[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]