the
    firearms illegally in commerce as a result of these
    illegitimate purchases.
        So, not related to today's hearing, but previously, I
    introduced a bill, H.R. 194, to require the Department of
    Justice to again study and report to Congress on this issue so
    we can be better prepared to help protect Americans and recover
    illegal firearms.
        Now, Mr. Morelle's legislation, which is included in this
    hearing, H.R. 4423, the Gun Theft Prevention Act, seeks to
    prevent gun thefts from stores and Federal firearms licensees.
    We must find a way that we can work with our lawful sellers to
    prevent thefts and gun trafficking.
        Just as an interesting side note, as the story reported in
    the Dallas Morning News yesterday, the individual who illegally
    purchased and then diverted the many firearms, the actual point
    at which the firearms were purchased lost the license but
    otherwise received no special scrutiny or prosecution.
        Perhaps we can hear a little bit more about that from Mr.
    Napier or any of our other witnesses this morning.
        This hearing is also about just reducing violence in our
    communities, and I would be remiss if I didn't mention a
    successful program that occurred in the district that I
    represent, the 26th District of Texas, to do just that.
        I live in one of the most rapidly growing parts of the
    country. It is an area just north of DFW Airport. A lot of
    people are moving there. Every year in the month of April, I do
    an emergency preparedness summit. My staff refers to it as the
    Tornado Summit.
        We have a lot of people moving to the area. We live down at
    the tip of Tornado Alley. And, while we don't have the majority
    of the tornados that will occur, of those tornados that do
    occur, we are the most densely populated area, and we are
    growing rapidly. So many people move to our area who really
    don't understand some of the peculiarities of Texas weather. So
    I do this summit every year.
        This year, in April--and it was right at the end of April
    that we did the summit--I also invited the chief of the Argyle
    Independent School District Police Department to talk to us
    about school safety, because he has a rather unique program
    that he has instituted in the school districts--relatively
    large school district in the suburban area of Denton County. I
    met him several years ago after one of these events occurred,
    and I will just never forget his comments to me.
        He and the superintendent decided they were not going to go
    to 20 funerals in Argyle, Texas. So he put together this
    program. And we can talk about it in a little bit more detail.
    It is not really part of the hearing that we have here today.
    But part of it does include arming personnel, a voluntary basis
    and the proper training. And I know that can be controversial
    in other parts of the country, but it seems to be working where
    Chief Cairney had set it up.
        But he also had a card that he gave to every teacher. It is
    sort of like one of those Life Alert buttons. Any teacher can
    shut the school down. Ask questions later. Something that makes
    you uncomfortable--maybe it is a shooting in a funeral home
    across the street after a car accident--shut the school down.
    And then figure out what to do next.
        And Chief Cairney reported that there had been a time or
    two where things got shut down where maybe the--when they
    unwound everything, maybe it wasn't necessary, but he would far
    rather face that than what might be the alternative.
        But I do hope we can talk about those types of programs in
    a broader context, but I thought it would be useful to at least
    bring it up today, that many of these problems do have local
    solutions.
        Drew Ferguson, a Member from Georgia, and I have worked on
    legislation called The BIG Act, passed the House now twice,
    still awaiting activity over in the Senate. The BIG Act stands
    for Behavioral Interventional Guidelines. So often we hear that
    everybody knew this kid was trouble, but no one knew what to do
    about it. No one knew who to go talk to. So trying to provide
    some framework where educators and administrative staff and
    teachers will have the--be armed with the necessary tools for
    the proper type of behavioral intervention when it is required.
        Regardless, reducing the trafficking in illegal firearms
    will limit the ability for dangerous individuals to pose a
    threat to schools, houses of worship, or retail stores. We wish
    we could be better preparing or campuses, our school staff, and
    our local law enforcement to prevent and respond to these
    situations because that is an important piece of the puzzle.
    But, again, look forward to hearing from our witnesses today.
        Thanks to all of you for being here, and I will yield back
    to the chairman.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Burgess, very much.
        And I would like to now take a moment to introduce our
    witnesses.
        First, Mr. Rob Wilcox is the Federal legal director at
    Everytown for Gun Safety. He is a nationally recognized expert
    on gun safety, drawing upon more than 20 years of policy
    advocacy and litigation experience. Mr. Wilcox specializes in
    the development of comprehensive approaches to address gun
    violence and technical advice on the development of evidence-
    informed policy solutions.
        Following Mr. Wilcox, Sheriff Todd Baxter has joined us. He
    is the sheriff--the sheriff for Monroe County, my home town. He
    is a member of law enforcement with 22 years of service to the
    Rochester Police Department and 4 years of experience in the
    Greece Police Department.
        Sheriff Baxter joined the local force following 3 years of
    Active Duty with the United States Army as a military police
    officer.
        We are also joined by Lois Lee, who is a Senior Associate
    in Pediatrics in the Division of Emergency Medicine at Boston
    Children's Hospital and an Associate Professor of Pediatrics
    and Emergency Medicine at Harvard Medical School. She focuses
    her research on pediatric emergency medicine injuries, health
    disparities, and health policy. Dr. Lee has published research
    on injury prevention, including injuries related to firearms.
    With this expertise, she serves as chair-elect of the AAP's
    Council on Injury Violence and Poison Prevention.
        Finally, we are joined by Mr. Bill Napier, who has more
    than 30 years of experience in retail loss prevention, serving
    in leadership roles such as site security manager, corporate
    manager, and director. For more than 18 years, Mr. Napier has
    also been in the retail outdoor arena with responsibility for
    ATF compliance and firearms-related security and
    investigations.
        Additionally, he has spent 20 years in municipal law
    enforcement. He is currently involved with the Loss Prevention
    Research Council at the University of Florida as a member of
    the Violent Crime Working Group and sits on the board of
    directors for the Loss Prevention Foundation.
        Again, an august group, and we are delighted that each of
    you took time out of your schedules to be with us. And we will
    begin with Mr. Wilcox.
        And I ask you to try to limit your comments. We have your
    written testimony, which is in the record, to about 5 minutes,
    and then we will ask our panelists for questions.

       STATEMENTS OF ROBERT WILCOX, DIRECTOR OF FEDERAL POLICY,
     EVERYTOWN FOR GUN SAFETY ACTION FUND; TODD K. BAXTER, MONROE
    COUNTY SHERIFF, ROCHESTER, NEW YORK; LOIS K. LEE MD, MPH, FAAP,
         FACEP, PEDIATRIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE PHYSICIAN, BOSTON
       CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL ASSISTANT, PROFESSOR OF PEDIATRICS AT
     HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL; AND WILLIAM NAPIER LPC, SECURITY/ATF
                         COMPLIANCE CONSULTANT

                       STATEMENT OF ROBERT WILCOX

        Mr. Wilcox. Good morning, Chairman Morelle, Ranking Member
    Burgess, Chair McGovern, and distinguished members of the
    subcommittee. My name is Rob Wilcox, and I am the Federal legal
    director at Everytown for Gun Safety, the country's largest gun
    violence prevention organization.
        I am a survivor of gun violence, whose cousin was shot and
    killed by somebody who never should have had a gun, come from a
    family that has had guns as long as I could remember. I am also
    an attorney who has worked on gun policy for nearly 20 years in
    a number of different capacities at the local, State, and
    Federal level.
        I am exceptionally grateful for this opportunity at this
    important hearing to discuss America's gun violence crisis and
    the flow of illegal guns and what we can be doing about it.
        The mass shootings in Buffalo and Uvalde devastated,
    terrified, and motivated action like we have never seen before.
    But make no mistake. Every single day in this country, 110
    people are shot and killed, and hundreds more are wounded. We
    have been horrified to our core more times than we can count,
    with places of joy and everyday life becoming places of terror.
        And we are not moving in the right direction right now.
    Cities across the country are seeing record rates of gun
    violence, homicides increasing 30 percent from 2019 to 2020.
    And, more and more, the guns recovered at crime scenes bear the
    signals that they were purchased from dealers for the purpose
    of gun trafficking or use in crime.
        And there is deep disproportionality in who is being
    affected by gun violence, with Black Americans 10 times more
    likely than White Americans to suffer from gun violence.
        The epidemic also comes at a true cost to our country.
    Individual families like mine are left devastated by the costs
    of losing a loved one, and local resources are strained to pay
    for it. At Everytown, we estimate that the cost comes to $280
    billion a year. That is more than the budget of the Veterans
    Administration.
        And, as we have been talking about today so far, addressing
    gun violence requires a comprehensive approach that balances
    community-based programs that we know are effective at reducing
    violence with upstream solutions to keep illegal guns out of
    our communities in the first place.
        ATF, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, that we
    mentioned, has made clear the three most common pathways that
    illegal guns take: no background check sales, straw purchases,
    and gun thefts. We know, when it comes to background check
    sales, there are too many commercial marketplaces where
    individuals who want to traffic or can't own guns can get them
    without a check. Just one website, just one alone, there was 1
    million ads per year for no-background-check sales.
        And we know that that is a place that traffickers will go.
    President Biden's new Gun Trafficking Strike Force just
    announced a bust of one gun trafficking ring that acquired 500
    guns from online sources to traffic from Georgia to California.
        Straw purchases, another significant area for inquiry.
    Straw purchasers often show signs. They show an unfamiliarity
    with the firearm that they are trying to purchase. They pay in
    all cash, or sometimes the actual buyer will come with them as
    well. Gun dealers can be trained to identify this. Technology
    can be used to make sure that we actually keep an eye on what
    is happening so we can bring criminal cases. And we need a
    standalone crime for straw purchasing and gun trafficking on
    the books in Federal law.
