[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 12 (Friday, January 20, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E141]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                             [[Page E141]]

                GUN VIOLENCE ECONOMIC EQUITY ACT OF 1995

                                 ______


                          HON. CARDISS COLLINS

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, January 20, 1995
  Mrs. COLLINS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, in recent weeks the GOP 
leadership has been leading the charge to slash social spending in 
America, place poor children in orphanages, and punish welfare 
recipients for their underprivileged status. Many among the Republican 
ranks would like to eliminate the Departments of Education and Housing 
and Urban Development, washing their hands of Federal responsibility in 
these areas. In addition, there is a GOP attack being waged on the 
vital prevention dollars that my Democratic colleagues and I fought so 
hard to keep intact in last year's crime bill. My friends on the 
opposite side of the aisle seem to believe in building walls around our 
inner-city communities rather than building futures for the youth that 
are struggling to succeed in those neighborhoods.
  The attitude from the GOP and its Contract With America seems to be 
que sera sera, whatever will be, will be. Let's let market forces work 
and we'll hope for the best. Well, I've got quite a surprise for you 
Mr. Speaker. Given that approach, you and your Republican friends will 
probably want to join my Democratic colleagues in cosponsoring a bill 
of mine, H.R. 174, the Gun Violence Economic Equity Act of 1995.
  I think we can all agree in this body that the gun violence plaguing 
our Nation is way past epidemic proportions and threatens to wipe out 
the hopes and dreams of all our future generations. Last Congress I was 
elated that, finally, after years of prolonged struggle with the ``just 
say no'' gun lobby, we were able to pass the Brady bill, along with a 
ban on 19 different types of assault weapons. These commonsense 
measures should have been in the books years ago and their passage 
serves the ``Not Really Attuned'' NRA with a loud wake-up call that the 
American people no longer stand for their attempts to block any and all 
rational gun control legislation.
  Our children are at risk and we must continue to bring some sanity to 
our gun regulatory framework. In 1992 alone, in my city of Chicago, 741 
youths 19 years of age and under were victims of gun injuries and early 
reports for 1993 and 1994 indicate rising numbers. At Children's 
Memorial Medical Center in Chicago, the number of children 16 and under 
treated for gunshot wounds skyrocketed 250 percent from 1988 to 1993. 
This is disgraceful tragedy. More can and must be done. I believe H.R. 
174 would greatly assist us in our long-running quest to end the 
madness on our streets.
  Mr. Speaker, I still believe the best way to control handguns is to 
ban them outright. However, if we have decided that gun ownership has 
some value in our society, then we should allow market forces to 
dictate the true cost of that ownership. This is the rationale behind 
the Gun Violence Economic Equity Act.
  H.R. 174 would make manufacturers, dealers, and importers of handguns 
and assault weapons strictly liable for damages resulting in injury and 
death from the use of these weapons to the victims and survivors of 
victims.
  By holding these parties liable for the damages caused by their 
products we will make certain that they share their appropriate 
culpability in the mayhem and destruction that their products inflict 
in both my congressional district and other communities all throughout 
America. These gun peddlers should understand that they must also take 
responsibility for their part in perpetuating the violence we have 
become all too accustomed to reading about in the daily papers.
  This legislation in no way decreases or diminishes the responsibility 
of individuals who own or use guns in cities and towns. Undoubtedly the 
appropriate laws or civil actions still apply and should be taken. A 
person who directly commits an act of violence is responsible for his 
or her actions, but the manufacturers and sellers of handguns and 
assault weapons are also partners in these acts and must be viewed as 
such under the law.
  Holding these parties liable also places the heavy economic cost of 
violence on the appropriate groups. Every one of us pays for gun 
violence in a myriad of ways. We pay in support to public hospitals 
whose trauma centers become overburdened with uncompensated care to 
victims of gunshot wounds. We pay in increased hospital insurance 
costs. We pay by having to subsidize the costs of increased security 
measures employed by businesses which we patronize. This list goes on 
and on.
  Successful suits by victims against gun manufacturers and 
distributors will increase the manufacturer's cost of doing business. 
In turn, manufacturers will pass on the cost by increasing the price of 
guns sold in order to be able to cover future court awards. The more 
injuries a particular weapon causes, the more a strict liability rule 
will increase the price and reduce the quantity demanded of that type 
of gun. Hopefully, an increase in the cost of doing business will make 
a manufacturer think twice about producing dangerous and needless 
weapons for our communities.
  Since there are many different models of guns, a strict liability 
rule would cause variable pricing of these guns according to the gun's 
history of being used to cause injury and death. The guns that cause 
the most net loss would show the sharpest declines in quantities sold. 
Guns that are safer, or because of type or selective marketing are 
rarely used in violent acts, would experience a smaller increase in 
price and a smaller decline in sales.
  Mr. Speaker, if we had a strict liability rule in place a long time 
ago maybe we wouldn't have to argue about the epidemic level of gun 
violence that we face in the United States today. Maybe we wouldn't 
have to watch scenes of children attending funerals of their classmates 
on the evening news or read about police officers killed because they 
were outgunned by thugs and felons.
  The American people are extremely anxious for the 104th Congress to 
take significant action to confront the most pressing problems facing 
our society, foremost of which continues to be gun violence. I urge my 
colleagues, therefore, to join me in supporting the Gun Violence 
Economic Equity Act of 1995 and signaling to the American people that 
we are committed to taking decisive and immediate action to bring down 
the number of deadly weapons in our streets and in our lives.


                          ____________________