[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]