        Lastly is gun theft. Hundreds of thousands of guns are
    stolen from homes each year. Guns are frequently stolen from
    cars, a trend that is rising. But we also know that guns are
    stolen from licensed gun dealers, who, as the chairman
    mentioned, are not subject to minimum physical security
    requirements under the law.
        ATF reports that, over a recent 5-year period, 80,000 guns
    were stolen or lost from Federal firearms licensees. But the
    truth is that number doesn't tell us the full story. In just
    one smash and grab in Wisconsin, one gun was used in 27
    shootings in Chicago. So there is a deep ripple effect. When
    these guns are stolen or lost from gun stores, they end up
    being used in crimes.
        But, just as we can identify these issues, we can't
    identify the solutions as well. No one solution will stop all
    of gun violence, but we can take a comprehensive approach. We
    can have background checks on all gun sales where there is no
    commercial marketplace where strangers can go to acquire guns.
    People selling dozens of guns each year should be treated like
    the gun dealers they are, rather than individuals that are
    flooding our communities with no-background-check sales.
        We know Congress must--can pass modernization and provide
    ATF more resources. Congresswoman Kelly's Federal Firearms
    Licensee Act is a great example. And, as you mentioned,
    Chairman, we need security being required because it is not
    enough for optional efforts when the cost is so high. We need
    required efforts, and so we strongly support the Gun Theft
    Prevention Act as a critical and necessary step.
        These are simple solutions that will dramatically reduce
    gun violence over time. We know the cost is too high. We know
    it is too high in dollars, we know it is too high in our
    communities, and I know it is too high for what my family has
    experienced. With concrete action, we can make a difference and
    save lives.
        I look forward to this discussion and your questions, and
    thank you so much for having us.
        [The statement of Mr. Wilcox follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Mr. Wilcox.
        Before I call on Sheriff Baxter, I want to also acknowledge
    we have been joined by a member of the distinguished Rules
    Committee and a member of the subcommittee, Ms. Scanlon from
    Pennsylvania.
        Ms. Scanlon. Thank you.

                      STATEMENT OF TODD K. BAXTER

        Mr. Baxter. Chairman Morelle and members of the
    subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before
    you today. It is truly an honor to be here and discuss this
    legislation and the nexus between illegal firearms and measures
    the Federal Government can attempt to enhance the efficiency,
    security, and management of firearms commerce.
        In my 35 years in law enforcement, I have seen firsthand
    consequences of the use of illegal guns on victims, their
    families, and communities at large.
        The challenge before this body is to effect meaningful
    change to reduce victimization without trampling on rights of
    individuals.
        I am proposing two guiding principles for future
    legislation that can considerably reduce the plague of illegal
    firearms. They are responsible commercial firearms management
    and positive gun ownership. With nearly 400 million legal
    privately owned firearms in the United States, one-tenth of 1
    percent of those firearms are stolen or lost annually. That is
    400,000 firearms reported lost or stolen: 95 percent of those
    losses from private owners, 5 percent from dealers and
    manufacturers.
        Responsible commercial firearms management is a necessity.
    The current legislation with refinements can significantly
    enhance and promote responsible firearms management by those in
    businesses selling firearms. Presently, there are 82,000
    Federal firearm licensees in the United States, a vast majority
    legitimate, competent small business owners responsibly selling
    guns.
        There are an unknown number of individuals with licenses
    that have acquired this license to validate personal possession
    of firearms not available to most citizens under Federal and
    State laws.
        ATF reported in 2020 it conducted 5,823 inspections. At
    this rate, it will take more than 13 years to inspect every
    FFL--let me reiterate that--13 years to inspect every FFL.
        More ATF agents available to educate, conduct inspections,
    promote best practices for physical security gun dealers would
    reap great benefit in dealing with preventable gun thefts.
    Giving the ATF the discretion to deny or revoke FFLs not
    involved in commerce, mandating inspections, while reducing
    their limitations, all advance the goal of responsible firearms
    management.
        In my community, we dealt with a reckless gun shop owner.
    His inaction to keep accurate inventory combined with weak
    physical security of his shop directly contributed to the theft
    of 133 guns in eight separate burglaries over 13 years.
        There were three burglaries just in the year 2018, with the
    last one accounting for more than 100 guns lost. Because of no
    accurate inventory, we will never know exactly how many guns
    were stolen. Had the ATF had the ability to swiftly enforce
    standards, a significant number of guns would not have made it
    to the streets and in the hands of dangerous criminals.
        Requiring licensees to submit security plans and confirm
    implementation makes perfect sense. ATF has comprehensive and
    effective guidelines for physical security and safety.
    Maintaining ATF to work with these licensees to tailor their
    plan to the conditions on the ground at the individual location
    rather than a one-size-fits-all approach would greatly yield
    better results.
        Requiring increased physical security measures at gun
    shops, while aspirational, will also create a financial
    hardship on some small businesses. I would strongly urge the
    development of a loan or grant program through the SBA to
    incentivize and prove physical security of license holders.
        Paramount to the success of enforcement in reducing stolen
    and lost firearms is the timely and complete reporting of all
    relevant information. A number of differing and nonexistent
    State requirements currently hinder the efforts to track and
    report lost and stolen firearms.
        The real challenge before Congress is to figure out how to
    achieve maximum participation by law enforcement and using law
    enforcement-sensitive tools that are already in existence. In
    addition, having the best information is critical to effective
    decisionmaking. We in law enforcement rely heavily on the FBI's
    open-source Uniform Crime Reporting Program, the UCR, in
    decisionmaking, policy development, and commitment of
    resources. Expanding the UCR to include general and stolen-lost
    gun data will be helpful in policy development and research.
        A second proposed theme for this future legislation focuses
    on gun owners. Since the vast majority of guns are stolen from
    individual owners, the Federal Government can be most effective
    by promoting positive gun ownership. In our lifetime, we have
    seen the results of government-led efforts to reduce drunk
    driving, smoking, and other initiatives through far-reaching
    educational and public service communication.
        The impact of a campaign to educate owners on the dangers
    of the community by their stolen firearms is an effective tool
    to reduce thefts. Also, the Federal Government can support
    funding for training opportunities that would include safety,
    safe storage, legal issues pertaining to gun ownership.
        These positive education tools will go a long way to
    diffuse the vilification of the more than 75 million legal gun
    owners in our Nation. If we are willing to eliminate the us-
    versus-them mentality that is so prevalent today and work on
    common ground as a starting point, we will reduce the supply of
    stolen guns that are going into the criminal element. We want
    to incentivize responsible gun ownership, not criminalize gun
    owners--incentivize, not criminalize.
        As Monroe County Sheriff, I have to remark on the
    courageous and professional work of law enforcement, in
    particular, in my community that is working hard every day to
    rid our community of illegal firearms. Successful prosecution
    and incarceration of those responsible for stealing firearms is
    as important as stopping the theft itself.
        Partnering with our Federal law enforcement partners in a
    multiagency task force model has shown viability and success in
    achieving this goal. Our community is second only to New York
    City in recovering crime guns in recent years. A recommitment
    to enhance funding the Federal, State, and local partnerships
    is a great investment.
        Thank you again for this opportunity, and I do look forward
    to your questions.
        [The statement of Mr. Baxter follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Morelle. Thank you very much, Sheriff.
        Before I call on Dr. Lee, just a reminder--this is a
    reminder I need more than probably anyone--to hit the talk
    button in front of you so that the microphone is activated.
        Dr. Lee.
        I didn't say it would be easy.
        Mr. Wilcox. You didn't tell me there would be a button,
    Congressman.

             STATEMENT OF LOIS K. LEE MD, MPH, FAAP, FACEP

        Dr. Lee. I think I got it.
        Chairman Morelle, Ranking Member Burgess, and distinguished
    members of the House Rules Subcommittee on Legislative and
    Budget Process, thank you for the opportunity to speak today.
        I am a pediatric emergency medicine physician at Boston
    Children's Hospital, and I have seen firsthand the devastating
    effects the death of a child has on their family and community.
    I have also seen the debilitating consequences of when a bullet
    goes through a child's spinal cord and causes lifelong
    paralysis and pain.
        I have also seen the lifelong mental health consequences of
    post-traumatic stress disorder and depression, not only for the
    victims of firearm violence but also for their family, friends,
    and community who have been witnesses to firearm violence.
    These are wounds which literally never heal.
        I know that you know firearm injuries and deaths are a
    serious public health problem that affects too many Americans.
    And now you also know that firearms are the number one cause of
    death in children and youth in the United States. In 2020
    alone, there were 10,197 deaths from firearms for children and
    youth 0 to 24 years old. This averages to 28 children killed by
    firearms every day, or, in other words, one school bus full of
    children die because of guns every 2 days.
        As gun violence is a public health problem, we know a
    multipronged public health approach is warranted to prevent
    these deaths, and this includes implementing policies to reduce
    product-related dangers and also promoting the manufacture and
    appropriate use of safer products.
        As these strategies have successfully decreased motor
    vehicle crash injuries and deaths, perhaps we should look to
    the motor vehicle safety system for approaches for gun violence
    prevention as well.
        Motor vehicle safety has a system designed for continuous
    improvement to decrease injuries and deaths on our roads. Part
    of this is the safety agency, the National Highway Traffic
    Safety Administration, or NHTSA. And we also have motor vehicle
    and insurance industry incentives for designing safer cars. We
    don't have any of these for firearms. Thankfully, we do have
    the ATF, but this is a law enforcement agency, not a safety
    agency.
        And we do have technology for safer guns right now in the
    form of personalized smart guns, but Americans cannot buy this
    on the U.S. consumer market right now. Smart guns use ideology
    just like the biometric fingerprint on your cell phone to make
    sure only the authorized user can fire that gun. And that
    prevents suicidal or homicidal teenagers and adults from firing
    a gun, either to shoot themselves or shoot someone else.
