[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 41 (Friday, March 22, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H2705-H2706]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                     GUN CONTROL AND CRIME CONTROL

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Buyer] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor today to talk about the 
vote that we just had here recently on the repeal of the assault 
weapons ban and measures to enforce statutes with regard to criminals 
who use a weapon in the commission of a crime. I want to talk about our 
judicial system at the Federal level and how it impacts at the local 
level.
  During the debate, I only had about 30 seconds. It was a limited 
debate. This was a debate that could have gone on on this floor for a 
long time, so I understand why the Committee on Rules had to limit the 
debate.
  But one thing really I believe is very clear, is that there are, and 
I do not question the sincerity from two different groups that we saw 
in this debate, you have got those people who believe with all their 
heart that if we just get all the guns off the streets, that there will 
be no crime in our society. Then there are those, of whom I am in the 
camp, that believes gun control is not crime control, and understands 
the right of free citizens to own and bear arms and the protections of 
the second amendment of the Constitution.
  But, folks, I do recognize, and those of us who live in this town in 
Washington and have to work here, that when you go out in those streets 
and you see those homes and you see the businesses here in the city 
whereby it is illegal to possess a handgun, and in those homes and in 
those businesses are citizens who live in fear, it is clear that the 
wrong people are behind bars in this town, as the thugs continue to 
roam the streets. So as we live in a free society, if in fact you live 
in fear, you are not free.

                              {time}  1445

  This bill was about giving law abiding citizens the opportunity to 
live in freedom and not in fear.
  What did not get sufficient time in the debate, what I believe was 
the substance of the bill, was increasing the penalties for the use of 
a weapon in the commission of a crime. In the last session of Congress, 
there was a great debate about increasing the penalties on criminals 
that use a firearm, and it was knocked down in the 1994 crime act. I 
was very upset that that happened. Let me talk for a moment about that.
  In this bill, what we have done is, if a thug walks into a 7-Eleven 
and he has got, stuck in his pants, he has a handgun right here, for 
the fact that he just walks in there and he has it and if his buddy 
pulls his gun, they both are arrested. For the fact that he had 
possession of a firearm in the commission of that crime, even though he 
never pulled it, it is a mandatory minimum of 5 years. I believe that 
deterrent is very important. If he pulls that weapon and he brandishes 
that weapon to incite fear in that individual, to rob them or hurt them 
or maim them, even to threaten to kill them, minimum 10 years. If in 
fact he discharges that firearm, 20 years.

  You might say, my gosh, Congressman, that is very harsh. You are 
right. That is harsh. Because there are those of us that believe if you 
use a weapon in the commission of a crime, it better be a harsh 
penalty. And let us send

[[Page H2706]]

that signal out there to the thugs, because to me the real assault 
weapon is the thug who pulls the trigger.
  Let us talk about theories of punishment in our judicial system. The 
theories of punishment, as I serve on the Committee on the Judiciary, I 
talk about it so often with my colleagues, theories of punishment are 
prevention, education, rehabilitation, restitution, retribution, and 
deterrence. So in prevention, whether they are programs in our 
communities for youth activities in our cities and towns or multi-drug 
task forces, or take education, the DARE Program, in our schools, 
rehabilitation, whether it is by alcohol, drug or schooling within our 
prisons. How about restitution to the victim, retribution to the 
criminal and deterrence. We need a proper balance of all of these in 
our society. There is a great need, because of victims crying out that 
they are not being heard. And when they are not heard, it breeds 
individual vigilantism in our society.
  So we need a proper balance. That is what we are trying to strike 
here in our society for the benefit of all mankind.

                          ____________________