[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 125 (Thursday, September 23, 1999)]
[House]
[Pages H8595-H8613]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 1501, JUVENILE JUSTICE REFORM ACT 
                                OF 1999

  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I rise to offer a privileged 
motion to instruct conferees on the bill (H.R. 1501) to amend the 
Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 to provide grants to 
ensure increased accountability for juvenile offenders; to amend the 
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 to provide 
quality prevention programs and accountability programs relating to 
juvenile delinquency; and for other purposes.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The Clerk will report the 
motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mrs. McCarthy of New York moves that the managers on the 
     part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes 
     of the two Houses on the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 
     1501, be instructed to insist that--
       (1) the committee of conference should this week have its 
     first substantive meeting to offer amendments and motions, 
     including gun safety amendments and motions; and
       (2) the committee of conference should meet every weekday 
     in public session until the committee of conference agrees to 
     recommend a substitute.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 7, rule XXII, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy) and the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy).
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, today I offer a motion to instruct the conferees on H.R. 
1501 to meet publicly, beginning this week, and every weekday until we 
reach a conference agreement.
  Stated more simply, my colleagues and I are asking that we move 
forward with the conference on the juvenile justice bill. The motion is 
not offered as a criticism. I understand that the chairman and the 
ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary have met in an attempt 
several times to reach a compromise on the gun provisions in the 
juvenile justice bill.
  The chairman and the ranking member have worked very hard on this 
important legislation, and we do appreciate all the efforts that they 
have made.
  However, we cannot afford to wait for the completion of behind-
closed-door negotiations while the threat of gun violence hangs over 
the heads of our schoolchildren throughout America. Every day Congress 
fails to advance juvenile justice legislation is another day that we 
lose 13 children to gun violence.
  Despite the assurances of the chairman and the ranking member, a 
number of my colleagues and I remain concerned about the outcome of the 
juvenile justice bill. Since the April 20

[[Page H8596]]

shooting at Columbine High School mobilized the American people to 
pressure Congress into addressing the issues of children's access to 
guns, we have faced a number of roadblocks and delays. I fear the 
delays we have faced have been caused by the congressional leadership's 
reluctance to enact meaningful gun safety legislation.
  Our motion today is offered as an incentive to move forward and 
complete our legislation. Let us listen to the American people and 
protect our children.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  (Mr. HYDE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I do not disagree with the gentlewoman from 
New York. I am a little puzzled by the formulation in the motion to 
instruct, because we have nothing to do with the calling of the 
meetings of the conferees. The chairman is the Senator from Utah, and 
he has the gavel. He can call the formal meetings.
  But we have been having informal meetings every day, every morning 
and every afternoon. We have had two today. We are working with all 
dispatch to try and resolve our difficulties.
  There were many difficulties, many differences, when we started out. 
We have them down to about one or two now. If people want to continue 
to breathe down our neck and push us, that is fine, we are all adults 
and we can take it. But we are working as expeditiously, as 
effectively, as we can. These are complicated, difficult, emotional 
issues. Many considerations have to be borne in mind.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like us to meet I suppose every day in public, 
but I can assure the gentlewoman, if she wants a bill, let us continue 
to move as we are. I wish it could have been done yesterday, but I can 
assure the gentlewoman that nobody is at fault, other than the 
complexity, the difficulties of the issues we are dealing with.
  I am convinced to a moral certitude that everybody wants a bill. 
Nobody wants this to fail. So we are working the best we can. I wish 
the gentlewoman would give some credence to our good faith, as I 
certainly do to the gentlewoman's.
  I just do not know what to do on this. I want to vote for it because 
I like the gentlewoman, and I do not like to be negative. On the other 
hand, it just seems pointless for us to be requiring the conference to 
meet this week so that motions, including gun safety amendments, could 
be offered. We are working those out informally, but they are being 
worked out.
  Then, we should meet every weekday in public session? I would hope 
that we will have an agreement, a text, very soon. I do not know when. 
But the process is working. It is fermenting. We will get a text, and 
then we can all study it and decide whether it is something we can 
support or not, and move forward.
  But we are doing our best. There may be others who could do better. 
Unfortunately, they are not in positions of authority. I am very 
satisfied that the gentleman from New York (Mr. Conyers) is serious and 
working and trying to be helpful, and is helpful, and I believe he 
feels the same about our side.
  I will vote no on this, simply because I think it sets out to do 
something that is not within our competence; that is, to tell the 
Senator to call meetings every day. I am sure he will call them when we 
are ready to offer something that can be voted on, and I just assure 
the gentlewoman, we are inching closer and closer and closer. I do not 
think it is going to be a matter of days, even, until we are ready with 
a product that we can all vote up-or-down on.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to 
respond to the previous speaker.
  Mr. Speaker, I would say to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde), 
my respect for the gentleman is tremendous, and this is nothing 
personal towards the gentleman whatsoever. It is actually towards, 
unfortunately, I feel, some people on the other side.
  There have been a lot of quotes in the newspaper, one on June 19 
after we had our defeat. ``The defeat of the gun safety bill in the 
House is a great personal victory for me,'' from the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. DeLay).
  My job is to try and bring this bill forward. If we can put any 
pressure, certainly even on the Senate side, then that is what I have 
to try and do. As far as the gentleman goes, the gentleman is a 
gentleman and I am always privileged to work with him.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, in response to the very generous comments of the 
gentlewoman from New York, I appreciate them. My admiration for her is 
multiplied by her admiration for me.
  But I would say that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Delay), who 
happens to be the Whip, is a person of strong feelings on this issue. 
He is entitled to them as an elected Member. But he speaks for himself, 
not for the entire Republican side on this issue.
  This is an issue that is locally difficult for some and easy for 
others. But I can assure the gentlewoman, with all due respect to our 
distinguished Whip, that I can muster, he does not make the sole 
determination, and we are proceeding, I think, effectively and 
efficiently.
  I want to assuage her worries that the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Delay) speaks for all of us. He does not on this issue. He speaks for 
me on a lot of issues, but not this one.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren).
  (Ms. LOFGREN asked and was given permission to revise and extend her 
remarks.)
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, the conference committee on this item has 
met just once, formally. That was on August 3. I am a member of that 
conference committee, as is my colleague, the maker of the motion here 
today.
  At that meeting, and this is only the second time I have been on a 
conference committee, but we made statements at this meeting. I did, 
too; we all did. At the conclusion of the statements made by all the 
Members of the Senate and all the Members of the House who were 
present, I tried to offer a motion that we would continue to work and 
to try and get something substantive done.

                              {time}  1615

  It was ruled that that motion was out of order. We could not even 
vote on whether we should actually begin work. What was told to me at 
that time was that it was necessary for the staff to meet and that they 
would meet throughout the recess; and, therefore, we could get this to 
a resolution.
  There was a lot of hope expressed that, by the time, roughly, that 
school started, we would have something ready to go. It is now 
September 23, and we are still not ready.
  I have listened to the discussion here today. I am aware and do 
readily believe that there have been discussions between the ranking 
member and the chairman, and I commend those discussions. But there is 
an aura of mystery around this.
  The other conferees, or at least I will speak for myself, I am not 
aware of the substance of what is being discussed. I hear various 
things from the press that concern me greatly. I have no way of knowing 
whether those press reports are accurate or inaccurate.
  But I am aware that there are some things that really do need to be 
in the final product, which is why I think this motion to instruct is a 
good one.
  The first part of the motion directs that we should have a 
substantive meeting. It has been nearly 2 months since we had our first 
meeting, and so I think to have our first substantive meeting is not 
too much to ask so that we could make motions. There is one motion that 
I would like to make, and it is a necessary one, and it has to do with 
high capacity clips for assault weapons.
  As we know, the Senate had a provision in their bill, and we of 
course became grid locked and did not have anything on that subject. 
Subsequent to all of that, on really a technicality type of thing, the 
Senate's provision was deemed inappropriate since it raised revenue. So 
there needs to be

[[Page H8597]]

some kind of motion for that to be reinstated.
  I mention this in particular because I think it is one thing that 
really does need that attention. I am aware, as a matter of fact, I am 
proud that the amendment here on the House side was the Hyde-Lofgren 
amendment. I know the gentleman from Illinois (Chairman Hyde) certainly 
does not oppose the substance of this. I think that we need to do this.
  Certainly the loophole that was created when Senator Feinstein and 
others pursued this a number of years ago turned out to be nothing that 
was anticipated. Millions of these high capacity clips are coming in 
from foreign providers.
  I would just say that the TEC-DC9 that was used in Columbine could 
not have been effective if the ammo was not available. So let us get on 
it. Let us do it in public. I believe in sunshine laws, being from 
California. I think, if we have a little sunshine on this process, it 
will be hard for those opposed to hold their heads up high.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I just want to say in response to the remarks of the 
gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) that I certainly share her 
zeal for banning the large clips, cartridge clips. It was her motion 
and mine that passed on the floor; but, unfortunately, the bill to 
which it was attached was not passed. But it is a part of what we are 
talking about, and I do not think that is in serious dispute.
  I just would like to remind the folks on the other side, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy) and the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lofgren) that this overriding part of this is juvenile 
justice, the H.R. 1501, juvenile justice reform. We have been working 
on that 4\1/2\ years. It is that difficult. It has that much emotion 
involved, that much philosophy, that much concern. So to expect us to 
stampede to a resolution now is just ill-advised. In good faith, we are 
doing our best. We are going to succeed, in my opinion.
  I have talked to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) at some 
length twice today. I met with him once. We are closer than ever. 
Please do not push us off the cliff with partisanship. I know how easy 
it is. I know how strongly my colleagues feel, how passionately they 
feel. I share that passion.
  But compromises are difficult. One does not get everything one wants. 
One has to make concessions. But those concessions have to be prudent. 
We understand that. That is true of both sides.
  I can only say my colleagues can continue to berate us, and I know 
they put a soft face on it, but they are. There is a predicate to what 
they are doing, and that is somehow we are foot dragging. Keep it up. 
It is all right. We will be here to respond. One of our Members has one 
tomorrow. It is kind of becoming a habit. But we are doing our best, 
and we are going to succeed.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, yesterday I joined with my Democratic women 
colleagues to call the role of children who have died from gunfire 
since the tragedy at Columbine on April 20. We cannot even get through 
the lists. Too many children have lost their lives to senseless gun 
violence.
  Five months since Columbine, and, still, the Republican leadership 
has failed to take common-sense steps to keep guns out of the hands of 
children and criminals. Yes, that is the bipartisan compromise that was 
agreed to in the Senate. What are we in the House waiting for?
  We have all watched children fleeing scenes at Columbine High School, 
a Los Angeles day care center, and now a church in Fort Worth. Just 
this week we saw a report of a teenage girl in Florida who plotted to 
murder her entire family but was stopped by a child safety lock.
  But the tragedies on the news are only the most prominent. Single 
killings or accidental shootings where a child kills his brother or 
sister with a gun thought to be hidden safely in the closet happen with 
sickening regularity. It all adds up to 13 American children each day 
dying due to gunfire.
  Yesterday morning, one of my Republican colleagues suggested that 
efforts to keep kids and crooks from getting guns were an insult to the 
wisdom of our Founding Fathers. Well, this Children's Defense Fund 
poster captures my response to that notion. It reads, ``This can't be 
what our Founding Fathers had in mind. Children in the United States 
aged 15 and under are 12 times more likely to die from gunfire than 
children in 25 other industrialized countries combined. This is a 
statistic that no one can live with. It is time to protect children 
instead of guns. With freedom comes a price. That price should not be 
our children.''
  Vote for this motion to instruct. Let us pass the common-sense 
compromise that was passed in the Senate.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey).
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from New York for 
her courageous work on this issue.
  I rise in strong support of this motion, and I am outraged that, once 
again, the stalling tactics of the majority have forced us to the floor 
to address gun safety.
  My colleagues and I have come together countless times over the past 
several months with the same simple message: Congress must pass 
meaningful gun safety legislation. Today, we repeat that message with 
added urgency.
  When the conferees met this week, and when they continue to meet, 
they must return with loophole-free substantive measures to combat the 
gun violence that is killing our children and turning our schools into 
war zones.
  The American people are demanding action. Throughout my district, 
mothers approach me, children in tow, and ask me why on earth this 
Congress has not done more to stop the scourge of gun violence 
attacking our communities. They are afraid to go out on to the streets 
of their own neighborhoods. They are afraid to send their kids to 
school. They are afraid to go to church or synagogue. They are 
searching for courageous leadership from this Congress.
  Instead of providing that leadership, Congress has stalled and 
stonewalled as, week after week, the death toll from gun violence 
rises. Who can forget Littleton, Paducah, Jonesboro, Springfield, 
Conyers, Los Angeles, and Fort Worth? How many cities and towns across 
this country need to be hit with tragedy before something is done?
  The Senate passed a gun safety bill which would have prevented felons 
from buying guns at gun shows, ban the importation of high capacity 
ammunition clips, and kept guns away from children. But the House took 
a different route. We had a choice between the public interest and 
special interest, and the public lost.
  Our bill is hollow legislation which ignores the cries of victims of 
gun violence and their families. We have an opportunity starting today 
to change our ways. We have a real opportunity to save lives. The 
conferees must work hard to include strong gun safety measures.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to respond to the gentlewoman (Mrs. Lowey) for 
whom my admiration is boundless. I know she does not want to be unfair; 
I am convinced of that. When she talked about our stalling tactics, I 
am somewhat bewildered. I wish the gentlewoman would talk to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) and talk to her staff, her 
committee staff. There is no stalling going on.
  These are complicated, tough issues. It may be clear to a committed 
liberal the way to go. I am sure it is clear to committed conservatives 
the way to go. But they are in different directions. We are trying to 
bring those together. We are trying to work something out. We are doing 
it with all diligence, all possible diligence.
  May I suggest, if the gentlewoman is interested, and I know she is, 
in helping the gun situation throughout our country, spend some time on 
urging her administration to enforce existing gun laws. In the last 3 
years, there has been one prosecution of a Brady Act violation. We have 
had a lot of sound and fury for only one prosecution. So there are 
things that we can do.