        So, for firearm injury prevention, as you know, there are
    many strategies we should consider, but these are three
    measures I would like to begin to recommend: Number one,
    increase funding for gun violence prevention research; number
    two, enact universal background check laws; and, number three,
    enact comprehensive extreme risk protection order, or red flag,
    laws.
        Not only are these actions important for a public health
    approach to decreasing firearm-related injuries and deaths, but
    they also have support in Congress and among the majority of
    Americans.
        We need increased research funding for gun violence. The
    research community does appreciate the $25 million appropriated
    by Congress since 2019. With this funding, the CDC has funded
    18 projects, including on how to decrease suicide risk among
    U.S. Army soldiers and veterans, how to reduce urban firearm
    violence, and also how to teach children about firearm safety.
        But this is far from adequate. For example, the National
    Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the NIH has an annual
    budget of 3.8 billion, much more than 25 million.
        In addition to research, stronger Federal and State-level
    policies are essential. Universal background checks, supported
    by nearly 90 percent of Americans, would make communities safer
    by ensuring those at risk for gun violence can't purchase guns.
    We also need comprehensive red flag laws to keep guns out of
    the hands of those at risk for suicide and homicide, especially
    in situations of domestic violence and mass shootings.
        In summary, I am here today in strong support of these
    three actions to promote firearm injury prevention in the
    United States, especially to keep our children and youth safe,
    and I know this is a goal that we all share. Given the
    magnitude and growing problem of gun violence in the United
    States, we cannot--we must not be paralyzed by the politics of
    firearms.
        Although the recent Senate agreement is progress, we know
    it is not enough. We must make public health and safety of our
    children and youth and our society at large a priority. We
    should not become a country where we believe gun violence is
    inevitable, much less acceptable, especially when there are
    decisive actions that you and Congress can take to prevent mass
    shootings, firearm suicides, and the daily firearm violence
    impacting children and communities across our country.
        These are things you can do as our leaders and
    policymakers. As a pediatrician, policy researcher, and a
    parent, I urge you to take these actions to decrease gun
    violence in our country.
        Thank you very much.
        [The statement of Dr. Lee follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Doctor.
        Now I would like to call on our final witness to testify,
    Mr. Napier.

                    STATEMENT OF WILLIAM NAPIER LPC

        Mr. Napier. Chairman Morelle and Ranking Member Burgess and
    the other distinguished members----
        Mr. Morelle. Is your talk button, just to make sure?
        Mr. Napier. Yes, sir, it is.
        Mr. Morelle. Okay.
        Mr. Napier. Thank you.
        Dr. Burgess. Maybe you could pull that a little bit closer.
        Mr. Napier. Okay.
        Dr. Burgess. It is hard for them to hear.
        Mr. Morelle. Yeah.
        Mr. Napier. Is that better? Great.
        I want to thank you for the opportunity to testify today
    and to provide input and detail my experiences and efforts to
    combat the thefts of firearms from federally licensed firearm
    retailers, or FFLs, as we call them.
        My name is Bill Napier, and I have more than two decades of
    experience as a security analyst and an ATF compliance
    consultant. I have conducted several hundred compliance visits
    at licensed manufacturers, distributors, facilities, and gun
    dealers of all sizes and shapes. I have also presented at
    dozens of conferences, seminars, and webinars to educate those
    in the industry on the panoply of regulations they must comply
    with as a condition of their license.
        And, lastly, I have over 20 years' experience as a law
    enforcement officer. I want to be very clear. Industry takes
    security very seriously, which is why, in 2018, we launched
    Operation Secure Store, which is a joint effort of the Bureau
    of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms that aims to prevent the theft
    of firearms from Federal retail licensees, or FFLs. I am
    extremely proud of the work that we have done in cooperation
    with the ATF to make a difference, and we feel it is making a
    difference.
        Operation Secure Store promotes public safety by
    proactively educating FFLs in identifying, quantifying
    vulnerabilities, and risks that are associated with the
    business of firearm commerce and industry-related operations as
    a whole.
        Specifically, Operation Secure Store has five components:
    education and awareness; then assessment and risk analysis;
    planning and strategy; engagement; and, finally, response.
    These are outlined on the Operation Secure Store website.
        In the education and awareness portion, we educate firearm
    dealers to ensure they have an ongoing awareness of potential
    threats, an understanding of the security basics, and access to
    the techniques and solutions that can be effective in
    protecting their businesses. We partnered with the ATF to
    develop educational programming, including our current ongoing
    series of regional security seminars hosted by the ATF.
        The assessment risk analysis is the initial step in
    identifying the vulnerabilities and weaknesses that could cause
    the FFL to be more susceptible to criminal threat or other
    hazards that could compromise their daily operations. Security
    risk assessments, a service provided by the industry's trade
    association, seeks to evaluate credible threats, capabilities,
    identify vulnerabilities, test their current controls, and
    assess consequences of a breach. Upon the assessments
    completion, gaps in existing controls may be identified and
    remedies suggested to ensure those areas in need of improvement
    can be addressed.
        Additionally, through these assessments, the FFLs are
    afforded the skills and knowledge to conduct ongoing self-
    assessments that include assessing a potential risk,
    prioritizing how and when those risks need to be addressed.
        Once the assessment and analysis is over, we develop a plan
    and a strategy that details when, where, how an FFL will
    develop or modify its security processes or programs as
    supported by the knowledge gained through the assessment and
    risk analysis, material always with the goal of mitigating
    risk, deterring potential threats.
        Strategies will include recommendation. The last two
    components of Operation Secure Store are often overlooked.
    Community engagement can have a tremendous impact on crime and
    crime prevention strategies. Active participation and
    relationship building of local law enforcement and the business
    community and the community's citizens can be critical to
    protecting a business, and engaging all these helps build a
    beneficial level of trust between the FFL and the community.
    Both the industry and ATF have established protocols for
    providing outreach and support to FFLs and their communities.
        And lastly is the response. An FFL's ability to respond
    quickly and efficiently to a crime against its business is
    critical not only to identifying the perpetrators of the crime,
    the recovery of the stolen goods, but to a speedy
    reestablishment of their daily business operation.
        ATF and NSSF are both committed to providing timely support
    to the FFL when a criminal or other emergency event occurs.
    NSSF and the ATF will often provide matching rewards to
    information leading to the arrest of those responsible for the
    crime.
        It is important to detail this approach to illustrate the
    way we educate, analyze, assess, plan, and strategize and
    respond in a personalized way unique to each FFL, because no
    two are the same. So the work has to be tailored to fit that
    specific situation. One-size-fits-all is a punitive, unfunded
    mandate that is ineffective.
        As an example, let's say we were to mandate that all FFLs
    retain video recordings for, say, one year. The FFL--the costs
    to the FFL would be prohibitive. Let me give you an example. So
    the ramification of this one size fits all. So there is 24
    hours in a day, 7 days in a week, 168 hours in a week. That is
    8,760 hours in a year. That would need to be recorded
    somewhere, held in video evidence.
        So 1 terabyte of high-definition video will hold about 500
    hours. So you need 1 terabyte every 3 days. That is about 121
    terabytes a year. That didn't include the equipment cost of the
    server, the switches, the software, the racks, the heating and
    cooling of the room, and the labor to manage all this. And
    then, statistically, far fewer firearms are lost or stolen from
    FFLs than they are from private citizens, law enforcement
    agencies, and the military.
        While we appreciate the attention of the issue of thefts of
    firearms from FFLs, we--as we too take it seriously, Congress
    should also consider paying the same level of attention to the
    military and law enforcement.
        And there are several other recommendations I believe would
    be a more productive approach: Use of the OSS, or Operation
    Secure Store program, as a basis for inspection, certification.
    Include all sources of consolidated firearms in the bill to
    include common carriers--firearms could be taken there; the
    rail service; private security groups--they have large groups
    with lots of firearms; law enforcement, and the military.
    Funding for the FFL to acquire and manage security equipment is
    going to be essential. Requiring reporting of missing firearms
    lost in 48 hours for everyone. Give FFLs access to the NCIC
    computer records the FBI keeps. When they acquire a used
    firearm, they have no way of knowing if the firearm is stolen
    unless the local law enforcement helps them. So, if I am a
    firearm dealer, I would need access to the records to say,
    before I acquire this firearm, I need to make sure it is not
    stolen. Also, publish the number of lost or stolen that are
    reported by persons, private security, law enforcement, and the
    military as well as the firearms recovered at crime scenes from
    each of these sources. Lastly, how many firearms are used in
    crimes or recovered from crime scenes from all sources?
        I think--again, I want to thank you for the opportunity to
    discuss the important work we do on behalf of the industry, law
    enforcement, and the American people.
        I will be happy to answer any questions that you have.
        [The statement of Mr. Napier follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Morelle. Okay. Thank you to--to all of you for your
    testimony, for being here. I think, by conversation with Mr.
    Burgess and I, or Dr. Burgess and I had earlier, I am going to
    ask just a couple questions at the outset and turn it to him.
    And then I would like to make sure my colleagues, who I am sure
    have busy schedules and other places to be--I want to make sure
    that they have an opportunity to ask some questions, and then
    we will come back here to Dr. Burgess and I.
        But let me just start, Mr. Wilcox, for you. We talked a
    fair amount about ATF and the limitations in terms of its
    funding. Can you just describe the impact that the lack of
    resources has on their ability to fulfill their mission,
    particularly as it relates to gun traffic and how we could
    address that?
        Mr. Wilcox. Thanks for the question, Chairman.
