[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 41 (Friday, March 22, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H2702-H2703]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              GUN CONTROL

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. Wise] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. WISE. Mr. Speaker, in this often contentious debate about gun 
control, I wanted to talk for a bit about why I supported lifting the 
ban on so-called assault weapons, but I would like to move beyond that, 
as well, as to what can be done.
  I supported lifting the ban because I do not think it has made much 
of a difference and I do not think it works. I also think that it is 
really false advertising.
  The fact of the matter is that this type of firearm that is sought to 
be banned is responsible at best, according to the Department of 
Justice, for something like 3 percent of violent crimes and many 
suggest in those statistics that it could be as low as 1 percent of 
violent crimes. Yet this is where 100 percent of the debate has rested 
for 2 years.
  I also oppose the ban on so-called assault weapons because I never 
have understood why it is that you can take two firearms and one looks 
a certain way, perhaps it has a bayonet mount on it or it has a flash 
suppressor or a folding stock, one firearm looks one way, another 
firearm looks another way but they both fire the same bullet at the 
same speed, at the same impact and they are both semiautomatic, yet one 
is banned and one is not. Once again , it seemed to me to be cosmetic.
  Third is because if these are indeed the cause of a lot of violent 
crime, then why is it that since this ban was passed, well over a year 
ago, why is it that there has only been one--that is right--one 
prosecution in the entire country under this law?
  So for those reasons, I have opposed this existing ban.
  I did support the present bill to lift the ban because it did 
something else, as well. It created mandatory sentencing for crimes 
committed with firearms. It put people away. If you commit the crime 
with this kind of gun or any kind of gun, you are going to jail for a 
certain amount of time. That is what is needed. My experience is that 
people who intend to commit a crime with a firearm are not paying 
attention to laws.
  We have laws already that it is illegal to carry a concealed weapon 
without a permit; any minor that is under 18, it is illegal for them to 
possess a handgun under existing law. Of course felons are not 
permitted to have firearms and on it goes. If they are going to commit 
a crime, they are going to get a gun.

                              {time}  1415

  Now, what I really propose, though, is to take the challenge that a 
newspaper issued to me recently. It is a fair challenge: If you do not 
believe in gun control, and I do not, then what is it that you would 
do? The first thing I would do is to make sure strict penalties are 
implemented so people understand if they commit a crime with a firearm, 
they are going to jail. At the Federal level this Government has been 
lax on that. It is time to toughen up. It is time to enforce existing 
laws that are on the books.
  Second, though, is to lower the decibel level on this issue. There 
are well-meaning people on both sides of this issue. In fact, there is 
a lot of disagreement. So can we focus where we agree? Can we focus on 
a coordinated community campaign?
  The fact of the matter is there is too much violence, there is too 
much crime. Yes, there is too much use of guns in this crime. But that 
is going to be dealt with by dealing with the heart, by dealing with 
the soul, by dealing with education, by dealing with the attitude. What 
is it that causes people in our society to become violent? What is it 
that makes people somehow think the first thing you do is pick up a gun 
instead of the absolutely last unthinkable thing you do? That is what 
needs to be dealt with.
  This can be a call for all of us in our community, churches, business 
groups, our schools, our parents, our teachers, to become involved in 
dispute resolution processes, to look and study what it is that can be 
done in our community, how can we work together to make sure that young 
persons growing up do not think violence is the first resort, how is it 
newspapers, community journalism, resources at their disposal, how is 
it newspapers can be involved in surveying what can be done across our 
country and bringing that home so all of us in the community can 
understand, so newspapers can focus on successful efforts, role models 
and community organizing and dispute resolution and their teaching and 
their education? How is it that newspapers can help focus people's 
attention, the young person's attention, as to what happens in these 
types of crimes? What is it that can be done within the community?
  Ladies and gentlemen, Mr. Speaker, we are not going to solve the 
problem of gun control on the floor of this House. What we can do, 
though, is to seek to bring this country together around fighting 
violence and make sure those who commit crimes with guns, yes, are put 
away, more importantly,

[[Page H2703]]

guns are not to be used lightly, and taken lightly, and we can begin 
focusing on how we can work together instead of we can be split apart. 
Only by working together are we going to resolve the problems in the 
challenge of violence and crime and too much use of guns.

                          ____________________