[[Page H8598]]

  But meanwhile, we are not stalling. The word is foreign to us. We are 
moving ahead. I would have liked to have solved this 2 weeks ago. I can 
assure the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) nobody is stalling.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman would yield?
  Mr. HYDE. With pleasure I yield to the gentlewoman from New York.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I have worked with the gentleman from 
Illinois, and I know he is a gentlemen, and I have great respect for 
his commitment to moving this bill. But I would just like to remind my 
friend and the gentleman that we have been asking for the commonsense 
gun safety legislation that passed the Senate to come before this House 
before Memorial Day. It has been quite a while. Look at the lives that 
have been lost.
  I understand that the legislation is complex. I would be delighted to 
work with the gentleman to call on the Justice Department to enforce 
the laws. But the commonsense gun legislation that passed the Senate 
could have been brought to the floor, could have been called from the 
desk at any time as a separate package.
  For me, as for the gentleman from Illinois, we understand how complex 
this is. But we also understand that there is a madness in this 
country, and that parents are afraid to send their kids to school.
  We have to do what we can to prevent felons from getting through that 
loophole at gun shows, for example, and getting their hands on guns.
  So I wish the gentleman Godspeed. I wish him good luck. I would hope 
that the juvenile justice bill could pass.
  But I would just like to say in conclusion to the gentleman from 
Illinois, my good friend, that way before Memorial Day, we have been 
asking for the common-sense legislation to be brought to the floor and 
to pass. We know it is not the whole answer. Unfortunately, that has 
not happened, and more lives have been taken. The gentleman's 
constituents and mine are just afraid.
  This is the United States of America, 1999. We know the guns are not 
the whole answer. But let us begin by making it tougher to get one's 
hands on a gun.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I do not disagree with much that the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. Lowey) has said. But there is an 
expectation that passing another law is going to make a great 
difference.
  Now, I do not deny that there is merit in additional gun laws. I 
think we can do some more things. I think we are on the verge of doing 
that. I think the bill that passed the Senate was an excellent one but 
for one aspect of it, and that is the gun show aspect.

                              {time}  1630

  I believe, and we believe, there was some unreasonable aspects to 
that, and that is a sticking point that we have been working on and 
working on and working on.
  But I want to remind the gentlewoman, I do not know how many young 
people were killed in automobile accidents in the period of time that 
she had reference to with guns, but I daresay more people were killed 
in automobile accidents. That does not mean we should stop people 
driving, but it is just a fact of life.
  Sixteen Federal laws were violated at Littleton. Sixteen. Nine State 
laws were violated. So what is our response? Let us heap another law on 
the fire. But, look, I am for it, notwithstanding the futility, 
perhaps, of another law. I am working to get one, but I am just 
suggesting to the gentlewoman these are not easy.
  And the Senate operates differently than we do. I think it took the 
Vice President's vote to get that bill out. Happily, he cannot vote in 
this body. But we are doing our best.
  Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would continue to yield, I would just 
like to comment on the gun show loophole, because I know my good 
colleague, the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), has been a 
leader on that, and I just do not understand why that issue is so 
difficult when we know that 90 percent of the people are cleared.
  Mr. HYDE. Ninety-five percent.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Ninety-five percent. So what we are saying, and what the 
legislation in the Senate is saying, 3 business days, that is just for 
the 5 percent of the people who do not get through. So what is wrong 
with that, when 95 percent get cleared in the first 24 hours or less? 
So let us do that.
  Mr. HYDE. I would just say to the gentlewoman that I have no problem 
with her formulation; unfortunately, the Lautenberg amendment does much 
more than that. Much more than that. And therein lies the problem.
  I am happy to yield further if the gentlewoman is going to say 
something generous. I yield whatever time she wants.
  Mrs. LOWEY. I have no doubt that the chairman's intentions are very 
noble and that he is a wise gentleman, as always.
  Mr. HYDE. There is a well-known road paved with good intentions, I am 
aware of it.
  Mrs. LOWEY. However, the gentleman has talked about car registration. 
I would like to see gun registration as well.
  Mr. HYDE. Not in this Congress, though, I would advise the 
gentlewoman.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Unfortunately, that may be the case, my dear friend. I 
would also like to say that although lives may be lost unfortunately as 
a result of gun accidents, the gentleman and I are terribly pained for 
every mother, every father, every family that loses a child, and every 
day we delay another 13 lives are lost. Every day.
  So I would just encourage my good friend, and I am delighted I am on 
my good friend's time, I would encourage my good friend to work as 
expeditiously as he can because, and I really mean this, whether I am 
in the supermarket or I am in the street, people are afraid. This is 
the United States of America, and people are afraid to go to school, 
afraid to go to church, afraid to go to synagogue, afraid to walk the 
streets. We have the power to do something. Let us make sure the 
Justice Department enforces the laws, but if we have the power to close 
some loopholes and pass common sense gun legislation, let us do it.
  Mr. HYDE. I am all for that. We are working on common sense gun 
legislation, and I am confident we will pass something that will better 
the present situation. It will not be everything the gentlewoman wants. 
It probably will not be everything I would like. But it will be useful. 
It will contain a clip ban for those large clips; it will contain 
safety devices, trigger locks. It will contain a juvenile Brady. It 
will contain a prohibition for minors for possessing assault weapons. 
It will have mandatory background checks that are reasonable, including 
at gun shows. So, if the gentlewoman would let us do our work, we will 
do it.
  I would say, by the way, that I think the gentlewoman would have made 
a great Senator.
  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Speaker, I would be delighted to yield back to the 
gentleman his time so that other people on his side can continue this 
discussion, and I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. McCarthy of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Blagojevich).
  Mr. BLAGOJEVICH. Mr. Speaker, let me just associate myself with all 
the wonderful things that were said by my colleagues on this side of 
the aisle about the chairman.
  Having said that, let me say I do not believe that criminals should 
get guns and we should do everything we possibly can to prevent 
criminals from having access to guns. We should close loopholes where 
they exist that allow criminals to get guns.
  And with regard to the issue of gun shows, last year in America there 
were 54,000 guns that were confiscated in crimes. Criminals purchased 
them originally at gun shows. And the reason that that happened is 
because there is a gaping loophole in gun shows.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. BLAGOJEVICH. I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.
  Mr. HYDE. The current law forbids criminals from acquiring guns. If 
we could enforce the current law, we might make some progress. I thank 
the gentleman.
  Mr. BLAGOJEVICH. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Speaker, let me reiterate 
again my great respect for the chairman, the gentleman from Illinois 
(Mr.

[[Page H8599]]

Hyde); and let me say I agree with him, we should certainly do 
everything we possibly can to enforce existing laws. Let me also say 
this Congress has not been generous with regards to providing funds to 
the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in its effort to fight gun 
violence.
  But having said that, there are loopholes in the existing law that 
allows for criminals to go to gun shows and buy guns, as many as they 
want, with no questions asked. That is why 54,000 of those crime guns 
were confiscated last year that were originally purchased at gun shows.
  The effort in the Senate that passed last May simply applies the 
Brady law to gun shows. So if I want to go buy a gun at a retail gun 
show, the same background requirements that I would submit to if I went 
to a retail store would be applied to me at gun shows. It is very basic 
and very simple, and I believe all of us who believe the Brady law has 
been successful, over 400,000 proscribed people were denied the right 
to buy guns because of that, ought to be for the Lautenberg version 
that passed the Senate.
  And while there is a sense that delay abounds in this chamber and 
that we have not been able to do what the Senate did in a timely 
fashion, I think if we are going to heed the lessons of history, we 
need to keep the pressure on the well-intentioned Members who want to 
try to achieve what the Senate tried to do in the conference committee.
  So let me just close by saying that in view of the history in this 
chamber and our inability to pass the Senate version here in the House, 
I think it is reasonable to suggest that we want to talk about this on 
a daily basis to keep the pressure on and let the American people keep 
focused on this issue. Because absent that, we probably will not get it 
done.
  Since this Congress began, we have had shootings in Columbine, we 
have had shootings in Indiana and Illinois, we have had shootings most 
recently in Fort Worth, Texas. I think it is incumbent upon us to heed 
what the American people want us to do, and that is to act. The Senate 
did so, we have not done so.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Ohio (Mrs. Jones).
  (Mrs. JONES of Ohio asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend her remarks.)
  Mrs. JONES of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I am back. Yesterday, on a motion to 
instruct conferees to craft juvenile justice legislation that would be 
loophole free so that guns would not reach the hands of those excluded 
by law from having guns; today, to instruct the conferees, as I said 
yesterday, to get it on.
  Yesterday, I spoke of delay and was chastised. But if as a Member of 
Congress I am talking about delay, I take part of that responsibility. 
Today, I speak of all deliberate speed. I speak to the desire of this 
Nation to see this issue through and to encourage the conferees to work 
openly.
  I do not want to breathe down the necks of the conferees. I want to 
be the wind beneath their wings. I want to be the engine that could. 
Make no mistake. I do not question the good faith of the conferees. I 
do not question anyone's intentions. It is the intentions of those who 
choose to defeat gun safety legislation, the spokespersons who continue 
to carry the NRA banner, those are the ones I am worried about.
  We believe that the conferees should meet in public session, that 
they be allowed to offer motions and amendments and meet substantively 
and recommend a substitute. We agree that it is the overriding purpose 
of this bill to do juvenile justice reform to protect our children.
  Mr. Speaker, my colleagues and I simply wish to pick up the 
conferees, to push them along, to encourage them, to urge them, to get 
them to understand that the time is now. Our children's lives rest in 
their hands.
  And by the way, Mr. Chairman, automobiles were not made to kill, guns 
were.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire about the time 
remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hansen). The gentlewoman from New York 
(Mrs. McCarthy) has 16\1/2\ minutes remaining, and the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hyde) has 14 minutes remaining.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/4\ minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Maryland (Mrs. Morella).
  Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding me 
this time, and I want to publicly state, as I have before, my great 
admiration for her commitment to gun control legislation. It comes from 
personal experience, and I think we all attest to her courage.
  I am rising in support of the amendment that she offered to instruct 
the conferees to meet publicly every weekday until they reach 
agreement. This is really setting priorities.
  I know the chairman of this committee, and I was listening to the 
discussion. I know he works very diligently. He is a man of great 
credibility. I have great respect for the chairman of the committee. 
But I do think it is important, and America is looking at us in terms 
of are we moving with deliberate speed, do we have open meetings, and 
do we have them all the time.
  One of the reasons I want this, of course, is I hope to achieve the 
goal that we would close that gun show loophole, the Brady bill, and I 
would just point out a couple of reasons why I feel strongly.
  A joint study by the Departments of Justice and Treasury that was 
released earlier this year, in January, found that, ``Gun shows provide 
a large market where criminals can shop for firearms anonymously. 
Unlicensed sellers have no way of knowing whether they are selling to a 
violent felon or someone who intends to illegally traffic guns.''
  A gun show dealer, quoted in the Lexington, Kentucky, Herald-Leader 
observed: ``A criminal could come here and go booth to booth until he 
or she finds an individual to sell him or her a gun. No questions 
asked.'' It just makes no sense that any person today can walk into a 
gun show and make a purchase without any precautions whatsoever. 
Moreover, illegal purchasers know they can go to a gun show without 
worrying about being denied a purchase.
  An Illinois State police study demonstrated that 25 percent of 
illegally trafficked firearms used in crimes originate at gun shows. In 
Florida, an inmate escaping from detention, stopped at a gun show to 
make a purchase while fleeing law enforcement authorities.
  Maybe these are some exceptions, but these exceptions indicate that 
we do need to tighten up the law and to close that loophole. No 
background check was required, no waiting period. Simply absurd. So 
this loophole needs to be closed, and I urge the conferees to do just 
that.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Colorado (Ms. DeGette).
  Ms. DeGETTE. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from New 
York for her dedication to this issue, and I would also like to thank 
the chairman, particularly for his dedication to the issue of making 
sure that the multiple-round ammunition magazines are banned, which is 
an issue that is in my bill in the House and that he worked with me and 
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren) and so many other people 
to pass. But we do have to pass this. It has not passed.
  I have to be honest, I have been very skeptical about the probability 
of the juvenile justice conferees reporting a bill with any child gun 
safety legislation. So far it looks like this skepticism is not 
misplaced, because the conferees have not had a substantive meeting 
since we returned from the August recess. And they did not work 
substantively over the recess. So I am here to say, let us not have 
this foot-dragging; let us pass this legislation.
  It is true we have existing laws, and it is true we should enforce 
those existing laws. But the truth is there is no gun show law in 
effect that we could have enforced to stop the killers at Columbine, 
which is four blocks from my district, from buying those guns at a gun 
show. There is no existing law to stop the multiple-round ammunition 
magazines which allow people to shoot scores of people before they can 
be stopped. And there is no existing law to require gun safety locks to 
be put on guns.