        So, I mean, ATF received the lowest amount of Federal
    funding of the four largest Federal law enforcement agencies,
    so compared it to FBI, DEA, U.S. Marshals Service over the last
    4 years. And, even with surging crime rate, that funding has
    remained relatively flat.
        Even when the prior administration requested a 20-percent
    increase of funding, we saw just a kind of minimal increase.
    And so we know that we need to put funds in ATF so they can
    build out their regulatory capacity, they can build out their
    data analytics capacity, and they can make sure, as the sheriff
    said, they have enough inspectors to actually go out and insect
    the FFLs so that we actually can make sure that the good are
    doing better and that those who are rogue and not following the
    laws can be shut down.
        And it is essential that we separate the two classes, is
    that we do know that there are hardworking Americans, some of
    whom I know that run FFLs, and they are looking to do the best
    they can to keep their firearms out of the wrong hands, by
    looking for straw purchasers, by keeping their store safe.
        But the truth is we can't just rely on optional programs
    when the cost is so high. We can't rely on the option of
    whether or not a store will put in place security measures when
    we know that that is going to save lives and stop a smash and
    grab that can happen eight times over 13 years, I think as the
    sheriff testified.
        And so it is really important that we both put the
    resources in ATF to address these specific issues, as well as
    pass those laws.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you.
        I wonder, Sheriff Baxter--you mentioned the challenges that
    law enforcement faces in keeping track of guns that are in the
    community. And, given the technology that we have clearly in
    this day and age, you know, how do you respond to people who
    suggest that it is too difficult or onerous to keep track of
    where these guns are? Do you have any observations on that?
        Mr. Baxter. Yeah. Thank you for the question, Chairman.
        The fact is that I can go online right now and check my
    Amazon package and find out exactly where it is in shipment,
    but I cannot answer a simple question in Monroe County of a gun
    that was just recovered: Was it stolen? Was it stolen in
    Georgia? Was it reported lost in South Carolina? Was it
    reported stolen next door?
        The comprehensive database that we are looking for, a
    simplistic comprehensive database, is something that we are
    lacking--seriously lacking in Monroe County. Those 130-some
    guns stolen from our local gun store, again, there is no
    inventory prior. There was no inventory checks or balances
    ahead of time. So, again, even knowing what guns were stolen
    from that store is not trackable right now.
        So all we are looking for is a simple tool to track
    firearms from the purchase on through. If they are stolen,
    report that so law enforcement and other agencies that would
    use this information comprehensively.
        And then, on the other side, when we do have someone with a
    stolen firearm, right now it is very difficult to charge
    someone with criminal possession of a stolen property charge
    because there is no supporting deposition. We don't even know
    if the weapon is stolen. And that is a charge we would like to
    put on someone. They are stealing property and possessing it,
    including a dangerous instrument.
        So those are some things in addition to a tracking
    mechanism and the--if you will, the database that we are
    looking for, that comprehensive database that will allow us to
    do all those functions. And give us good research. You know,
    there is a lot of data. We heard a lot of data today, and--but
    there is no holistic, you know, one-stop shop for this data
    that we are looking for.
        Mr. Morelle. Very good. Thank you.
        I am going to turn to Dr. Burgess to ask a couple of
    questions, and then I want to make sure our other colleagues
    have the opportunity as well.
        Dr. Burgess. Thank you, Chair Morelle.
        As I mentioned in my opening statement, an article that I
    encountered on my local paper, the Dallas Morning News, I would
    ask unanimous consent that we can include that in the record.
        Mr. Morelle. Without objection.
        [The information follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Dr. Burgess. So, Mr. Napier, in talking about this article
    in the Dallas Morning News, there is a man who was indicted for
    illegally purchasing over 90 firearms for the purpose of
    resale. He purchased 75 guns in 6 months from a seller who,
    although the seller themselves are not under criminal charge
    right now, they did lose their FFL license.
        So, as a practical matter, what happens to the inventory of
    that store after that FFL holder loses their license because of
    this activity?
        Mr. Napier. In some cases, they would sell their inventory
    to another FFL.
        Dr. Burgess. Is that a requirement?
        Well, here. Let me ask you the hard question.
        Mr. Napier. Okay.
        Dr. Burgess. Do we think that the ATF is going to follow
    through on that and make certain that this dispersal of
    inventory follows appropriate channels?
        Mr. Napier. I would hope, on their inspection, if they went
    out, that they would find that and deal with it.
        Dr. Burgess. Yeah. I would, too. And, I mean, it just
    points out what could be a deficiency. So, if a gun store--if
    an FFL holder is under investigation, then what happens if they
    go out of business during--before the investigation is
    concluded and, again, the disposition of the inventory? What is
    going to happen there? Same thing?
        Mr. Napier. Well, I understand that the ATF has the ability
    to do an emergency hearing and take the license and possibly
    seize the firearms at that point if they think they are an
    immediate threat to public safety. Otherwise, the firearms
    could be sold then if the FFL knew that their--terminating
    their FFL was imminent.
        Dr. Burgess. Okay. Mr. Morelle, I will reserve other
    questions for later, let you proceed.
        Mr. Morelle. Terrific. Thank you, Doctor.
        I will call on Chairman McGovern if you have any questions,
    sir.
        Mr. McGovern. First of all, let me thank Mr. Morelle for
    doing this hearing. I support his legislation.
        I want to thank you all for testifying.
        Dr. Lee, I agree with all of the recommendations that you
    outlined that Congress should do, and I think the majority of
    American people do as well as, I think, would agree with what
    we are talking about here today.
        But, you know, welcome to Washington, where, because of the
    arcane rules of the Senate, there is a dictatorship of the
    minority. So it doesn't matter what a majority of Senators even
    want; all that matters is you need 60 votes to get a cup of
    coffee.
        And we will see what comes as a result of the bipartisan
    negotiations. I don't think it will be anywhere near enough,
    but I hope that it will at least be a step in the right
    direction.
        We are talking about, you know, gun stores and illegal
    sales. A few years back, Congress indemnified gun manufacturers
    to a certain extent. And I guess my question is, if you are a
    gun manufacturer and somebody steals a bunch of guns from you,
    are you legally obligated to report that?
        Anybody. I don't know. Are they--I mean, and, if they
    don't, what is the consequence?
        Mr. Wilcox. So you--the law does--thank you for the
    question, Chairman.
        The law does require you to legally report within a certain
    time period any discovered lost or stolen firearms. And there
    is a penalty for not reporting, but there is also no inventory
    check to make sure that you are regularly looking for lost or
    stolen firearms. And the law that you pointed out----
        Mr. McGovern. Sure.
        Mr. Wilcox [continuing]. Has had dramatically bad
    consequences.
        Mr. McGovern. Right.
        Mr. Wilcox. I too was involved in a litigation of a case at
    a gun store in Alaska where an individual wearing a garbage bag
    walked in, was looking at guns. The gun dealer says he left him
    alone with a gun to go heat up a burrito.
        Mr. McGovern. Yeah.
        Mr. Wilcox. This guy walked out of the store with the gun.
    There was cash left on the counter, and a young man's life was
    killed just a few blocks--taken a few blocks away. And there
    was litigation by that young man's family to hold that dealer
    responsible saying: You had no security. You left this man with
    a gun who was wearing a garbage bag, and he just walked out
    your door.
        And the court said that that immunity law that you spoke of
    protected that dealer.
        Mr. McGovern. Yeah. So, like, what sense does that make,
    right? You know, we had a gun manufacturer in my home city of
    Worcester, Massachusetts, where, you know, they did not do
    adequate background checks on the security guards. They were
    involved in helping facilitate guns leaving the manufacturer.
    Never was reported.
        A gun--one of those guns was used in a shooting that killed
    a young person. And, again, to the best of my knowledge, there
    was no consequence other than some--a bad article for the
    manufacturer.
        And I guess, you know, some of the stuff that is used to be
    trafficked is obtained through carelessness and through, you
    know, lack of responsibility of manufacturers. Not all, but
    some. And so, when we are talking about how we tighten things
    up so that there is accountability, so that you know what the
    inventories are, and you could--if you get a database, you
    could then go and you could actually check that this was a
    stolen gun from this--it is like we have made it--we have made
    it easy for people not to do the responsible thing.
        And, again, some of the stuff that we have done over the
    years here just makes no sense to me. If the issue is about
    protecting our children, but not just children--everybody--you
    know, I have--you know, so many people are being killed in gun
    violence in this country, you know, that I worry that they will
    become statistics. You know, the number is so enormous that
    people can't even--I think they have lost their human ability
    to feel what that means.
        Now, the terrible tragedy in Uvalde and in Buffalo
    recently, I think, where attention was given to the individuals
    who were killed, it humanizes this, and people all of a
    sudden--you know, we are talking about this again. But every
    day an individual gets killed, such--we have massacres on a
    regular basis, but every day, an individual gets killed, and no
    one knows their stories. No one knows, you know, the grief that
    their parents are going through or their children are going
    through.
        But I think part of this discussion has to be on the
    responsibility of people who are producing, not just selling,
    but actually manufacturing these guns, you know, to--you know,
    to help us try to control what has become an epidemic in this
    country.
        And, you know, I am a Congressman, but I am a parent first.
    And, my kids now are 24 and 20. I still worry about them when
    they go to the movies. You know, I still--I worry about them
    when they are--you know, one just graduated from college. My
    daughter goes to school. You just don't know.
        And I guess I say--I have two sisters who are school
    teachers, and what they tell me is, you know, the solution from
    their point of view is: Don't give me a gun.
        I mean, one is: you know, I am a teacher. I don't feel
    comfortable having a gun in my classroom. I do not want to be
    faced with the choice of having to use a gun against a student.
