[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 138 (Monday, September 30, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11974-S11975]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. MOYNIHAN:
  S. 2163. A bill to amend title 18, United States Code, to regulate 
the manufacture, importation, and sale of ammunition capable of 
piercing police body armor; to the Committee on the Judiciary.


            LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS PROTECTION ACT OF 1996

  Mr. MOYNIHAN. Mr. President, the legislation I am introducing today 
would amend Title 18 of the United States Code to strengthen the 
existing prohibition on handgun ammunition capable of penetrating 
police body armor, commonly referred to as bullet-proof vests. This 
provision would require the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney 
General to develop a uniform ballistics test to determine with 
precision whether ammunition is capable of penetrating police body 
armor. The bill also prohibits the manufacture and sale of any handgun 
ammunition determined by the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney 
General to have armor-piercing capability.
  I am encouraged that President Clinton has taken an interest in this 
subject. In a statement similar to remarks he has made many times 
recently at campaign appearances around the country, President Clinton 
said to an audience in Cincinnati, OH, on September 16, 1996:

       So that's my program for the future--do more to break the 
     gangs, ban those cop killer bullets, drug testing for 
     parolees, improve the opportunities for community-based 
     strategies that lower crime and give our kids something to 
     say yes to.

  Mr. President, it has been almost 15 years since I first introduced 
legislation in the Senate to outlaw armor-piercing, or cop-killer, 
bullets. In 1982, Phil Caruso of the Patrolman's Benevolent Association 
of New York City alerted me to the existence of a Teflon-coated bullet 
capable of penetrating the soft body armor police officers were then 
beginning to wear. Shortly

[[Page S11975]]

thereafter, I introduced the Law Enforcement Officers Protection Act of 
1982 to prohibit the manufacture, importation, and sale of such 
ammunition.
  At that time, armor-piercing bullets--most notably the infamous 
``Green Hornet''--were manufactured with a solid steel core. Unlike the 
softer lead composition of most other ammunition, this hard steel core 
prevented these rounds from deforming at the point of impact--thus 
permitting the rounds to penetrate the 18 layers of Kevlar in a 
standard-issue police vest or flak-jacket. These bullets could go 
through a bullet-proof vest like a hot knife through butter. My 
legislation simply banned any handgun ammunition made with a core of 
steel or other hard metals.
  Despite the strong support of the law enforcement community, it took 
4 years before this seemingly noncontroversial legislation was enacted 
into law. The National Rifle Association initially opposed it--that is, 
until the NRA realized that a large number of its members were 
themselves police officers who strongly supported banning these 
insidious bullets. Only then did the NRA lend its grudging support. The 
bill passed the Senate on March 6, 1986 by a vote of 97 to 1, and was 
signed by President Reagan on August 8, 1986 (Public Law 99-408).

  That 1986 act served us in good stead for 7 years. To the best of my 
knowledge, not a single law enforcement officer was shot with an armor-
piercing bullet. Unfortunately, the ammunition manufacturers eventually 
found a way around the 1986 law. By 1993, a new Swedish-made armor-
piercing round, the M39B, had appeared. This pernicious bullet evaded 
the 1986 statute's prohibition because of its unique composition. Like 
most common ammunition, it had a soft lead core, thus exempting it from 
the 1986 law. But this soft core was surrounded by a heavy steel 
jacket, solid enough to allow the bullet to penetrate body armor. Once 
again, our Nation's law enforcement officers were at risk. Immediately 
upon learning of the existence of the new Swedish round, I introduced a 
bill to ban it.
  Another protracted series of negotiations ensued before we were able 
to update the 1986 statute to cover the M39B. We did it with the 
support of law enforcement organizations, and with technical assistance 
from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms. In particular, James 
O. Pasco, Jr., then the Assistant Director of Congressional Affairs at 
BATF, worked closely with me and my staff to get it done. The bill 
passed the Senate by unanimous consent on November 19, 1993 as an 
amendment to the 1994 crime bill.
  Despite these legislative successes, it was becoming evident that 
continuing innovations in bullet design would result in new armor-
piercing rounds capable of evading the existing ban. It was at this 
time that some of us began to explore in earnest the idea of developing 
a new approach to banning these bullets based on their performance, 
rather than their physical characteristics. Mind, this concept was not 
entirely new; the idea had been discussed during our efforts in 1986, 
but the NRA had been immovable on the subject. The NRA's leaders, and 
their constituent ammunition manufacturers, felt that any such broad-
based ban based on a bullet performance standard would inevitably lead 
to the outlawing of additional classes of ammunition. They viewed it as 
a slippery slope, much as they have regarded the assault weapons ban as 
a slippery slope. The NRA had agreed to the 1986 and 1993 laws only 
because they were narrowly drawn to cover individual types of bullets.
  And so in 1993 I asked the ATF for the technical assistance necessary 
to write into law an armor-piercing bullet performance standard. At the 
time, however, the experts at the ATF informed us that this could not 
be done. They argued that it was simply too difficult to control for 
the many variables that contribute to a bullet's capability to 
penetrate police body armor. We were told that it might be possible in 
the future to develop a performance-based test for armor-piercing 
capability, but at the time we had to be content with the existing 
content-based approach.
  Two years passed and the Office of Law Enforcement Standards of the 
National Institute of Standards and Technology wrote a report 
describing the methodology for just such a armor-piercing bullet 
performance test. The report concluded that a test to determine armor-
piercing capability could be developed within 6 months.
  So we know it can be done, if only the agencies responsible for 
enforcing the relevant laws have the will. The legislation I am 
introducing requires the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation 
with the Attorney General, to establish performance standards for the 
uniform testing of handgun ammunition. Such an objective standard will 
ensure that no rounds capable of penetrating police body armor, 
regardless of their composition, will ever be available to those who 
would use them against our law enforcement officers.
  I wish to assure the Senate that this measure would in no way 
infringe upon the rights of legitimate hunters and sportsmen. It would 
not affect legitimate sporting ammunition used in rifles. It would only 
restrict the availability of armor-piercing rounds, for which no one 
can seriously claim there is a genuine sporting use. These cop-killer 
rounds have no legitimate uses, and they have no business being in the 
arsenals of criminals. They are designed for one purpose: to kill 
police officers.
  The 1986 and 1993 cop-killer bullet laws I sponsored kept us one step 
ahead of the designers of new armor-piercing rounds. When the 
legislation I have introduced today is enacted--and I hope it will be 
early in the 105th Congress--it will put them out of the cop-killer 
bullet business permanently.
                                 ______