[[Page H8600]]

                              {time}  1645

  We need common-sense child gun safety locks. The majority of 
Americans understand this. And my colleague from New York (Mrs. Lowey) 
is exactly right. People from Jefferson County, Colorado, not a 
Democratic district, Republicans, Independents, and Democrats, come to 
me on the streets of Denver and they beseech me to do something, to 
pass common-sense child gun safety legislation. It is not a partisan 
issue. And the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) has amply 
demonstrated this. But I fear that there are others in the leadership 
of this House who are not letting this happen.
  Please pass this motion to instruct.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman from 
New York for yielding me the time, and I thank her for her leadership, 
and I am delighted to join her on the conference committee.
  I want to speak to the chairman. I appreciate his presence and his 
acknowledgment that we can work together. But I think these are two 
very viable points in this motion to instruct.
  First of all, Mr. Speaker, I believe we should meet this week. 
Secondarily, I believe that it is important that we have public 
meetings, and I will tell my colleagues why.
  First of all, the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, along 
with so many of us, as the previous speaker from Colorado has 
mentioned, that many of us are supporting the high-capacity ammo clips, 
the prohibition on those, which were the cause of the sin, if you will, 
on several recent shootings, including the tragic shooting in 
California with the Jewish Community Center and, of course, the 
shootings just this past week in Fort Worth, Texas, my own State, the 
shootings in Illinois, all generated because of these automatic clips. 
Yet there are some on the conference and some Republicans who are 
trying to classify it as a tax bill which would delay and stymie its 
being part of our gun safety reform.
  I think the other aspect of what I would like to speak to, Mr. 
Speaker, is why I am standing here today. For, as I go into my 
communities, many of them will acknowledge that for years many inner-
city poor neighborhoods were besieged by gun violence. Many mothers in 
inner cities for years had ``Saturday Night'' and ``Friday Night 
Specials.'' And what were they? The tragedy of the burial of their 
young children, gun violence and gang violence.
  So many of my constituents in inner-city Texas districts asked why 
all of a sudden are we raising our eyes and our ire about gun violence? 
Public hearings will let them know that we distinguish between no one. 
The death of a child is still the death of a child. And we acknowledge 
the years and years that this Congress stood and watched as there was 
inner-city violence with ``Saturday Night Specials'' and probably did 
nothing. So the fact that we open these to public hearings is valuable.
  Then secondarily, I think it is important to note what we are talking 
about with gun shows. It is absolutely hypocritical and outrageous for 
the National Rifle Association to say that we are trying to put gun 
shows out of business.
  Frankly, I do not find them entertaining. We have had one every week 
in the State of Texas. But what we are saying is there is a loophole as 
big as a truck that they can go to a gun show and go to one licensed 
dealer over here and have an official Brady check and go to an 
unlicensed dealer over there and get no check, and we are simply saying 
that the unlicensed dealer should use the same process of going through 
an official process and a 3-day wait period so that we do not have the 
tragedies of what we have had with the shooting in the Jewish Community 
Center.
  I am really trying to, hopefully, have dialogue with the National 
Rifle Association, which pitches all of us as wanting to come and take 
guns out of people's homes and close down gun shows. Well, we may not 
like gun shows, but we have no intent of closing them down.
  What we do want to do, as the Lautenberg effort wants to do in 
amendment, is to ensure that there is a consistency in every single 
person that comes in there to buy a gun so an anonymous criminal cannot 
come out and shoot someone.
  The additional thing that I hope my colleagues will respond to is 
that, unlike movie theaters where a child must be accompanied by an 
adult who goes into an X-rated or an R-rated movie, children can go 
into gun shows with no supervision, we need to make sure that an adult 
accompanies a child to a gun show if they go.
  Let us pass this motion to instruct and pass real gun safety reform 
for all of our children in America.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, may I inquire how much time I 
have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hansen). The gentlewoman from New York 
has 9\1/4\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) 
has 14 minutes remaining.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
  (Ms. SCHAKOWSKY asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague the gentlewoman 
from New York (Mrs. McCarthy), who is really an inspiration to all of 
us on this issue, for yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, say to the chairman, I need to tell him that the most 
commonly asked question in the Ninth Congressional District, which 
borders on the district of the chairman, is why can the House not do 
something about guns?
  My constituents asked me that after Columbine and they asked me after 
there was the shooting in my district of the worshippers going home 
from the synagogue who were shot on the street and the murder of Ricky 
Birdsong in Skokie, which is in my district, and they asked me if the 
shootings at the Jewish Community Center in California were going to be 
enough finally for us to ask. And when the mad gunman was in Atlanta, 
they thought, well, this has got to be it, that is going to tip the 
scales. And then Fort Worth, where even the church was a dangerous 
place.
  And when I go home, they look at me and they scratch their head and 
they look in my face and they want to know an answer. They want to know 
what is it going to take, how many children are we going to bury, how 
many school shootings are there going to be. And I really do not have 
an answer.
  So why do we not open up the process? Why do we not let the people of 
America in on the mystery of how Congress addresses issues like gun 
violence?
  The chairman spoke about inching closer, inching closer. But inching 
closer is not a consolation when I go to the funerals in my district, 
and I have been to three in the last recent months, of children who 
were killed by gun violence. Inching closer does not satisfy. They want 
to know when.
  Let us do it now. Let us open the process. Let us restore confidence 
in people that this Congress can act, that we can do something, that 
there is an orderly process, that there is real debate, that there is 
real movement.
  If we pass the motion of the gentlewoman, we can at least include the 
American people who want action in on this process and, hopefully, we 
can resolve this issue before another incident, which I guarantee, my 
colleagues, will occur if we do not act and do not act now.
  So I rise in support of the motion.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as she may 
consume to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lofgren).
  (Ms. LOFGREN asked and was given permission to speak out of order.)


Announcement of Intention To Offer Motion to Instruct Conferees on H.R. 
               1501, Juvenile Justice Reform Act of 1999

  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 7 of rule XX, I hereby 
announce my intention to offer a motion to instruct conferees on H.R. 
1501. The form of the motion is as follows:

       Ms. Lofgren moves that the managers on the part of the 
     House on the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two 
     houses on the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 1501, be 
     instructed that the committee on the conference recommend a 
     conference substitute that includes provisions within the 
     scope of conference which are consistent with the

[[Page H8601]]

     Second Amendment to the United States Constitution (e.g., (1) 
     requiring unlicensed dealers at gun shows to conduct 
     background checks; (2) banning the juvenile possession of 
     assault weapons; (3) requiring that child safety locks be 
     sold with every handgun; and (4) a Juvenile Brady bill.)

  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, this has been interesting. Yesterday's motion was 
interesting, and today's motion, and tomorrow's, and then next week's, 
every day, I am sure.
  We have a nice discussion, a serious discussion about these problems; 
and that is all to the good. But something is missing.
  Guns are important. Guns are the instruments by which these killings 
occur. But at the same time, there is so much more to this problem that 
is not being discussed by anybody and that is the violence that our 
children are being fed in the entertainment industry, in the movies, in 
the music, in the Internet games that are played.
  Violence is a staple. It has desensitized, it has calloused people's 
sensitivities. And nobody seems to get exercised about that. I got 
exercised about it. I thought that, since obscenity is not protected by 
the First Amendment, violence, the purveying of violence ought to not 
be protected because it is a form of obscenity.
  I got overwhelmed because the lobbyists came out and said, gee, you 
are going to hurt the retailers that are retailing this stuff. And so, 
nobody really cares about that, it is guns that are the problem.
  I say we are filling our children with a culture of death and we are 
worrying about the guns, the instruments of some of this death. I worry 
about it, too, and I do not disregard that. But I would like to see 
some sensitivity on the liberal side for the climate that we are 
raising our kids in, that is at the day-care centers, where the 
socialization of our children develops according to the law of the 
jungle, where parents cannot find the time to spend with their 
children.
  There are profound problems with our culture that are not getting 
better. ``Deviancy'' is being defined down in the famous phrase of the 
famous Senator from New York. But we are talking about guns. That is 
okay. Guns are a serious problem. They are dangerous instrumentalities.
  There is a Second Amendment, however, that I respect. Most of the 
constitutional scholars that exist that talk about protecting the 
Constitution kind of gloss over the Second Amendment. But it is there. 
It is in the Constitution, and it serves a very useful purpose. Because 
I would not like to see Americans disarmed because the government 
sometimes in some cultures and histories becomes the adversary, and I 
think a protection of freedom is that people can maintain arms.
  But I also believe, as in freedom of speech, that reasonable 
regulation is appropriate. Freedom of speech is not unregulated. We 
condition yell ``fire'' in the proverbial crowded theater. There are 
laws against obscenity, slander, libel, copyrights, all sorts of 
restrictions on free speech. That does not diminish the significance of 
it, but it just says it is constitutionally possible to have 
restrictions.
  The same thing is true of the Second Amendment. I think everyone 
should have the right if they are otherwise normal and qualified to own 
a gun if they want to. There are hunters. There are sportsmen. There is 
a right to protect our homes. But, at the same time, I believe 
reasonable restrictions are possible.
  I do not think criminals should have guns. I do not think young 
children should have guns. There are all sorts of reasonable 
restrictions. Assault weapons, by definition, do not belong in the 
civilian community. I am willing to support those. But I think we have 
to be honest, and I think that the intellectual community ought to 
understand that entertainment and advertising and music and culture 
today is at the bottom of a lot of this problem.
  Something fills the heart and souls of our kids other than hope and 
love. There is hate. There is fear. There is a culture of death 
animating the kids who pull those guns, put them up against the little 
girl's head and says, Do you believe in God? And she said yes, and then 
he pulled the trigger.
  The gun did not go off by itself. That kid pulled that trigger 
because there was something inside him that was terribly wrong. I think 
we ought to start addressing this broad picture, not just focusing on 
the instrumentality of assassination. A knife in the hands of a surgeon 
is one thing. A knife in the hands of an assassin is another thing.