    And, by the way, someone who walks into my school, you know,
    with an AR-15 or somebody has body armor on, you know, really?
    I mean, I am going to be able to figure all this out?
        You know, and if we are going to turn our schools into kind
    of armed fortresses, what about our supermarkets? What about
    our churches? What about our synagogues? I mean, there is no
    end to all of this.
        But I appreciate all that you do. I mean, in law
    enforcement, in the medical arena, in advocacy, and, you know,
    help trying to bring all this stuff under control. And, again,
    I hope that we get something out of these discussions. I hope
    we can move Mr. Morelle's bill. I think, again, it is one of
    these things, like, who is opposed to this, right? I am sure
    somebody will be, and--but I think we all agree, you know, we
    have to start doing some stuff. We have to get things passed.
        And we also have to look at some of the laws that are on
    the books that make all this very difficult.
        Let me just say one final thing. You know, I have always
    appreciated our law enforcement officials, but, you know, I
    have talked to a lot of people in my community and the police
    department, the sheriff's department. You know, they have no
    idea what they are walking into as--and, you know, sure, if
    your people are trained, you are armed, they can handle a
    weapon. But you have no idea what you are walking into, and--
    because there is such a proliferation of these weapons in this
    country.
        And, you know, I appreciate your service as well. But,
    anyway, I am on a rant, so let me just end here and just say I
    thank you for coming, and I thank Mr. Morelle for putting this
    hearing together.
        I yield back.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        I would like to call on Ms. Scanlon from Pennsylvania.
        Ms. Scanlon. Thank you so much for organizing this hearing
    and the legislation you have introduced.
        During the past couple weeks, as we have seen March for Our
    Lives rallies around the country and gun violence vigils
    everywhere, I have heard from hundreds of constituents who have
    decided that enough is enough, and they are demanding action.
        And what has really impressed me and struck me is that
    these are young and old; male and female; Republican, Democrat,
    Independent; Black and White; responsible gun owners and people
    who have never owned a weapon in their lives. It is everywhere.
        And I think it is because, at this point, no one is immune
    from daily firearm violence in our country, whether it is
    affecting parents who are afraid to send their children to
    school because of the gun violence on the streets between home
    and school or because of what they are seeing on TV when there
    is a mass shooting; whether it is families where a member of
    the family, whether a veteran or, increasingly and so
    tragically, children are struggling with mental health issues,
    or the random intrusion of gun violence that is making people
    question their ability to go to the church or the temple or the
    synagogue or the grocery store, movie theaters.
        I was held up at gunpoint in a public park. Another
    relative just yesterday had a drive-by shooting in their
    suburban neighborhood. So we are all questioning our safety in
    the face of what is just a public health epidemic at this
    point.
        So, whether or not Members of Congress and particularly the
    Senate are willing to act, I think the American people
    understand that we can't sit idly by and watch preventable
    deaths by gun happen every day.
        If we are going to stem the tide of violence, we have to
    have a range of approaches. Because the problem is so large,
    there is no one magic solution. So whether it is universal
    background checks, red flag laws, banning ghost guns, et
    cetera, and addressing the underlying challenges that are
    causing people to pick up guns in the first place, whether it
    is mental health struggles, poverty, lack of education or
    opportunity, this feels like an all-hands-on-deck moment where
    we need to do a lot of very different things.
        As local officials in my district are working to reach
    solutions, one thing I hear over and over again, State,
    Federal, local, is that we need to stem the flow of guns to our
    streets and to people who we all agree should not have them,
    whether it is felons, criminals, people who are an active
    danger to themselves or to others.
        So it feels like a very big piece of the solution is to
    make sure that laws and protections already on the books are
    actively being enforced. One way to do that is to make sure
    that the ATF has the resources and leadership to do. So, so we
    are really urging the Senate to act and make sure we confirm a
    director of ATF since they haven't had a permanent director
    since 2015.
        Ms. Scanlon. But, talking about the ATF, recent ATF data
    indicates that gun sales soared during the pandemic. And for
    thousands of guns sold in 2020, the time to crime was 6 months
    or less. And that is a big change.
        A recent report from Brady confirms what has been reported
    in the past, that a small number of gun shops in Pennsylvania
    supply most of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's crime guns.
        So we know crime guns from multiple sources, but if a
    really good tool is to cut off the supply of illegal guns, it
    could be for federally licensed firearm dealers to do a better
    job to prevent guns from being acquired by straw purchasers and
    traffickers and for the ATF to be able to adequately enforce
    those laws on the books and shut down gun dealers who are
    skirting the law.
        So, Mr. Wilcox, can you talk about why a small number of
    dealers usually account for a majority of gun crimes, whether
    in Pennsylvania or elsewhere?
        Mr. Wilcox. I think because there is common understanding
    of where a gun trafficker or straw purchaser can go, because
    that store owner is likely to look the other direction.
        And not only do we have the statistics you mentioned,
    Congresswoman, but there was recent information that was
    released by the Oversight Committee after getting new data. And
    I know that there is always conversation of, well, maybe you
    are just selling a lot of guns and it is just a small
    percentage of your inventory. Well, one of the leading crime
    gun suppliers in this country, a store in Georgia, 10 percent
    of their sales were guns that were traced to crime--10 percent
    of all of their sales were crime guns. That is shocking.
        And if you can't take real steps to call that a high-risk
    dealer and make sure that they are following best practices and
    they are video-recording that store--because I really would
    like to know what is happening in that store that 10 percent of
    those guns are being traced to crime.
        And I get that maybe there are some data limitations and we
    want to make some excuses, but the truth is, that is a shocking
    number. And I think if I was a straw purchaser or gun
    trafficker and I knew a store, 10 percent of its inventory was
    crime guns, well, that is the store I would go to, no doubt
    about it.
        And so I think we have to give ATF the tools it needs. We
    have to modernize our laws to take into account how guns are
    trafficked today in 2022, so we are not living in 1986, and
    really give them the resources and leadership, as you said,
    they need.
        But the truth is, I think a lot of us in this room can
    agree on that, but colleagues in the House of Representatives,
    of yours, have introduced a bill that wants to eliminate the
    ATF. So it is not all good-natured. We have folks who think
    that we shouldn't even have this agency.
        And so I really think that is the difference right now
    between the two approaches of we need to shut down bad actors
    or we should just eliminate this very valuable agency.
        Ms. Scanlon. So I would characterize it as people who want
    to actually solve the problem and people who don't.
        But turning to--there has been a sharp decline in ATF
    Federal firearm license compliance inspections in 2022 and
    continuing into 2021 and--I am sorry--sharp decline in 2020,
    continuing to 2021 and 2022.
        Can you talk about ATF's decline in inspections in recent
    years? The implications? What does this limited number of
    inspections mean for revocations? You know, the ability to
    enforce the protections that are supposed to be there for all
    of us?
        Mr. Wilcox. Absolutely, Congresswoman.
        So, you know, ATF is not doing many inspections as it is,
    inspecting around roughly 10 percent of active FFLs a year. And
    it would take over 10 years to actually inspect every gun
    dealer there is.
        But the truth is, these inspections don't always turn up
    clean records. Nearly half of them will show some violation,
    many of them very serious violations. But we see very few
    revocations. Less than 1 percent of FFLs are revoked even when
    we see very serious violations.
        And, truthfully, in 2020, what we saw is the lowest number
    of inspections that we have seen in years. And I think that is
    incredibly problematic, that we have high-risk dealers, like I
    have mentioned, we have very few inspections, and then we
    aren't seeing concrete action.
        I am heartened by the President's intention to take on
    rogue gun dealers and have a zero-tolerance policy, but we
    really need to do that seriously by expanding the number of
    inspections we are doing.
        Ms. Scanlon. Okay. So one thing we can do is provide more
    resources to expand inspections. Are there other things
    Congress can do to hold gun dealers accountable when they break
    the law?
        Mr. Wilcox. Yeah. I think the chairman's bill is a great
    example, requiring gun dealers when they apply for their
    licenses to submit a security plan. And then they have to be
    held to it. And if they don't, they can be held accountable.
        And I think the chairman's proposal is really smart
    because, depending on if they were negligent or they just made
    a mistake, there are different penalties. You can go from a
    small civil fine to a license revocation depending on your
    culpability.
        And I think those are tools ATF doesn't have right now.
    Right now they have, your license is revoked or it isn't. And
    we have to give them those tools that, when they see
    infractions, they can have civil penalties, license suspension,
    they can require a dealer to potentially do more. Because right
    now it is just an all-or-nothing bet, and that just isn't
    working.
        Ms. Scanlon. Well, I appreciate this input. That is really
    helpful.
        As I close out, can I just seek unanimous consent to
    introduce a report from April 2022 by Brady: United Against Gun
    Violence entitled ``Uncovering the Truth About Pennsylvania
    Crime Guns''?
        And I would yield back.
        Mr. Morelle. Without objection.
        [The information follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Morelle. Thank you to the distinguished colleague from
    Pennsylvania.
        By Webex, we have been joined by another distinguished
    member of the Rules Committee and of this subcommittee, Deborah
    Ross of North Carolina.
        Ms. Ross, the floor is yours.
        Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And, to the witnesses, I apologize for not being there, but
    we are trying to deal with a gun bill in Judiciary at the same
    time, and Ms. Scanlon and I are both monitoring that gun bill
    as well. It is the number-one bill that has been requested by
    law enforcement, so--Sheriff Baxter, it is the active-shooter
    bill. And hopefully we will get it out of Judiciary at some
    point and to the House floor.
        Last week, our committee held a hearing on two commonsense
    gun bills that keep our fellow Americans safe while respecting
    their Second Amendment rights. And today's meeting, under the
    leadership of Chairman Morelle, is just as important, as we
    explore actions Congress can take to better combat gun
    trafficking to ensure that illegal guns do not make their way
    onto the streets of our communities.
