[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 102 (Thursday, July 11, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S7764-S7765]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. DeWINE:
  S. 1945. A bill to broaden the scope of certain firearms offenses; to 
the Committee on the Judiciary.


                         Gun Crimes Legislation

 Mr. DeWINE. Mr. President, prosecutions of gun criminals are 
down 20 percent under the Clinton administration. At a time when 10 
million Americans every year become victims of violent crime, the 
administration is not making the prosecution of armed criminals a major 
priority.
  I think that's a mistake. I think we have to do more to get violent 
felons off the streets. And I am introducing a bill that will help make 
sure this happens.
  Recently, the Supreme Court handled down a unanimous decision that 
essentially disarmed a very effective weapon that Federal prosecutors 
use to combat violence and drug abuse. The bill I am introducing will 
rearm Federal prosecutors--and it will do so in a way that it will not 
be open to reinterpretation by the courts. Congress must leave no doubt 
that when a criminal commits a violent crime or completes a drug deal, 
and a gun is around, the gun is a part of the offense, and the criminal 
will get 5 years added to his prison sentence.
  Prior to December 6, 1995, Federal prosecutors used title 18, section 
924(c)(1) to impose an additional mandatory 5 years in prison for those 
criminals who use or carry a firearm during or in relation to a violent 
crime or a drug trafficking crime.
  The purpose of this statute was to send violent criminals and drug 
traffickers to jail--where they belong. And this provision was an 
effective law enforcement tool because the lower courts defined ``use'' 
very broadly. In fact, if the defendant simply had a gun nearby, it was 
sufficient to convict under section 924(c)(1)--because the courts ruled 
that the proximity of the gun served to ``embolden'' the defendant.
  According to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, in 1994 alone, over 
2,000 defendants were sentenced to longer terms under section 
924(c)(1).
  The Supreme Court's ruling last year ended the effectiveness of this 
statute as a crime-fighting tool. The court ruled that, in order to 
charge a defendant under section 924(c)(1), the Government must show 
that the defendant actively employed a firearm during or in relation to 
a violent or drug trafficking crime. Therefore, if a firearm merely 
served to embolden a criminal, the court said, it was not being 
``used''

[[Page S7765]]

within the meaning of section 924(c)(1), and the criminal would not 
receive the additional 5 years in prison.
  When Congress passed this statute, it was sending a clear message to 
drug dealers and violent criminals--Guns and drugs are a recipe for 
disaster. And, if you mix them, you are going to pay a price. I believe 
that this Congress should act to restore this crime fighting tool, and 
we should do it in a way that leaves nothing to the reckoning of the 
courts.
  My legislation would do just that. It would amend section 924(c)(1) 
to cover all circumstances in which a drug dealer or violent criminal 
is caught with a firearm that is being used to further his drug 
trafficking or violent enterprise. Under this legislation, a drug 
dealer, for example, would be subject to a mandatory additional 5-year 
prison sentence for drug trafficking, if he ``uses or carries a 
firearm, or has a firearm in close proximity to illegal drugs or drug 
proceeds, or has a firearm in close proximity at the time of arrest or 
at the point of sale of illegal drugs.''
  I believe that this legislation will do a great deal to help the law 
enforcement officials on the front lines of the war on drugs. It makes 
our law stronger--and helps get these felons off the streets, out of 
our communities, and into prison.
                                 ______