                              {time}  1700

  The knife is neutral. It is what animates the user that is really the 
root problem here, which nobody wants to address because we bump into 
the entertainment industry, and God forbid we get between a buck and 
the industry.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. HYDE. I yield to the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee).
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, as usual the gentleman from 
Illinois has made an extremely passionate and eloquent and very 
persuasive argument.
  I do not pretend to stand and represent the liberal element of this 
Congress. I do not know if anyone has designated me as such. But I 
might remind the gentleman that when we were doing the 
telecommunications bill, there were many of us, Democrats and 
Republicans alike, who joined on an obscenity-prevention amendment or 
provision with respect to the Internet, and we ultimately, Mr. 
Chairman, were ruled unconstitutional or at least ruled out of order, 
if my colleague will, by the Supreme Court.
  I would say to the gentleman that his point about cultural violence 
is a strong point, but I would also raise the fact that, if we look 
statistically, the young people will tell us that 95 percent of our 
youth are good and the 5 percent may be the ones that are caught up in 
some of these heinous acts. At the same time they are caught so we are 
concerned about what they get in school and in music. We have adults 
that have already gone past our training.
  We have got the very deranged individual who went into the Jewish 
Community Center and did it out of hate, but what happened is he did 
not use a knife. The hateful gentleman in Illinois did not use a knife. 
They used guns, and I have said over and over to my friends in Texas:
  I am in a very difficult position, coming from the State of Texas 
because they hold on to their weapons very strongly, and I have been 
consistently a person who believes in gun regulation, and I am not 
alone with the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Hyde) asking to pierce the 
sanctity of someone's home to take their guns out that they legally own 
or to close down gun shows in which I do not like, frankly; but what I 
am saying, that the Second Amendment can live consistently and 
constitutionally with gun regulation.
  Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I agree with the gentlewoman.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. So, Mr. Speaker, I think we are not in 
disagreement. I believe there have been many of us who have risen to 
the floor of the House to speak against the heinous violent music or 
violent words or Internet violence, but we must admit that guns do kill 
and they are in the hands of individuals who use them to kill.
  Mr. HYDE. Guns are the instrumentality, but the spirit of killing is 
the person who pulls the trigger, and we ought to take a look at that.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I join the gentleman from 
Illinois in that. I hope we can do both together.
  Mr. HYDE. I do, too.
  Let me just say in closing, this interesting philosophical seminar 
the gentleman from Chicago (Mr. Blagojevich) commented that we did not 
fund the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms adequately for their 
job. During the last 5 years the Justice Department's funding has 
doubled; it is about 14.7 billion now, and gun prosecutions by the 
Justice Department have dropped almost in half. So we can look there, 
too, as long as we are exercising the searching gaze of the House of 
Representatives.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the reason that we are doing this motion is because, and 
I am glad we have this conversation today

[[Page H8602]]

and the debate going back and forth because it reminds me of the debate 
that we had on June 19 when we were talking about only the amendments 
that we are trying to get passed. I think people have to stop, think, 
and hopefully actually read what the amendment says. There is nothing 
in the amendment on trying to close the gun show loophole that will 
affect someone's Second Amendment rights. We have to make that 
extremely clear.
  Right now, if someone wants to buy a gun, when they go to a gun 
store, they have a federally licensed dealer. When they go to a gun 
show, 45 percent of those selling guns there are federally licensed 
dealers. All we are saying is that those that come into gun shows and 
are not federally licensed should not be able to sell a gun to someone 
because the criminals know where to go get the guns; that is the 
problem. The criminals do know where to go get the guns.
  So all we are saying is if someone is going to sell a gun at a gun 
show, that person should have to go under the same rules and 
regulations as those legal dealers at the gun show. That is all we are 
saying.
  As was mentioned, 95 percent of the people that go to gun shows get 
their guns instantly through the check. We are dealing with a very, 
very small percentage, very, very small percentage of people that might 
have to wait a couple of hours. Then we even go further to a smaller 
percentage that actually might have to wait 24 hours.
  This is what I am saying: How can I stand here and not fight to do 
whatever I can to make sure that guns do not get in the wrong hands? 
How can I stand here and make sure that what we do here in the House 
will be the right thing? Because if we pass a bill and that bill is not 
strong enough to stop the criminal from getting the gun, and then God 
forbid someone buys a gun at a gun show, goes to one of our schools, 
goes to one of our churches, goes to one of our synagogues and does 
their killing, how can we live with each other? How can we even face 
the victims of those crimes? That is what we have to do.
  I am someone that actually supports the Second Amendment. I happen to 
believe in the Second Amendment, and I have to tell my colleagues I 
know of an awful lot of gun owners that are coming up to me more and 
more and more, even saying, and actually they are very proud when they 
come up to me and say, Mrs. McCarthy, I am an NRA member, and I do 
believe that I have a right to own a gun. But I also believe that we 
have to take a little more responsibility for our guns.
  All we are asking for our citizens and for everybody that wants to 
buy a gun: Are you willing to take 3 business days, 3 business days, to 
make sure that a criminal or a child does not get their hand on a gun? 
The majority of Americans are saying yes to that. Unfortunately, that 
sound has not gotten in here, inside of Washington.
  We have to have good standards. That is why we are all here. We set 
the laws of the land, and we are certainly going to have disagreements, 
and I understand that. The majority of us know that we always have to 
compromise, and we accept that also. But there comes a point when that 
compromise could cause a lot of loss of lives, and we have to be very 
clear on that, very, very clear on that.
  Mr. Speaker, I hope between now and when the bill comes up for a vote 
again that the clear information will be out there. As my colleagues 
know, there is a part in the amendment where they talk about tracing. 
They do not like the idea of tracing. Mr. Speaker, I have to tell my 
colleagues every successful police department throughout this country 
that really works with the ATF on tracing, they are the ones that have 
the lowest crime rates because they are able to find those illegal gun 
dealers. Traces are an extremely important part of the bill. We cannot 
let that go.
  Mr. Speaker, we do need more funding for that so that the Boston 
project that has worked so wonderfully, has cut down murders in Boston, 
especially among the young people; it is a project that works, and we 
are seeing it work throughout the country. We are supposed to support 
those things. That is tracing.
  Here it was brought up earlier that gun shows do not really have guns 
go to criminals. Well, we have a report, and I offer this which 
includes the letters from police organizations that support the 
original bills, as they were, and I want to submit this, the ATF 
report, so this can go into the Record so people can look at this when 
they want more information.
  The materials referred to are as follows:
                                                Police Foundation,


                                               Washington, DC,

                                               September 16, 1999.
     Hon. Orrin G. Hatch,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Hatch: The Police Foundation is a private, 
     independent, nonpartisan, and nonprofit organization 
     dedicated to supporting innovation and improvement in 
     policing. Established in 1970, the foundation has conducted 
     seminal research in police behavior, policy, and procedure, 
     and works to transfer to local agencies the best new 
     information about practices for dealing effectively with a 
     wide range of important police operational and administrative 
     concerns. On behalf of the Police Foundation, I am writing 
     today in strong support of the gun-related provisions adopted 
     by the Senate as part of S. 254. These measures are crucial 
     in reducing access to guns by children and criminals.
       As you and other conferees meet, the Police Foundation 
     urges you to focus on an issue of importance to law 
     enforcement--the need for at least three business days to 
     conduct background checks at gun shows. This is the same 
     period of time currently required when a firearm is purchased 
     from a licensed gun dealer.
       We believe it is critical to have at least three business 
     days to do a thorough background check, especially to access 
     records that may not be available on the Federal National 
     Instant Check Background System (NICS), such as a person's 
     history of mental illness, domestic violence, or recent 
     arrests. For law enforcement officials, it is not how fast a 
     background check can be done but rather how thorough the 
     check is conducted. Without a minimum of three business days, 
     the risk increases that guns will be sold to criminals or 
     others prohibited from purchasing guns.
       The Police Foundation is concerned that neither the 24-hour 
     or 72-hour requirements allow for an adequate background 
     check. The FBI has analyzed NICS background check data for 
     the last six months and estimates that if the law had 
     required all background checks to be completed in 72 hours, 
     9,000 people found to be disqualified would have been able to 
     obtain a weapon. If there had been a 24-hour background check 
     time limit, 17,000 prohibited purchasers would have obtained 
     weapons in the last six months. The FBI also found that a gun 
     buyer who could not be cleared by NICS in under two hours was 
     twenty times more likely to be a prohibited purchaser.
       We strongly believe that all gun sales--be they in gun 
     stores or at gun shows--should be subject to a three-
     business-day background check requirement; without such 
     standards, gun shows will continue to be a major source of 
     weapons for violent felons, straw purchasers, the dangerously 
     unstable, and others who threaten our communities. Despite 
     being convicted of multiple felonies, Hank Earl Carr was able 
     to purchase multiple guns at gun shows--guns he used to 
     murder his stepson and three police officers in Florida in 
     1998.
       The Police Foundation supports other Senate-passed 
     provisions, including requiring child safety locks with every 
     handgun sold; banning all violent juveniles from buying guns 
     when they turn eighteen; banning juvenile possession of 
     assault weapons; enhancing penalties for transferring a 
     firearm to a juvenile; and banning the importation of high 
     capacity ammunition magazines.
       In order to protect the safety of our families and our 
     communities, it is important to adopt the Senate-passed, gun-
     related provisions. The Police Foundation is committed to 
     working with you and your colleagues in the Congress in 
     supporting and enacting sensible measures to protect all 
     Americans and most especially our children.
           Sincerely yours,
     Hubert Williams.
                                  ____

                                      International Association of


                                             Chiefs of Police,

                               Alexandria, VA, September 14, 1999.
     Hon. Orrin G. Hatch,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Hatch: On behalf of the more than 18,000 
     members of the International Association of Chiefs of Police 
     (IACP), I am writing to express our strong support for 
     several vitally important firearms provisions that were 
     included in S. 254, the Violent and Repeat Juvenile Offender 
     Accountability Act of 1999.
       As conference work on juvenile justice legislation begins, 
     I would urge you to consider the views of our nation's chiefs 
     of police on these important issues. Specifically, the IACP 
     strongly supports provisions that would require the 
     performance of background checks prior to the sale or 
     transfer of weapons at gun shows, as well as extending the 
     requirements of the Brady Act to cover juvenile acts of 
     crime.
       The IACP has always viewed the Brady Act as a vital 
     component of any comprehensive crime control effort. Since 
     its enactment, the Brady Act has prevented more than 400,000 
     felons, fugitives and others prohibited from owning firearms 
     from purchasing firearms. However, the efficacy of the Brady 
     Act

[[Page H8603]]

     is undermined by oversights in the law which allow those 
     individuals prohibited from owning firearms from obtaining 
     weapons, at events such as gun shows, without undergoing a 
     background check. The IACP believes that it is vitally 
     important that Congress act swiftly to chose these loopholes 
     and preserve the effectiveness of the Brady Act.
       However, simply requiring that a background check be 
     performed is meaningless unless law enforcement authorities 
     are provided with a period of time sufficient to complete a 
     thorough background check, law enforcement executives 
     understand that thorough and complete background checks take 
     time. The IACP believes that to suggest, as some proposals 
     do, that the weapon be transferred to the purchaser if the 
     background checks are not completed within 24 hours of sale 
     sacrifices the safety of our communities for the sake of 
     convenience.
       Requiring that individuals wait three business days is 
     hardly an onerous burden, especially since allowing for more 
     comprehensive background checks ensures that those 
     individuals who are forbidden from purchasing firearms are 
     prevented from doing so.
       Finally, the IACP believes that juveniles must be held 
     accountable for their acts of violence. Therefore, the IACP 
     also supports modifying the current Brady Act to permanently 
     prohibit gun ownership by an individual, while a juvenile, 
     commits a crime that would have triggered a gun disability if 
     their crime had been committed as an adult.
       Thank you for your attention to this matter. If you have 
     any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 703/
     836-6767.
           Sincerely,
                                               Ronald S. Neubauer,
     President.
                                  ____