        I represent North Carolina, a southern State with plenty of
    law-abiding gun owners, but hundreds of my constituents have
    reached out to my office over the past few weeks begging for us
    to take action to keep our fellow Americans safe from gun
    violence. And this is on both sides of the aisle, and we have a
    number of unaffiliated voters who are tremendously concerned as
    well. So it is imperative that we work together to combat this
    public health crisis.
        Thanks to the ATF, recent data tells us that three States
    are the destination for 45 percent of all trafficked guns in
    the South, and North Carolina is one of those three States.
    Almost 25 percent of the guns traced by the ATF in North
    Carolina originated from outside of the State, and,
    unfortunately, of the top 10 origin States for trafficked guns
    in North Carolina, 8 had no background-check laws. My State
    requires a background check to purchase an unlicensed handgun.
        But the precise information I shared with you is due in
    part to the ATF's dedicated work to make data available in the
    hopes of making our communities safer. Allowing the ATF to
    publicly release illegal-gun-tracing data helps us tackle gun
    trafficking and instills hope rather than fear in our citizens.
        I wanted to ask, first, Sheriff Baxter, how do you work
    with the ATF, and is there anything the ATF could do to be even
    more helpful to law enforcement?
        Sheriff Baxter. Thank you for that question. Absolutely.
        First of all, we have a wonderful working relationship in
    Monroe County with all our Federal partners, in particular the
    ATF. We recently approved a position at the sheriff's office to
    join the ATF task force to work on that proverbial iron
    pipeline that is transporting weapons to New York State, in
    particular my community, and also to do inspections, you know,
    to work with--our educational portion of this--with our Federal
    firearms licensees and our dealers that are selling guns out
    there legitimately.
        And my feedback yesterday from two gun dealers, gun shops
    in Monroe County was that they have a great relationship with
    the ATF. They come in, they are helpful, they are inspecting.
    But they are really concerned about the rogue, if you will, the
    outlier that, as I explained earlier, you know, released 133
    guns, at a minimum, into Monroe County. So that relationship is
    very strong, at least up in our way.
        The one thing that we are really lacking--and I heard it a
    couple times--is this data, right? But it has to be timely
    data. You know, we have the rogue store; that is apparent. But
    if we have these straw purchases coming from one particular
    store in, say, South Carolina--I will use that as an example--
    you know, we could put ATF agents and Monroe County sheriff's
    deputies on the airplane to go down and investigate that if we
    had that timely information of these weapons being transported.
        So that is something we are looking for, a little more
    teeth in that system, a little more capability in the data
    collection.
        And then one more point is, our store in Monroe County, the
    example I am using, they had no teeth to shut it down. We
    begged the ATF; we begged our town code enforcement officers.
    We tried every tool we had.
        So it also has to have the power, the authority, if you
    will, to temporarily shut down and seize, if you will, the
    inventory, if we have that one outlier, and then hold the
    judicial process as soon as possible to make sure their due
    process is in play.
        But that is one of the things we are seriously lacking, is
    that ability to stop something that is hemorrhaging right in
    front of us as quick as possible and then go through the due
    processes to see what is really occurring.
        Ms.  Ross. Thank you very much.
        My next question is for Dr. Lee.
        And, you know, I am a huge proponent of red flag laws. As
    you know, the House passed a red flag law last week. And I
    think that they would go a long way to preventing, you know,
    imminent threats.
        But I am somewhat concerned that there is--it is not a
    belief, but maybe talking points--out there that all people who
    commit gun violence have mental health issues. And while I
    believe many do, I also think that implying that people who
    have mental health issues would always be violent does a
    disservice to people with mental health issues. My dad is a
    psychiatrist, and this is a bugaboo for him as well.
        Could you talk a little bit about the difference between
    how a red flag law would work and then how people who maybe
    don't have mental health issues maybe have anger issues or
    other issues that society needs to find a way to combat through
    mental health or other ways?
        And I am sorry if that is a little bit of a jumbled
    question, but it has been something that has been bothering me
    about our discussions and our debate about who commits gun
    violence.
        Dr. Lee. Thank you, Representative Ross, for that question.
    I agree with you 100 percent that addressing mental health
    alone does not actually directly address this problem of gun
    violence.
        And the truth is, most people who are diagnosed with a
    mental health disorder are not at risk for being a perpetrator
    of gun violence. They are actually at a higher risk for being a
    victim of gun violence. And many of those who we think might be
    at risk for either suicide or for homicide are not diagnosed
    with mental health problems. So that is not, in and of itself,
    a good way to screen and prevent gun violence.
        But the way extreme risk protection orders would work is
    that someone would then petition a court to temporarily--and it
    depends on the State--temporarily prevent an individual from
    either purchasing or possessing a gun if they are at risk
    either for harming themselves or harming someone else. And so,
    if there is a concern for domestic violence, also known as
    intimate partner violence, or some other concern for assault,
    then you could petition a judge to, again, temporarily remove
    the firearm--the ability to purchase or possess a firearm.
        In the case of mental health, if there was an individual, a
    teenager or an older adult--and for those who may be less
    familiar, for adults, actually 60 percent of gun deaths are
    suicide, not homicide. So, if someone makes statements, even
    though they may not be diagnosed with depression, either on
    social media or to a friend or to a counselor, again, then the
    courts can be petitioned to temporarily remove the firearm from
    that person's possession or ability to purchase.
        For suicide, that is particularly important because suicide
    is often a very impulsive act, and if someone decides in the
    moment that they want to kill themselves with a gun, greater
    than 90 percent of the time they will be successful in killing
    themselves.
        But what we also know is that the majority of people who
    have survived a suicide attempt actually never attempt suicide
    again. And so this is why means matter.
        People who try to commit suicide by ingesting medications
    in an overdose, for example, greater than 90 percent of them
    survive. And that is because they have time for regret, they
    have time to tell somebody, or they develop symptoms and they
    can go to the hospital and then they can get both the medical
    and psychiatric help that they need.
        And so making it more difficult for somebody who might be
    suicidal or homicidal or even potentially making threats for a
    mass shooting, being able to prevent the means, access to a
    gun, would be very important as just one part of decreasing the
    gun violence epidemic.
        Ms. Ross. Thank you for that.
        I do have one more question for you, since you raised the
    issue of domestic violence. And we have seen amendments and
    statements that victims of domestic violence--we should
    encourage them to get guns or have guns be given to them, maybe
    even from somebody who thinks they could be protected in that
    situation.
        I have worked on some domestic violence issues as a State
    legislator, and what I have learned from the domestic violence
    community is that taking that approach frequently ends up with
    the perpetrator of domestic violence finding the gun and using
    the gun.
        Do you have any information about that? And if you don't,
    does anybody else on the panel have any information about guns
    and domestic violence?
        Dr. Lee. I can speak briefly on that issue.
        Basically, older studies have shown that if there are guns
    in the home, more likely somebody in the home will be shot and
    killed by that firearm--and, typically, in a case of domestic
    violence, it is the perpetrator of domestic violence who will,
    you know, kill the victim of domestic violence--as opposed to
    being able to actually protect a stranger from coming into your
    home.
        So we just know that having the presence of a gun in the
    home not only increases the risk of homicide often from
    domestic violence but also suicide, just because, again, of the
    access.
        Ms. Ross. Thank you very much.
        I don't know if anybody else on the panel has anything to
    add. If they do, great, and if not, I can yield back.
        Sheriff Baxter. I would be honored to add a few bits of
    information.
        You know, the tool is one thing. And the red flag laws are
    something that, obviously, every State is debating right now.
    And New York has one and is trying to bolster it as we speak.
        But going to domestic violence in particular, but school
    shootings, targeted violence cases, another important part, you
    know, for this Congress to discuss is a threat assessment
    process--TAM teams, if you will. We started one about 3 years
    ago in Rochester called the ROCTAC, Rochester Threat Advisory
    Committee.
        And what they do is they get together twice a month and
    look at these potential targeted violence cases, whether it is
    domestic violence or a school shooting--someone that is raising
    to that level in the community that is different, that is
    really different. And we are able to present that to 26
    participating member agencies through a holistic look at that
    person and how they are ascending up that ladder towards
    targeted violence and then intervene with multiple different
    facets.
        And, like I said, there are 26 organizations that get
    together. We broke down the barriers; we broke down the egos,
    the silos. We talked about FERPA, we talked about HIPAA, got
    all those legislation things out of the way. And it is very
    amazing what we can do when you get those agencies together and
    look at this potential targeted violence case, whether domestic
    or not.
        And we have been extremely successful in intervening in
    these people's lives and getting them the help they need but
    also, you know, making sure that the community is safe at the
    same time. So we are looking at it from both points.
        But I just want to put in there that, you know, this threat
    assessment model is something that we really need to replicate.
    They are doing it right now across New York State using ours,
    thank God, as a model. But intervening in lives, looking at the
    ``see something, say something,'' and doing something with that
    information that so many organizations do in silos but don't do
    comprehensively, I think, is really a golden nugget here that
    we have to discuss.
        Ms. Ross. Many thanks.
        And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Ms. Ross.
        I would like to just, if I can, a couple more questions,
    and I will certainly yield also to my friend and colleague.
        But, Dr. Lee, you know, there is a lot of conversation
    about trying to get research to look into the impacts of gun
    violence, but can you just tell me, what might we--like, the
    average citizen might say, well, we know about the number of
    gun deaths, we know about the number of shootings. There is a
    lot that we know about guns, illegal guns, et cetera. But what
    do you think we would be able to gain from additional
    investments in research that you mentioned in your testimony
    that we don't know now? What would help us? What would be of
    value to us?