                                      International Brotherhood of


                                              Police Officers,

                               Alexandria, VA, September 15, 1999.
     Hon. Orrin G. Hatch,
     Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Hatch: The International Brotherhood of 
     Police Officers (IBPO) is an affiliate of the Service 
     Employees International Union, AFL-CIO. The IBPO is the 
     largest police union in the AFL-CIO.
       On behalf of the entire membership of the IBPO I wish to 
     express our strong support of the gun-related provisions 
     adopted by the Senate as part of S. 254. The IBPO knows that 
     passage of these measures will keep guns away from children 
     and criminals.
       The IBPO requests that the conferees continue to focus on 
     the need for adequate time to conduct background checks at 
     ``gun shows.'' As I am sure that you are aware, the Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation has estimated that over 17,000 
     disqualified individuals would have been able to purchase a 
     gun if a twenty-four hour time limit was required for a 
     background check. Accordingly, if such time requirement is 
     legislated 17,000 more felons will be able to purchase guns.
       The IBPO is also in support of extending the requirements 
     of the Brady Act to cover juvenile acts of crime. Our union 
     has supported legislation which seeks to comprehensively 
     control crime. The Brady Act is a major part of such efforts.
       Thank you for your consideration of these issues that are 
     significant to all law enforcement officers and the citizens 
     of the United States of America.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Kenneth T. Lyons,
     National President.
                                  ____

                                                   Arapahoe County


                                             Sheriff's Office,

                                Littleton, CO, September 15, 1999.
     Chairman Orrin Hatch,
     Senate Judiciary Committee,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Hatch: As you and other conferees meet to 
     craft juvenile justice legislation, I urge you to adopt the 
     gun-related provisions adopted by the Senate as part of S. 
     254, The Violent and Repeat Juvenile Offender Accountability 
     and Rehabilitation Act of 1999. We at the National Sheriffs' 
     Association (NSA) appreciate your efforts to curb violent 
     juvenile crime.
       We feel that S. 254 combines the best provisions of each 
     legislative attempt to reform and modernize juvenile crime 
     control. As you know, sheriffs are increasingly burdened with 
     juvenile offenders, and they present significant challengers 
     for sheriffs. The so-called core mandates requiring sight and 
     sound separation, jail removal and status offender mandates 
     are so restrictive, that even reasonable attempts to comply 
     with the mandates fall short. We welcome modest changes to 
     the core mandates to make them flexible without jeopardizing 
     the safety of the juvenile inmate. We agree that kids do not 
     belong in adult jail and therefore we appreciate the 
     commitment to find appropriate alternatives for juvenile 
     offenders.
       Additionally, NSA supports the Juvenile Accountability 
     Block Grant program. S. 254 sets aside $4 billion to 
     implement the provisions of the bill and this grant funding 
     will enable sheriffs to receive assistance to meet the core 
     mandates. NSA is also hopeful that the prevention programs in 
     the bill will keep juveniles out of the justice system. Kids 
     that are engaged in constructive activities are less likely 
     to commit crimes that those whose only other alternative is a 
     gang. We applaud the focus on prevention, and we stand ready 
     to do our part to engage America's youth.
       In addition, you may be asked to consider the following 
     amendments that I support.
       Four ways to close loopholes giving kids access to 
     firearms:
       1. The Child Access Loophole: Adults are prohibited from 
     transferring firearms to juveniles, but are not required to 
     store guns so that kids cannot get access to them. This Child 
     Access Prevention (CAP) proposal would require parents to 
     keep loaded firearms out of the reach of children and would 
     hold gun owners criminally responsible if a child gains 
     access to an unsecured firearm and uses it to injure 
     themselves or someone else.
       2. The Gun Show Loophole: So-called ``private collectors'' 
     can sell guns without background checks at gun shows and flea 
     markets thereby skirting the Brady Law which requires that 
     federally licensed gun dealers initiate and complete a 
     background check before they sell a firearm. No gun should be 
     sold at a gun show without a background check and appropriate 
     documentation.
       3. The Internet Loophole Similar to the Gun Show Loophole: 
     Many sales on the internet are performed without a background 
     check, allowing criminals and other prohibited purchasers to 
     acquire firearms. No one should be able to sell guns over the 
     internet without complying with the Brady background check 
     requirements.
       4. The Violent Juveniles Purchase Loophole: Under current 
     law, anyone convicted of a felony in an adult court is barred 
     from owning a weapon. However, juveniles convicted of violent 
     crimes in a juvenile court can purchase a gun on their 21st 
     birthday. Juveniles who commit violent felony offenses when 
     they are young should be prohibited from buying guns as 
     adults.
       The National Sheriffs Association and I welcome passage of 
     this legislation. We look forward to working with you to 
     ensure swift enactment of S. 254.
           Respectfully,
     Patrick J. Sullivan, Jr., Sheriff.
                                  ____

                                           National Association of


                                     School Resource Officers,

                                               September 16, 1999.
     Chairman Hatch,
     Senate Judiciary Committee, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Hatch: The National Association of School 
     Resource Officers (NASRO) is a national organization that 
     represents over 5000 school based police officers from 
     municipal police agencies, county sheriff departments and 
     school district police forces. On behalf of our entire 
     membership nationwide, I am writing today in strong support 
     of the gun-related provisions adopted by the Senate as part 
     of S. 254. These measures are crucial in reducing child and 
     criminal access to guns.
       As you and other conferees meet to craft juvenile justice 
     legislation, NASRO urges you to focus on an important issue 
     to law enforcement--the need for at least three business days 
     to conduct background checks at gun shows. This is the same 
     period of time currently allowed when a firearm is purchased 
     from a licensed gun dealer.
       As law enforcement officials we know from experience that 
     it is critical to have at least three business days to do a 
     thorough background check. Law enforcement officials need 
     time to access records that may not be available on the 
     federal National Instant Check Background System (NICS) such 
     as a person's history of mental illness, domestic violence or 
     recent arrests. What is important to law enforcement is not 
     how fast a background check can be done but how thorough it 
     is conducted. Without a minimum of three business days this 
     will increase the risk that criminals will be able to 
     purchase guns.
       NASRO is concerned that 72 or 24 hours is not an adequate 
     amount of time for law enforcement to do an effective 
     background check. The FBI analyzed all NICS background check 
     data in the last six months and estimated that--if the law 
     had required all background checks to be completed in 72 
     hours--9,000 people found to be disqualified would have been 
     able to obtain a weapon. If the time limit for checks had 
     been set at just 24 hours, 17,000 prohibited purchasers 
     would have gotten guns in just the last half year. the FBI 
     also found that a gun buyer who could not be cleared by 
     the NICS system in under 2 hours was 20 times more likely 
     to be a prohibited purchaser than other gun buyers.
       It is impossible to tell precisely how many lives will be 
     saved by applying the same background check system that now 
     applies to gun store sales to gun shows. We know, however, 
     that without such equivalent treatment gun shows will 
     continue to be the purchase points of choice for murderers, 
     armed robbers and other violent criminals like Hank Earl 
     Carr, who was a frequent gun show buyer despite being a 
     multiple convicted felon. Carr's crimes didn't stop until 
     1998, when he shot his stepson and three police officers 
     before turning a gun on himself.
       On June 23, 1999 a Colorado man shot and killed his three 
     daughters, ages 7, 8 and 10 just hours after purchasing a gun 
     from a licensed dealer. The dealer completed a NICS check, 
     but the check failed to reveal that the man had a domestic 
     abuse restraining order against him. If law enforcement had 
     consulted local and state records using both computerized and 
     non-computerized data bases than the man probably would have 
     never been able to purchase the gun.
       The other Senate passed provisions NASRO supports include 
     requiring that child safety locks be provided with every 
     handgun sold; banning all violent juveniles from buying

[[Page H8604]]

     guns when they turn 18; banning juvenile possession of 
     assault rifles; enhancing penalties for transferring a 
     firearm to a juvenile; and banning the importation of high 
     capacity ammunition magazines.
       It is important to adopt the Senate-passed gun-related 
     provisions in order to protect the safety of our families and 
     our communities. The police officer on the street understands 
     that this legislation is needed to help keep guns out of the 
     hands of children and violent criminals.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Curtis Lavarello,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____

                                          National Organization of


                             Black Law Enforcement Executives,

                                               September 15, 1999.
     Hon. Orrin Hatch,
     Chair, Senate Judiciary Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, 
         DC.
       Dear Senator Hatch: The National Organization of Black Law 
     Enforcement Executives (NOBLE) representing over 3500 black 
     law enforcement managers, executives, and practitioners 
     strongly urge you to support the gun related provisions 
     adopted by the Senate as a part of S. 254. These measures are 
     crucial in reducing child and criminal access to guns.
       As you and other conferees meet to craft juvenile 
     legislation, NOBLE urges you to focus on an important issue 
     to law enforcement--the need for at least three business days 
     to conduct background checks at gun shows. This is the same 
     period of time currently allowed when a firearm is purchased 
     from a licensed dealer.
       NOBLE is concerned that 24 hours is not an adequate amount 
     of time for law enforcement to do an effective background 
     check. The FBI analyzed all National Instant Check Background 
     System (NICS) data in the last 6 months and estimated that--
     if the law had required all background checks to be completed 
     in 72 hours, 9000 people found to be disqualified would have 
     been able to obtain a weapon. If the time limit for checks 
     had been set for 24 hours, 17,000 prohibited purchasers would 
     have gotten guns in just the last half year. The FBI also 
     found that a gun buyer who could not be cleared by the NICS 
     system in under 2 hours was 20 times more likely to be a 
     prohibited purchaser than other gun buyers.
       It is impossible to tell precisely how many lives will be 
     saved by applying the same background check system that now 
     applies to gun store sales to gun shows. We know, however, 
     that without such equivalent treatment gun shows will 
     continue to be the purchased points of choice for murders, 
     armed robbers and other violent criminals like Hank Earl 
     Carr, who was a frequent gun show buyer despite being a 
     multiple convicted felon. Carr's crimes did not stop until 
     1998, when he shot his stepson and three police officers 
     before turning the gun on himself.
       The other Senate passed provisions NOBLE supports include 
     requiring that child safety locks be provided with every 
     handgun sold; banning all violent juveniles from buying guns 
     when they turn 18; banning juvenile possession of assault 
     rifles; enhancing penalties for transferring a firearm to a 
     juvenile; and banning the importation of high capacity 
     ammunition magazines.
       It is important to adopt the Senate passed gun related 
     provisions in order to protect the safety of our families and 
     our communities. The police officer on the street understands 
     that this legislation is needed to help keep guns out of the 
     hands of children and violent criminals.
           Sincerely,
                                                Robert L. Stewart,
                                               Executive Director.
         Hispanic American Police Command Officers Association, 
           The Ronald Reagan Building & International Trade 
           Center,
                               Washington, DC, September 15, 1999.
     Chairman Hatch,
     Senate Judiciary Committee, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Hatch: The Hispanic American Police Command 
     Officers Association (HAPCOA) represents 1,500 command law 
     enforcement officers and affiliates from municipal police 
     departments, county sheriffs, and state and federal agencies 
     including the DEA, U.S. Marshals Service. FBI, U.S. Secret 
     Service, and the U.S. Park Police. On behalf of our entire 
     membership nationwide, I am writing today in strong support 
     of the gun-related provisions adopted by the Senate as part 
     of S. 254. These measures are crucial in reducing child and 
     criminal access to guns.
       As you and other conferees meet to craft juvenile justice 
     legislation, HAPCOA urges you to focus on an important issue 
     to law enforcement--the need for at least three business days 
     to conduct background checks at gun shows. This is the same 
     period of time currently allowed when a firearm is purchased 
     from a licensed gun dealer.
       As law enforcement officials we know from experience that 
     it is critical to have at least three business days to do a 
     thorough background check. Law enforcement officials need 
     time to access records that may not be available on the 
     federal National Instant Check Background System (NICS) such 
     as a person's history of mental illness, domestic violence or 
     recent arrests. What is important to law enforcement is not 
     how fast a background check can be done but how thorough it 
     is conducted. Without a minimum of three business days this 
     will increase the risk that criminals will be able to 
     purchase guns.
       HAPCOA is concerned that 72 or 24 hours is not an adequate 
     amount of time for law enforcement to do an effective 
     background check. The FBI analyzed all NICS background check 
     data in the last six months and estimated that--if the law 
     had required all background checks to be completed in 72 
     hours--9,000 people found to be disqualified would have been 
     able to obtain a weapon. If the time limit for checks had 
     been set at just 24 hours, 17,000 prohibited purchasers would 
     have gotten guns in just the last half year. The FBI also 
     found that a gun buyer who could not be cleared by the NICS 
     system in under two hours was 20 times more likely to be a 
     prohibited purchaser than other gun buyers.
       It is impossible to tell precisely how many lives will be 
     saved by applying the same background check system that now 
     applies to gun store sales to gun shows. We know, however, 
     that without such equivalent treatment gun shows will 
     continue to be the purchase points of choice for murderers, 
     armed robbers and other violent criminals like Hank Earl 
     Carr, who was a frequent gun show buyer despite being a 
     multiple convicted felon. Carr's crimes didn't stop until 
     1998, when he shot his stepson and three police officers 
     before turning a gun on himself.
       On June 23, 1999 a Colorado man shot and killed his three 
     daughters, ages 7, 8 and 10 just hours after purchasing a gun 
     from a licensed dealer. The dealer completed a NICS check, 
     but the check failed to reveal that the man had a domestic 
     abuse restraining order against him. If law enforcement had 
     consulted local and state records using both computerized and 
     non-computerized data bases than the man probably would have 
     never been able to purchase the gun.
       The other Senate passed provisions HAPCOA supports include 
     requiring that child safety locks be provided with every 
     handgun sold; banning all violent juveniles from buying guns 
     when they turn 18; banning juvenile possession of assault 
     rifles; enhancing penalties for transferring a firearm to a 
     juvenile; and banning the importation of high capacity 
     ammunition magazines.
       It is important to adopt the Senate-passed gun-related 
     provisions in order to protect the safety of families and our 
     communities. The police officer on the street understands 
     that this legislation is needed to help keep guns out of the 
     hands of children and violent criminals.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Jess Quintero,
     National Executive Director.
                                  ____



                              Police Executive Research Forum,

                               Washington, DC, September 14, 1999.
     Hon. Orrin G. Hatch,
     Chairman, Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman Hatch: The Police Executive Research Forum 
     (PERF) is a national organization of police professionals 
     dedicated to improving policing practices through research, 
     debate and leadership. On behalf of our members, I am writing 
     today in strong support of the gun-related provisions adopted 
     by the Senate as part of S. 254. These measures are crucial 
     in reducing children's and criminals' access to guns.
       As you and other conferees meet to craft juvenile justice 
     legislation, PERF urges you to focus on an important issue to 
     law enforcement--the need for at least three business days to 
     conduct background checks at gun shows. This is the same 
     period of time currently allowed when a firearm is purchased 
     from a licensed gun dealer.
       As law enforcement officials, we know from experience that 
     it is critical to have at least three business days to do a 
     thorough background check. While most checks take only a few 
     hours, those that take longer often signal a potential 
     problem regarding the purchaser. Without a minimum of three 
     business days, the risk that criminals will be able to 
     purchase guns increases. The FBI analyzed all NICS background 
     check data in the last six months and estimated that, if the 
     law had required all background checks to be completed in 72 
     hours, 9,000 people found to be disqualified would have been 
     able to obtain a weapon. If the time limit for checks had 
     been set at just 24 hours, 17,000 prohibited purchasers would 
     have obtained guns in just the last half year. The FBI also 
     found that a gun buyer who could not be cleared by the NICS 
     system in under two hours was 20 times more likely to be a 
     prohibited purchaser than other gun buyers.
       PERF also strongly supports measures that impose new safety 
     standards on the manufacture and importation of handguns 
     requiring a child-resistant safety lock. PERF helped write 
     the handgun safety guidelines--issued to most police agencies 
     more than a decade ago--on the need to secure handguns kept 
     in the home. Our commitment has not wavered. I also urge you 
     to clarify that the storage containers and safety mechanisms 
     meet minimum standards to ensure that the requirements have 
     teeth.
       PERF also encourages the enactment of proposals that 
     prohibit the sale of an assault weapon to anyone under age 18 
     and to increase the criminal penalties for selling a gun to a 
     juvenile. PERF also supports banning all violent juveniles 
     from buying any type of gun when they turn 18, and supports 
     banning the importation of high-capacity ammunition 
     magazines. PERF knows we must do more to keep guns out of the 
     hands of our nation's troubled youth.
       PERF supports strong, enforceable ``Child Access 
     Prevention'' laws. Once again, we have witnessed the carnage 
     that results when children have access to firearms. PERF has 
     supported child access prevention bills in

[[Page H8605]]

     the past because we have seen first hand the horror that can 
     occur when angry and disturbed kids have access to guns.
       We must do more to keep America's children safe--not just 
     because of recent events, but because of the shootings, 
     accidents and suicide attempts we see with frightening 
     regularity. It is important to adopt the Senate-passed gun-
     related provisions in order to protect our families and our 
     communities. The police officer on the street understands 
     that this legislation is needed to help keep guns out of the 
     hands of children and violent criminals. Thank you for 
     considering the views of law enforcement. We applaud your 
     efforts to help make our communities safer places to live.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Chuck Wexler,
                                               Executive Director.

 Gun Shows: Brady Checks and Crime Gun Traces--January 1999, Executive 
                                Summary

       More than 4,000 shows dedicated primarily to the sale or 
     exchange of firearms are held annually in the United States. 
     There are also countless other public markets at which 
     firearms are freely sold or traded, such as flea markets. 
     Under current law, large numbers of firearms at these public 
     markets are sold anonymously; the seller has no idea and is 
     under no obligation to find out whether he or she is selling 
     a firearm to a felon or other prohibited person. If any of 
     these firearms are later recovered at a crime scene, there is 
     virtually no way to trace them back to the purchaser.
       The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Brady Act) 
     provides crucial information about firearms buyers to Federal 
     firearms licensees (FFLs), but does not help nonlicensees to 
     identify prohibited purchasers. Under the Brady Act, FFLs 
     contact the Federal Bureau of Investigation's National 
     Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) to ensure 
     that a purchaser is not a felon or otherwise prohibited from 
     possessing firearms. Until the Brady Act was passed, the only 
     way an FFL could determine whether a purchaser was a felon or 
     other person prohibited from possessing firearms was on the 
     basis of the customer's self-certification. The Brady Act 
     supplemented this ``honor system'' with one that allows 
     licensees to transfer a firearm only after a records check 
     that prevents the acquisition of firearms by persons not 
     legally entitled to possess them. Since 1994, the Brady Act 
     has prevented well over 250,000 prohibited persons from 
     acquiring firearms from FFLs.
       The Brady Act, however, does not apply to the sale of 
     firearms by nonlicensees, who make up one-quarter or more of 
     the sellers of firearms at gun shows. While FFLs are required 
     to maintain careful records of their sales and, under the 
     Brady Act, to check the purchaser's background with NICS 
     before transferring any firearm, nonlicensees have no such 
     requirements under current law. Thus, felons and other 
     prohibited persons who want to avoid Brady Act checks and 
     records of their purchase buy firearms at these shows. 
     Indeed, a review of criminal investigations by the Bureau of 
     Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) reveals a wide variety of 
     violations occurring at gun shows and substantial numbers of 
     firearms associated with gun shows being used in drug crimes 
     and crimes of violence, as well as being passed illegally to 
     juveniles.
       On November 6, 1998, President Clinton determined that all 
     gun show vendors should have access to the same information 
     about firearms purchasers.\1\ He directed the Secretary of 
     the Treasury and the Attorney General to close the gun show 
     loophole. President Clinton was particularly concerned that 
     felons and illegal firearms traffickers could use gun shows 
     to buy large quantities of weapons without ever disclosing 
     their identities, having their backgrounds checked, or having 
     any other records maintained on their purchases. He asked the 
     Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General to provide 
     him with recommendations to address this problem.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     \1\ Footnotes follow this text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       In developing recommendations for responding to the 
     President's directive, the Department of the Treasury and the 
     Department of Justice sought input from United States 
     Attorneys, FFLs, law enforcement organizations, trade 
     associations, and a wide range of other groups interested 
     in firearms issues. The suggestions of these disparate 
     groups ranged from doing nothing to establishing an 
     outright ban on all sales of firearms at gun shows or by 
     anyone other than an FFL. The United States Attorneys 
     expressed particular concern with the complexity of the 
     statutory definition of ``engaged in the business'' of 
     dealing in firearms and noted that this made unlicensed 
     firearms traffickers unusually difficult to prosecute.
       The recommendations in this report build upon existing 
     systems and expertise to achieve the President's goals of 
     preventing sales to prohibited persons and better enabling 
     law enforcement to trade crime guns.
       First, ``gun show'' would be defined to include not only 
     traditional gun shows but also flea markets and others 
     similar venues where firearms are sold.
       Second, ATF would register all persons who promote gun 
     shows. Promoters would be required to notify ATF of the time 
     and location of each gun show, provide ATF with a list of 
     vendors at the show, indicate whether the vendors are FFLs, 
     ensure that all vendors are provided with information about 
     their legal obligations, and require that vendors acknowledge 
     receipt of this information. If a registered promoter fails 
     to fulfill these obligations, ATF would consider revoking or 
     suspending the promoter's registration or imposing a civil 
     monetary penalty. Criminal penalties would also be available 
     in certain circumstances.
       Third, if any part of a firearms transaction, including 
     display of the weapon, occurs at a gun show, the firearm 
     could be transferred only by, or with the assistance of, an 
     FFL. Therefore, if a nonlicensee sought to transfer a 
     firearm, an FFL would be responsible for positively 
     identifying the purchaser, conducting a Brady Act check on 
     the purchaser, and maintaining a record of the transaction. 
     This is the same system that has been used successfully for 
     many years when someone wishes to transfer a firearm to a 
     nonlicensee in another State.
       Fourth, FFLs would be responsible for submitting strictly 
     limited information concerning all firearms transferred at 
     gun shows (e.g., manufacturing/importer, model, and serial 
     number) to ATF's National Tracing, Center (NTC). No 
     information about either the seller or the purchaser would be 
     given to the Government (with the exception of instances in 
     which multiple sales are required.\2\ Instead, the licensees 
     would maintain this information in their files, as is done 
     with all firearms sold by FFL today. The NTC would request 
     this information from an FFL only in the event that the 
     firearm subsequently became the subject of a law enforcement 
     trace request.
       Fifth, the Department of the Treasury and the Department of 
     Justice will review the definition of ``engaged in business'' 
     and make recommendations for legislative or regulatory 
     changes to better identify and prosecute, in all 
     appropriate circumstances, illegal traffickers in firearms 
     and suppliers of guns to criminals.
       Sixth, the Federal Government should commit additional 
     resources to combat the illegal trade of firearms at gun 
     shows. Without a commitment to financially support this 
     initiative, the effectiveness of this proposal would be 
     limited.
       Seventh, in conjunction with the firearms industry, a 
     campaign should be undertaken to encourage all firearms 
     owners to take steps when selling or otherwise disposing of 
     their weapons to ensure that they do not fall into the hands 
     of criminals, unauthorized juveniles, or other prohibited 
     persons.
       Taken together, these recommendations will address the 
     President's goals of preventing firearms sales to prohibited 
     persons at gun shows and better enabling law enforcement to 
     trace crime guns. Whenever any part of a firearms transaction 
     takes place at a gun show, the requirements of the Brady Act 
     will apply, and records will be kept to allow the firearm to 
     be traced if it is later used in crime. If unlicensed 
     individuals wish to sell their personal collections of 
     firearms at gun shows, they will now have the obligation--and 
     the means--to ensure that they are not selling their guns to 
     felons or other prohibited persons. The recommended steps 
     impose reasonable obligations in connection with firearms 
     transactions at gun shows while significantly enhancing law 
     enforcement's ability to prevent criminals from getting guns 
     and to apprehend those who use firearms in the commission of 
     crimes.