        Dr. Lee. Thank you, Chairman Morelle, for that question.
        There is so much that we don't know. And as a gun violence
    researcher for the last 10 years, it is very complicated, and
    it is not just a public health medical issue; it is a
    criminology issue, it is a sociology issue. And so the funding
    really needs to be crosscutting. It is wonderful to have the
    CDC and NIH funding, but we need it over more Federal research
    agencies to really do multiyear, complicated, multidisciplinary
    research.
        Some of the areas that we really need to explore, as we
    were talking about red flag laws, what is the best way to write
    legislation, and what are the most effective ways to enforce
    that, and how effective are these laws? We have a few studies
    looking at State by State, but we don't really have the
    evidence-based science that we can truly get if we had more
    funding around that.
        We need to have a better understanding of what are the
    risks and protective factors for gun violence, both for
    homicide and for suicide. We need to better understand what are
    the associations of the social determinants of health, health
    inequities, and how that leads to the huge health disparities
    we see related to gun violence.
        And we also----
        Mr. Morelle. So this--I am sorry. So, much of this would be
    aimed at going further upstream, identifying factors that the
    research shows contributes to potential violence, and then
    working with not only law enforcement partners but you are
    suggesting an approach that goes to educational, social, health
    partners to try to really identify those risks and people who
    are at risk and do interventions much earlier? Is that--do I
    have that?
        Dr. Lee. Absolutely. That is the whole model of prevention,
    right? We need to go upstream. So, if you want to prevent lung
    cancer, we have decreased smoking. We want to decrease deaths
    from motor vehicle crashes, so we have lowered highway speed
    limits; we have, you know, drunk-driving laws; we don't let
    teenagers drive when they are 14.
        You know, so there are things we can do upstream to try to
    decrease those outcomes of injury and death, but then there are
    also interventions for when they--inevitably, some will happen.
    So the President's investment in hospital and community-based
    violence intervention programs is also critical. And so, with
    this complicated issue, we need to work upstream and
    downstream.
        Mr. Morelle. It is funny; I wasn't planning to mention
    this, but back in Monroe County I co-lead an effort that is
    really aimed at integrating health education and social service
    delivery. And we are working with our healthcare systems,
    working with all of our different partners. It is directed at
    folks in poverty but folks in crisis just generally. And the
    idea is, classroom teachers have limited information available
    to them currently, don't know how other factors outside the
    classroom are affecting not only the scholastic achievement but
    just the appropriate development of children--the same is true
    of people who have behavioral health issues, mental health
    issues--to try to bring caregivers together so that they are
    working what we call ``warm hand-offs.'' We are looking at
    social determinants; we are looking at community schools.
        And I hadn't really thought about it in that context, but
    what you are talking about actually would aid efforts like
    that, because it really does allow an intervention so that
    hopefully people like Sheriff Baxter may know about it but may
    not have to intervene because we have managed to, sort of, you
    know, not only remove the threat or lessen the threat but
    really have positive interventions in the lives of individuals
    who, unaddressed, would potentially lead to violence.
        Dr. Lee. Absolutely. And that is why this multipronged
    approach is really the way to go.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you for that.
        You know, as I was thinking about it, talking about in
    particular the bill that I referenced, H.R. 4423, it does a
    couple of things around not only inventory--so, for gun
    dealers, actually requiring them to have an inventory of guns,
    to do a reconciliation periodically, maybe a couple times a
    year, to reconcile what their inventory is.
        Also, for private dealers, to make certain that they report
    within--the bill has 30 days--report to law enforcement when
    there is a theft. So, right now, if you are a private dealer,
    not a licensed Federal licensee, you don't have any requirement
    to report lost guns. They end up on our streets. And I wonder,
    maybe Sheriff Baxter--but, others, feel free to comment--on how
    this could change that and create more accountability.
        And, then, the number of different kinds of sanctions we
    could impose, more than just sort of the binary, ``Yes, you are
    okay,'' or, ``We are going to close you down.'' So other things
    that would help ameliorate what is potentially a dangerous
    situation.
        Sheriff Baxter. The firearms dealers that I am familiar
    with, very reputable firearms dealers have great inventories--
    you know, what comes in, what goes out, where it went. They do
    not mind doing inventories on a more normal basis and reporting
    that to the local ATF agent, who then could possibly--they are
    verifying it with a written statement, but it also could be
    verified other ways by an ATF agent. That is not something that
    is difficult to ask for, and it should be done.
        The other point that you brought up, Congressman, is, you
    know, the reporting. You know, it should be the obligation of
    someone that has a firearm that is lost or stolen to report
    that to local law enforcement as soon as possible. It may be
    part of an overall criminal enterprise no one knows about. It
    may be threatening to one of my deputies or to another citizen.
    There may be multiple reasons why that should be reported as
    soon as possible. And that is how I would write the law, ``as
    soon as possible.''
        That should be reported and then, via us, just like the UCR
    data that I talked about earlier, reported up the chain to the
    Federal agencies that track it overall, and then just share
    that data across sectional areas that are, you know, involved
    in this discussion.
        But very limited resources would be needed to keep that
    database by a reputable gun dealer. And then report that more
    than once a year, that they have that inventory on hand. And,
    if not, report it stolen or lost as quick as possible.
    Including individual gun owners. I think it is just a simple
    thing that we can ask folks to do: Report to local law
    enforcement if you can't find your firearm.
        Mr. Morelle. And I would certainly welcome any comments of
    any other panelists on this.
        I do note that, if you really want to get to the small
    percentage even of the licensees who seem to be persistent--and
    you talked about this, Mr. Wilcox--that having the data would
    then allow us really to target in on the high-risk problems,
    whether it is the licensees or it is private dealers who
    continue to have a potential for repeat--I mean, that really
    allows us to focus in ways that--without the data, you are just
    kind of, like, you know, searching literally for a needle in a
    haystack.
        I don't know if anybody--please feel free.
        Mr. Wilcox. Chairman, that is one of the problems, is that
    the data has largely been kept from us since the early 2000s.
        I think it is absolutely right that those who want to do
    good will always try to do better and those who want to hide in
    the shadows will look for every opportunity. And, right now,
    because of an appropriations rider, we don't get good data on
    the source of illegal guns, and are there concentrations in
    particular places, and are those dealers themselves failing
    multiple inspections.
        And that is the kind of information and data that can help
    focus our law enforcement so that the sheriff can get on that
    plane, as he mentioned, and go find the rogue gun dealer and
    make sure we are putting them out of business.
        And so I think we all are saying the data is important, but
    that means we have to actually see it, and we have to put it in
    the sunlight, and we can't let bad actors hide in the shadows.
        I think there is more that can be done, even under the
    current restrictions, as we have done with public health
    research. We haven't repealed the Dickey amendment. But we are
    doing research, and there is more data we could be publishing
    now, even with the appropriations rider that I think should be
    repealed in place.
        Mr. Morelle. Anybody else?
        Mr. Napier. Chairman Morelle, may I make a comment?
        Mr. Morelle. Sure. Yes, Mr. Napier.
        Mr. Napier. So I think we need to look at all sources of
    crime guns, not just the firearm dealers. We have crime guns
    that come from police stations. We have crime guns that come
    from security agencies. We have crime guns that come from the
    military. We have crime guns that come from personal
    collections. We need all this data.
        Wouldn't that be helpful, if I were the sheriff, to have
    that information that, am I dealing with a gun dealer, am I
    dealing with another rogue police agency or a rogue rail
    service? There are bad people among us everywhere.
        Mr. Morelle. Yeah, I mean, not to interrupt you, but I am
    not sure that anybody would object. I think we would agree. I
    know that I have spoken--in my responsibilities as a member of
    the Armed Services Committee, I have talked to folks at the
    Department of Defense about guns that go missing off bases,
    right? So maybe when you are discharged you take your firearm
    with you. You are not supposed to, as I understand, but it
    happens.
        But I think your point--the more data that is available to
    all of us, particularly to people like Sheriff Baxter and his
    brothers and sisters in law enforcement, the more that we know,
    the more data we have on all of those, I think, benefits us. I
    am not sure anybody objects. And so I would welcome those
    additions to the bill.
        And, again, I think the vast majority of people are trying
    to do the right things--private owners and dealers as well as
    licensees. But there are clearly problems. I mean, you know,
    when you have 45,000 people dying of firearm-related deaths in
    the United States in a given year, clearly you know there is a
    challenge.
        This, I think--and, you know, I am sure Dr. Burgess and I
    will have side conversations about this afterwards. I am not
    sure this necessarily impedes on people's views of the Second
    Amendment. This is really about making sure that we all, as a
    society, just know where lethal weapons are.
        We do it, as I mentioned in my opening remarks, around
    pharmacies, understandably. Opioid epidemic and things that are
    on Schedule I, under controlled substances, we want to know
    where they are. They have street value. And they can be lethal
    as well.
        Certainly guns, by their very definition, are lethal. And
    so, really, inventory, tracking, making people be accountable
    for them, particularly when it is something you do as a matter
    of commerce, whether you are a licensee or you are just a
    private dealer who does it periodically--everyone should be
    held accountable, I would think.
        I don't know if--Dr. Lee.
        Dr. Lee. I just wanted to make a comment.
        So, again, if you have to buy a car, you have to have a
    license, you have to have training, you have to have it
    registered, and you have to have insurance. None of those
    things--depending on the State you live in, right, you may not
    need licensing, you are not necessarily going to be registered,
    and insurance is not involved at all. So, again, a parallel
    thing.
        We are not trying to take away people's rights to have
    their guns; we just want to make sure that they can use it
    safely.