                      1. DESCRIPTION OF GUN SHOWS

                 Sponsorship and Operation of Gun Shows

       Shows that specialize primarily in the sale and exchange of 
     all types of firearms are frequent and popular events.\3\ 
     According to the periodical ``Gun Show Calendar'' (Krause 
     Publications), 4,442 such shows were advertised for calendar 
     year 1998. The following are the 10 States where shows were 
     conducted most frequently in 1998:


        State                                           Number of shows
Texas...............................................................472
Pennsylvania........................................................250
Florida.............................................................224
Illinois............................................................203
California..........................................................188
Indiana.............................................................180
North Carolina......................................................170
Oregon..............................................................160
Ohio................................................................148
Nevada..............................................................129

       Most of the shows were promoted by approximately 175 
     organizations and individuals. Most promoters are State and 
     local firearms collector organizations with large 
     memberships, including one group that has 28,000 members. The 
     remainder of the gun shows were promoted by individual 
     collectors and businesspeople. Ordinarily, gun shows are held 
     in public arenas, civic centers, fairgrounds, and armories, 
     and the vendor rents a table from the promoter for a fee 
     ranging from $5 to $50. The number of tables at shows varies 
     from as few as 50 to as many as 2,000.
       Most of the shows are open to the public, and individuals 
     generally pay an admission price of $5 or more to the 
     promoter. In rare instances, public access is limited by 
     invitation only. Most gun shows occur over a 2-day period, 
     generally on weekends, and draw an average of 2,500-5,000 
     people per show.\4\
       Both FFLs and nonlicensees sell firearms at these shows. 
     FFLs make up 50 to 75 percent of the vendors at most gun 
     shows. The majority of vendors who attend shows sell firearms 
     and associated accessories and other paraphernalia. Examples 
     of accessories and paraphernalia include holsters, tactical 
     gear, knives, ammunitions, clothing, food, military 
     artifacts, books, and other literature. Some of the 
     vendors offer accessories and paraphernalia only and do 
     not sell firearms.

[[Page H8606]]

       Public markets for the sale of firearms are not limited to 
     the specialized firearms shows. Large quantities of firearms 
     are also sold by nonlicensees at flea markets and other 
     organized events. As some flea markets, FFLs have established 
     permanent premises from which they conduct their business.
       Both the specialized firearms shows and the broader 
     commercial venues such as flea markets are collectively 
     referred to as ``gun shows'' in the remainder of this report.

                         Types of Firearms Sold

       The types and variety of firearms offered for sale at gun 
     shows include new and used handguns, semiautomatic assault 
     weapons,\5\ shotguns, rifles, and curio or relic firearms.\6\ 
     In addition, vendors offer large capacity magazines \7\ and 
     machinegun parts \8\ for sale.
       The ``high-end'' collector and antique shows and the 
     sporting recreational shows are generally produced by the 
     sporting organizations or avid collectors and enthusiasts. 
     The overall knowledge of the Federal firearms laws and 
     regulations by these promoters is good, and the weapons 
     offered for sale are mostly curios or relics or higher 
     quality modern weapons. At other shows, vendors may be less 
     knowledgeable about the Federal firearms laws, and many of 
     the guns sold are of lower quality and less expensive.

                               Atmosphere

       The casual atmosphere in which firearms are sold at gun 
     shows provides an opportunity for individual buyers and 
     sellers to exchange firearms without the expense of renting a 
     table, and it is not uncommon to see people walking around a 
     show attempting to sell a firearm. They may sell the firearms 
     to a vendor who has rented a table or simply to someone they 
     meet at the show. Many nonlicensees entice potential 
     customers to their tables with comments such as, ``No 
     background checks required; we need only to know where you 
     live and how old you are.'' Many of these unlicensed vendors 
     actively acquire firearms from other vendors to satisfy a 
     buyer's request for a specific firearm that the vendor does 
     not currently possess. Some unlicensed vendors replenish and 
     subsequently dispose of their inventories within a matter of 
     days, often at the same show. Although the majority of people 
     who visit gun shows are law-abiding citizens, too often the 
     shows provide a ready supply of firearms to prohibited 
     persons, gangs, violent criminals, and illegal firearms 
     traffickers.
       Many Federal firearms licensees have complained to ATF 
     about the conduct of nonlicensees at gun shows.\9\ These 
     licensees are understandably concerned that the casual 
     atmosphere of gun shows, combined with the absence of any 
     requirement that an unlicensed vendor check the background of 
     a firearms purchaser, provides an opportunity for felons and 
     other prohibited persons to acquire firearms. Because Federal 
     law neither requires the creation of any record of these 
     unlicensed sales nor places any obligations upon gun show 
     promoters, information is rarely available about the firearms 
     sold should they be recovered in a crime.

                          Gun Shows and Crime

       It is hardly surprising, therefore, that a review of ATF's 
     recent investigations indicates that gun shows provide a 
     forum for illegal firearms sales and trafficking. In 
     preparing this report, the Department of the Treasury, the 
     Department of Justice, ATF, and outside researchers \10\ 
     reviewed 314 recent investigations that involved guns shows 
     in some capacity.\11\ The investigative reports came from 
     each of ATF's 23 field divisions throughout the country \12\ 
     and involved a wide range of criminal activity by FFLs, 
     unlicensed vendors, and felons conspiring with FFLs.\13\ 
     The investigations also involved a wide variety of 
     firearms, including handguns, semiautomatic assault 
     rifles, and machineguns.
       Together, the ATF investigations paint a disturbing picture 
     of gun shows as a venue for criminal activity and a source of 
     firearms used in crimes. Felons, although prohibited from 
     acquiring firearms, have been able to purchase firearms at 
     gun shows. In fact, felons buying or selling firearms were 
     involved in more than 46 percent of the investigations 
     involving gun shows.\14\ In more than a third of the 
     investigations, the firearms involved were known to have been 
     used in subsequent crimes.\15\ These crimes included drug 
     offenses, felons in possession of a firearm, assault, 
     robbery, burglary, and homicide.\16\
       Firearms involved in the 314 reviewed investigations 
     numbered more than 54,000.\17\ A large number of these 
     firearms were sold or purchased at gun shows. More than one-
     third of the investigations involved more than 50 firearms, 
     and nearly one-tenth of the investigations involved more than 
     250 firearms. The two largest investigations were reported to 
     have involved up to 7,000 and 10,000 firearms, respectively. 
     These numbers include both new and used firearms.\18\
       The investigations reveal a diversity of Federal firearms 
     violations associated with gun shows.\19\ Examples of these 
     violations include straw purchases,\20\ out-of-State sales by 
     FFLs, transactions by FFLs without Brady Act checks, and the 
     sale of kits that modify semiautomatic firearms into 
     automatic firearms. Engaging in the business without a 
     license was involved in more than half of all the 
     investigations. Nearly 20 percent involved FFLs who were 
     selling firearms ``off-the-book.'' \21\ The central violation 
     in approximately 15 percent of the investigations was the 
     transfer of firearms to prohibited persons such as felons or 
     juveniles not authorized to possess firearms. Nearly 20 
     percent of the investigations involved violations of the 
     National Firearms Act (NFA), which regulates the possession 
     of certain firearms such as machineguns.\22\
       An examination of individual cases illustrates how gun 
     shows are connected to criminal activity.
       In 1993, ATF uncovered a Tennessee FFL who purchased more 
     than 7,000 firearms, altered the serial numbers, and resold 
     them to two unlicensed dealers who subsequently transported 
     and sold the firearms at gun shows and flea markets in North 
     Carolina. The scheme involved primarily new and used 
     handguns. All three pled guilty to Federal firearms 
     violations. The FFL was sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment; 
     the unlicensed dealers were sentenced to 21 and 25 months' 
     imprisonment, respectively.
       In 1994, ATF recovered two 9mm firearms and the NTC traced 
     them to an FFL in Whittier, California. The FFL had sold over 
     1,700 firearms to unlicensed purchasers over a 4-year period 
     without maintaining any records. Many of the sales occurred 
     at swap meets in California. The firearms were then sold to 
     gang members in Santa Ana and Long Beach, California. Many of 
     the firearms were recovered in crimes of violence, including 
     homicide. Of the five defendants charged, two were 
     convicted--the FFL and one of his unlicensed purchasers. Each 
     was sentenced to 24 months' imprisonment.
       In 1995, an ATF inspector in Pontiac, Michigan, discovered 
     a convicted felon who used a false police identification to 
     buy handguns at gun shows and resold them for profit. Among 
     the firearms purchased were sixteen new and inexpensive 9mm 
     and .380 caliber handguns. Detroit police recovered several 
     of the firearms while investigating a domestic disturbance. 
     The defendant pled guilty to numerous Federal firearms 
     violations and was sentenced to 27 months' imprisonment.
       In addition to analyzing the ATF investigations, ATF 
     supplemented the information with data from the NTC. 
     Approximately 254 individuals identified in the ATF gun show-
     related investigations were checked against data in the 
     Firearms Tracing System and related data bases. Of these, 44 
     appeared in the multiple purchase records with an average of 
     59 firearms per person. Of the 44 individuals, 15 were 
     associated with 50 or more multiple sale firearms; these 
     individuals had a total of 188 crime guns traced to them, 
     an average of approximately 13 firearms each. The largest 
     number of multiple sales firearms associated with one 
     individual was 472; this individual had 53 crime guns 
     traced to him. These patterns are not in and of themselves 
     proof of trafficking. Rather, they are indicators 
     investigators use to assist in trafficking investigations.
       It is difficult to determine the precise extent of criminal 
     activities at gun shows, partly because of the lack of 
     obligations upon unlicensed vendors to keep any records. 
     Nevertheless, the information obtained from the ATF 
     investigations demonstrates that criminals are able to obtain 
     firearms with no background check and that crime guns are 
     transferred at gun shows with no records kept of the 
     transaction.


               2. current law and regulation of gun shows

       The gun show loophole results both from the existing legal 
     framework governing firearms transactions and the limits on 
     the application of existing laws to gun shows. Gun shows 
     themselves are not subject to Federal regulation. Instead, 
     only transfers by FFLs at gun shows are regulated. Few 
     limitations apply to sales by nonlicensees at gun shows or 
     elsewhere. The Federal legal framework governing gun shows 
     and firearms vendors, as well as the State legal framework 
     governing gun shows, is summarized below.

                         The Federal Framework

                Federal Regulations of Firearms Vendors

     Licensed firearms dealers
       The GCA requires that those seeking to ``engage in the 
     business'' of importing, manufacturing, or dealing in 
     firearms must obtain a Federal firearms license from the 
     Secretary of the Treasury.\23\ The Federal firearms license 
     entitles the holder to ship, transport, and receive firearms 
     in interstate or foreign commerce.\24\ The bearer of that 
     license, the FFL, must comply with the obligations that 
     accompany the license. In particular, FFLs must maintain 
     records of all acquisitions and dispositions of firearms and 
     comply with all State and local laws in transferring any 
     firearms.\25\ They must positively identify the purchaser by 
     inspecting a Government-issued photographic identification, 
     such as a driver's license. FFLs must also complete a 
     multiple sales report if they sell two or more handguns to 
     the same purchaser within 5 business days. FFLs may not 
     transfer firearms to felons, persons who have been committed 
     to mental institutions, illegal aliens, or other prohibited 
     persons.\26\ FFLs also may not knowingly transfer firearms to 
     underage persons or handguns to persons who do not reside in 
     the State where they are licensed.\27\
       FFLs must also comply with the provisions of the Brady Act 
     prior to transferring any firearm to a nonlicensee. The Brady 
     Act requires licensees to contact NICS prior to transferring 
     a firearm to any nonlicensed person in order to determine 
     whether receipt of a firearm by the prospective purchaser 
     would be in violation of Federal or State