        Mr. Morelle. I think that is a great point. And when I was
    in my years in the State legislature, I was the chairman of the
    Insurance Committee, so I appreciate what you are saying. And
    we do have that rule.
        So we are not inhibiting your--everybody has access to an
    automobile and a license, but you have to make sure that you
    are insured so that, if something untoward happens, something
    unexpected, there are ways to protect all the interests, both
    of drivers, passengers, and pedestrians, in automotive
    accidents.
        Yeah, Sheriff, you look like you wanted to add something to
    that, sir.
        Sheriff Baxter. I think a key component is training, right?
    We provide training classes to our constituents in Monroe
    County free of charge as a sheriff's office. A lot of the
    private entities that are selling firearms do the same thing.
        And they teach those things I alluded to earlier in my
    testimony about safe storage, safe handling, awareness at how
    many guns--it is your gun; if it is stolen, you shouldn't have
    to be a victim of crime, but realize that guns can end up on
    some street somewhere and possibly hurt someone else, so just
    be more conscientious. Those things go a long way, and--let
    alone the legal issues around firearms. You should at least be
    aware of those things.
        And it is very popular in Monroe County. We don't tell
    people they have to go; they knock down our door to go to those
    training sessions. So that has a long-reaching effect, just
    educating the public of what is going on in our community and
    how do you store it properly.
        Mr. Morelle. Yeah, no question.
        Yeah, Mr. Wilcox.
        Mr. Wilcox. I just want to kind of emphasize that point of
    storage. And it really cuts across lethal means and suicide
    prevention and school safety.
        I think ``say something'' is a--you know, ``hear something,
    say something'' is a great model. We need early intervention,
    we need wraparound services. But we also know, as part of that,
    and the recommendation is, that we control access to lethal
    means, access to firearms.
        Three out of four school shooters are getting their guns
    from the home--home of family, friend, or relative. And so that
    personal responsibility of secure storage in the home goes a
    long way to protect that home, protect from theft, and protect
    our schools.
        And so, if we really are going to be comprehensive about
    our interventions, we need to know what secure storage really
    works. And the truth is, oftentimes a lot of what is used is
    not terribly effective. There are cable locks, including some
    that have been distributed, that have had to be recalled. About
    half a million cable locks that were distributed had to be
    recalled because they were ineffective.
        So we have to really see what is the effective secure
    storage to stop teens, to stop thieves, so that we can, kind
    of, keep guns in the right hands and not let them fall into the
    wrong hands.
        Mr. Morelle. Appreciate that very much.
        And I appreciate all the comments and observations and the
    testimony.
        I think I would like to turn it over to Dr. Burgess for any
    additional thoughts you have.
        Dr. Burgess. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        In addition to the newspaper article I submitted for the
    record earlier, I would like to ask unanimous consent to put
    into the record the slide deck from Chief Paul Cairney that he
    presented at our Emergency Preparedness Summit in April.
    Appropriate to the discussion, his second slide is titled ``A
    Multipronged Approach,'' and that has come up several times
    today.
        And I failed to mention when I was detailing earlier how he
    had structured this, he actually does employ a full-time
    clinical psychologist on the campus of the school district. And
    I think that has been extremely effective. And his reference to
    me was, if a fairly large school district--he has been there
    for 8 or 9 years. He has only made five arrests over that time,
    which speaks to the early engagement with law enforcement and
    intervention.
        Mr. Morelle. Without objection.
        Dr. Burgess. Thank you.
        Mr. Napier, I know we have been here for a while, and I
    know it has been a long day--and I appreciate everyone's input
    today.
        You heard me mention at the very beginning of all of this,
    in my opening statement, concern I had about the data that
    Congress receives from ATF, those people that actually lie on
    their national instant background check that they fill out. The
    number of prosecutions, then, that is done by ATF is
    vanishingly small.
        So I have introduced a bill to address that, and I just
    wondered if you had any thoughts on that approach.
        Mr. Napier. I do, sir. That is H.R. 194, I assume, that you
    are talking about?
        Dr. Burgess. Yes.
        Mr. Napier. We have to enforce and we have to prosecute the
    laws that are on the record now. And when we don't--I will give
    you an example.
        So, if I am a Federal firearms licensee, I call FBI NICS
    and get a ``proceed'' or else I get a ``delay'' or I get a
    ``denied.'' If I get a ``denied,'' that person shouldn't have
    been in my gun store.
        Every night, the FBI, I understand, does a dump to the ATF.
    Well, the ATF doesn't have the resources to go out and knock on
    the door and talk to these people that should not have been in
    a gun store to begin with. And I would ask that that get a good
    look and perhaps funding.
        Can you imagine how many on a daily basis are getting
    dumped down to the ATF and, ``Okay, guys, now go get them''?
    Where are the resources?
        Dr. Burgess. Yeah. It begs the question, why do we ask for
    the data if we are not going to use it?
        And then, unfortunately, one other article that I will
    submit for the record: the case of Aurora, Illinois, from 2019,
    a gun that should never have been--a purchase of a firearm that
    should never have happened. And then, actually, several years
    later, when he applies for a concealed carry permit, it is
    discovered, ``Oh, my, you shouldn't even have the stupid gun.''
    No one ever picked it up. And then it was used in a workplace
    shooting, which was tragic.
        So I will ask unanimous consent to insert that in the
    record as well.
        Mr. Morelle. Without objection.
        [The information follows:]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Dr. Burgess. And that is the reason why I felt so strongly
    that, if we are going to ask for data, we at least ought to
    look at it from time to time. And maybe if we looked at it from
    time to time, we would come to grips with the funding issue as
    well.
        So thank you for the hearing today, and thanks for allowing
    me to participate, and I will yield back.
        Mr. Morelle. Thank you, Dr. Burgess.
        Before we close, is there anything that any of the
    panelists would like to add that you think hasn't been covered?
    Anything that we should bear in mind as we are considering
    this?
        Feel free.
        Mr. Wilcox. One last thing, Chairman.
        And, Ranking Member, you brought up an excellent point
    about the data and what happens to it. Fortunately, in the
    Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act that just passed
    and was signed by the President, there was a provision called
    NICS Denial Notification.
        So, when that background check is failed, that data no
    longer sits at NICS. They are required by law now to send it to
    State and local law enforcement so that Sheriff Baxter and
    others will get the ping that says, individual was denied at
    this gun store. And now we have to make sure that that is
    implemented.
        But I think this Congress did an excellent job in a
    bipartisan manner to actually get that into law. And, going
    forward, that data doesn't just sit in a database; it will go
    out into the field and can be used effectively to go
    investigate these instances of a denial.
        So I just wanted to add that at the end, because I think
    you were raising an excellent point that I agree with, and I
    was very proud to see that piece of legislation signed into
    law.
        Mr. Morelle. Mr. Napier.
        Mr. Napier. Yes, sir. There was earlier testimony about the
    drop-off in number of ATF visits. It was my observation that,
    in beginning of 2020, folks were locked down and could not get
    out, including the ATF. They had to park their government car
    in their driveway and they didn't leave. So, naturally, the
    number of inspections would drop off significantly. And that is
    my take on why those dropped off so much.
        Mr. Morelle. Dr. Lee.
        Dr. Burgess. If I could----
        Mr. Morelle. Yeah.
        Dr. Burgess [continuing]. Just ask a followup to that.
        Are people back on the job now?
        Mr. Napier. They are. They are back in the field.
        Dr. Burgess. It has been a problem across Federal agencies
    that people sort of took the pandemic plus 4 years off. So I
    hope they are back on the job. Let me put it that way.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Morelle. Yes.
        Dr. Lee.
        Dr. Lee. Since we have been talking so much about the
    federally licensed gun dealers, which is an important source of
    guns, we also have to recognize that universal background
    checks really only apply to those gun dealers. So, if you buy a
    gun at a gun show, at a gun auction, through a private sale,
    there is no background check.
        And so, again, then that data are not useful to guns being
    sold in that manner. And this is why stronger background-check
    laws are important.
        Mr. Morelle. Yeah, I appreciate that. We omitted mentioning
    that, but obviously it is a really important----
        Dr. Burgess. Mr. Morelle, may I ask a followup question?
        Mr. Morelle. Yeah, sure, Doctor.
        Dr. Burgess. I guess to Mr. Napier: If a Federal firearms
    dealer sells a gun at a gun show, are they required to go
    through the process?
        Mr. Napier. Yes, sir. They operate just like they do in
    their licensed facility.
        Dr. Burgess. And if a gun is purchased online from a
    federally licensed dealer, are they required to go through the
    process?
        Mr. Napier. They have to follow all those same laws.
        Dr. Burgess. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Morelle. Yeah. And, not to be argumentative, I think
    the point was that that is for federally licensed licensees,
    but there are a lot of people, obviously, at gun shows and
    private dealers who aren't licensed at all.
        I think that was the point, Dr. Lee, you were trying to
    make? Yeah.
        Any other comments?
        Let me just say this. I am really grateful, Dr. Burgess,
    for his continued support, of being here today and always
    asking great questions, grateful to my other colleagues.
        Dr. Burgess. Point of clarification. ``Support'' is
    generous.
        Mr. Morelle. Support the effort to have the conversation
    here. I didn't say support of the bill, just to be clear,
    although hopefully I will get you there too.
        But I am grateful to my colleagues. And I do think we
    should be able to find, on this issue, common ground and common
    sense that could guide us and put us in a better place and
    really give tools to law enforcement and end up in a place
    where we have far less violence, far fewer guns on our streets,
    and make sure that there is accountability.
        So, with that, again, thank you to all the panelists for
    not only being here today but everything you do.
        And, with that, this hearing is closed.
        [Whereupon, at 1:13 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                             [all]