[[Page H8607]]

     law.\28\ FFLs must maintain a record but need not contact 
     NICS when they sell from their personal collection of 
     firearms. Federal law requires licensees to respond to 
     requests for firearms tracing information within 24 
     hours.\29\ Moreover, ATF has a statutory right to conduct 
     warrantless inspections of the records and inventory of 
     Federal firearms licensees.\30\ An FFL who willfully 
     violates any of the licensing requirements may have his or 
     her license revoked and is subject to imprisonment for not 
     more than 5 years, a fine of not more than $250,000, or 
     both.\31\
       The obligations imposed upon FFLs serve to implement the 
     crime-reduction goals of the GCA. For example, the 
     recordkeeping requirements, interstate controls, and other 
     requirements imposed on licensees are designed to allow the 
     tracing of crime guns through the records of FFLs and to give 
     States the opportunity to enforce their firearms laws.\32\
     Licensed firearms collectors
       The GCA also requires persons to obtain a license as a 
     collector of firearms \33\ if they wish to ship, transport, 
     and receive firearms classified as ``curios or relics'' in 
     interstate or foreign commerce.\34\ For transactions 
     involving firearms other than curios or relics, the licensed 
     collector has the same status as a nonlicensee. ``Curio or 
     relic'' firearms generally are firearms that are of special 
     interest to collectors and are at least 50 years old or 
     derive their value from association with a historical figure, 
     period, or event.\35\ A licensed collector may buy and sell 
     curio or relic firearms for the purpose of enhancing his or 
     her personal collection, but may not lawfully engage in a 
     firearms business in curio or relic firearms without 
     obtaining a dealer's license.\36\ Recordkeeping requirements 
     are imposed on licensed collectors, and ATF has a statutory 
     right to conduct warrantless inspections of the records and 
     inventory of such licensees.\37\ Licensed collectors, like 
     other licensees, are required to respond to requests for 
     firearms trace information within 24 hours.\38\ However, 
     licensed collectors are not subject to the requirements of 
     the Brady Act.\39\
     Nonlicensed firearms sellers
       In contrast to licensed dealers, nonlicensees can sell 
     firearms without inquiring into the identity of the person to 
     whom they are selling, making any record of the transaction, 
     or conducting NICS checks.\40\ Because nonlicensed gun show 
     vendors are not subject to the Brady Act and indeed cannot 
     now conduct a NICS check under Federal law, they often have 
     no way of knowing whether they are selling a firearm to a 
     felon or other prohibited person. The GCA does, however, 
     prohibit nonlicensed persons from acquiring firearms from 
     out-of-State dealers and prohibits nonlicensees from shipping 
     or transporting firearms in interstate or foreign 
     commerce.\41\ Nonlicensees are also prohibited from 
     transferring a firearm to a nonlicensed person who the 
     transferor knows or has reasonable cause to believe does not 
     reside in the State in which the transferor resides.\42\ A 
     nonlicensee also may not transfer a firearm to any person 
     knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the 
     transferee is a felon or other prohibited person.\43\ 
     Finally, nonlicensed persons may not transfer handguns to 
     persons under the age of 18.\44\ Of course, because 
     nonlicensees are not required to inspect the buyer's 
     driver's license or other identification, they may never 
     know that the buyer is underage.
     ``Engaged in the Business''
       Whether an individual seeking to sell a firearm will be 
     regulated as an FFL or nonlicensee depends on whether that 
     individual is ``engaged in the business'' of importing, 
     manufacturing, or dealing in firearms. When Congress enacted 
     the GCA in 1968, it did not provide a definition of the term 
     ``engaged in the business.'' Courts interpreting the term 
     supplied various definitions,\45\ and upheld convictions for 
     engaging in the business without a license under a variety of 
     factual circumstances.\46\
       In 1986, the law was amended to provide the following 
     definition:
       (21) The term ``engaged in the business'' means--

                           *   *   *   *   *

       (C) as applied to a dealer in firearms, . . . a person who 
     devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms as 
     a regular course of trade or business with the principal 
     objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive 
     purchase and resale of firearms, but such term shall not 
     include a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or 
     purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal 
     collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his 
     personal collection of firearms. . . .\47\
       The 1986 amendments to the GCA also defined the term ``with 
     the principal objective of livelihood and profit'' to read as 
     follows:
       (22) The term ``with the principal objective of livelihood 
     and profit'' means that the intent underlying the sale or 
     disposition of firearms is predominantly one of obtaining 
     livelihood and pecuniary gain, as opposed to other intents, 
     such as improving or liquidating a personal firearms 
     collection; Provided, That proof of profit shall not be 
     required as to a person who engages in the regular and 
     repetitive purchase and disposition of firearms for 
     criminal purposes or terrorism. . . .\48\
       Unfortunately, the effect of the 1986 amendments has often 
     been to frustrate the prosecution of unlicensed dealers 
     masquerading as collectors or hobbyists but who are really 
     trafficking firearms to felons or other prohibited persons.

                    Federal Regulation of Gun Shows

       Current Federal law does not regulate gun shows. The GCA 
     does regulate the conduct of FFLs who offer firearms for sale 
     at gun shows. Although the GCA generally limits licensees to 
     conduct business only from their licensed premises,\49\ in 
     1984, ATF issued a regulation allowing licensees to conduct 
     business temporarily at certain gun shows located in the same 
     State as their licensed premises.\50\ The regulatory 
     provision was codified into the law as part of the 1986 
     amendments to the GCA. To qualify for the exception, the gun 
     show or event must be sponsored by a national, State, or 
     local organization devoted to the collection, competitive 
     use, or other sporting use of firearms; and the gun show or 
     event must be held in the State where the licensee's premises 
     is located.
       As a result, an FFL may buy and sell firearms at a gun show 
     provided he or she otherwise complies with all the GCA 
     requirements governing licensee transfers. Nonlicensees, 
     however, may freely transfer firearms at a gun show without 
     observing the recordkeeping and background check requirements 
     imposed upon licensees.

                State Statutory and Regulatory Framework

       More than half of the States impose no prohibition on the 
     private transfer of firearms among nonlicensed persons and do 
     not regulate the operation of gun shows. In some States, the 
     only restrictions imposed on the private sales or transfers 
     of firearms are similar to certain prohibitions set forth by 
     the GCA. For example, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana, 
     and Mississippi prohibit the transfer of certain firearms to 
     felons; minors (or minors without parental consent); or 
     persons who are intoxicated, mentally disturbed, or under the 
     influence of drugs. Some States require permits to obtain a 
     firearm and impose a waiting period before the permit is 
     issued (e.g., 14 days in Hawaii). Other States impose 
     additional requirements (such as completion of a firearms 
     safety course in California) to obtain a license or permit. 
     Some impose a waiting period for all firearms (e.g., 
     Massachusetts), others only for handguns (e.g., Connecticut). 
     Maryland directly regulates the sale of firearms by 
     nonlicensees at gun shows, requiring nonlicensees selling 
     handguns or assault weapons at a gun show to undergo a 
     backgound check to obtain a temporary transfer permit, and 
     limits individuals to five such permits per year.
       Exhibit 2 provides an overview of the laws of those States 
     that regulate the transfer of some or all firearms by persons 
     not licensed as a dealer, and of those States that directly 
     regulate gun shows. None of the solutions proposed in this 
     report will affect any State law or regulation that is more 
     restrictive than the Federal law.


 3. earlier legislative proposals and comments from interested parties

       In developing the recommendations of this report, prior 
     legislative proposals addressing gun shows were considered 
     along with results of surveys of United States Attorneys, 
     interest groups, and individuals concerned with firearms 
     issues. Comments from FFLs and law enforcement officials were 
     also considered.

                         Legislative Proposals

       In the 105th Congress, Representative Rod Blagojevich 
     introduced legislation addressing gun shows, H.R. 3833. 
     Senator Frank Lautenberg introduced a similar bill, S. 2527. 
     The proposed bills generally required any person wishing to 
     operate a ``gun show'' to obtain a license from the Secretary 
     of the Treasury and to provide 30 days' advance notice of the 
     date and location of each gun show held. The gun show 
     licensee would be required to comply with the provisions 
     applicable to dealers under the Brady Act, the general 
     recordkeeping provisions of the GCA, and the multiple sales 
     reporting requirements. These requirements would apply only 
     to transfers of firearms at the gun show by unlicensed 
     persons. Unlicensed vendors would be required to provide the 
     gun show licensee with written notice prior to transferring a 
     firearm at the gun show. The gun show licensee would also be 
     required to deliver to the Secretary of the Treasury all 
     records of firearms transfers collected during the show 
     within 30 days after the show.

                          Responses to Surveys

                        United States Attorneys

       The Department of Justice requested information from United 
     States Attorneys regarding their experience prosecuting cases 
     involving illegal activities at gun shows or in the 
     ``secondary market.'' \51\ Those United States Attorneys who 
     reported cases were asked to describe any particular problems 
     of proof that arose in the cases and whether the existing 
     levels of prosecutional and investigative resources are 
     adequate to address the violations that are identified. 
     Finally, they were asked for their proposals on how to 
     curtail illegal activity at gun shows.
       Some United States Attorneys' offices have had significant 
     experience investigating and prosecuting cases involving 
     illegal activities at gun shows, while others reported no 
     experience with these cases at all. Several common themes 
     emerge from the responses.
       There was widespread agreement among United States 
     Attorneys that it can be difficult to prove that a 
     nonlicensed person is

[[Page H8608]]

     ``engaging in the business'' of firearms dealing without a 
     license under current law. The definitions create substantial 
     investigative and proof problems.\52\ Significant undercover 
     work and follow-up by ATF required to prepare a case 
     against someone for ``engaging in the business.''
       The United States Attorneys were virtually unanimous in 
     their call for additional resources. The number of ATF agents 
     available to investigate cases in many judicial districts 
     falls far below the number required to mount effective 
     enforcement activities at gun shows. United States Attorneys 
     also noted that it will be difficult to devote scarce 
     prosecutorial resources to gun show cases, so long as a 
     number of the offenses remain misdemeanors.
       United States Attorneys offered a wide range of proposals 
     to address the gun show loophole. These include the 
     following: (1) allowing only FFLs to sell guns at gun shows 
     so that a background check and a firearms transaction record 
     accompany every transaction; (2) strengthening the definition 
     of ``engaged in the business'' by defining the terms with 
     more precision, narrowing the exception for ``hobbyists,'' 
     and lowering the intent requirement; (3) limiting the number 
     of private sales permitted by an individual to a specified 
     number per year; (4) requiring persons who sell guns in the 
     secondary market to comply with the recordkeeping 
     requirements that are applicable to FFLs; (5) requiring all 
     transfers in the secondary market to go through an FFL; (6) 
     establishing procedures for the orderly liquidation of 
     inventory belonging to FFLs who surrender their license; (7) 
     requiring registration of nonlicensed persons who sell guns; 
     (8) increasing the punishment for transferring a firearm 
     without a background check as required by the Brady Act; (9) 
     requiring the gun show promoters to be licensed and maintain 
     an inventory of all the firearms that are sold by FFLs and 
     non-FFLs at a gun show; (10) requiring that one or more ATF 
     agents be present at every gun show; and (11) insulating 
     unlicensed vendors from criminal liability if they agree to 
     have purchasers complete a firearms transaction form.
       A small number of United States Attorneys suggesting that 
     existing laws are adequate even though the resources 
     available to enforce these laws are not. While gun shows do 
     not appear to be a problem in every jurisdiction, the 
     majority of United States Attorneys agreed that gun shows are 
     part of a larger, pervasive problem of firearms transfers in 
     the secondary market.

                       Law Enforcement Officials

       Of the 18 State law enforcement officials who responded to 
     the survey, only 1 opposed new restrictions on gun shows. 
     Seventeen officials share the President's concern with the 
     sale of firearms at gun shows without a background check or 
     other recordkeeping requirements and support changes to make 
     these requirements for all gun show transfers. The majority 
     of respondents urged that any changes apply not only to gun 
     shows but to flea markets, swap meets, and other venues where 
     firearms are bought and sold. Several respondents suggested 
     limits on the number of gun shows or caps on the quantities 
     of guns sold by nonlicensees. Others urged increased 
     cooperation with the United States Attorneys to assist in the 
     prosecution of those individuals who violate Federal firearms 
     laws. Finally, the National Sheriffs Association suggested 
     that gun show operators be required to obtain a permit and 
     notify ATF of any gun show.

                                  FFLs

       FFLs submitted 219 responses, of which approximately 30 
     percent requested additional regulations to prevent unlawful 
     activities at gun shows. Many of these FFLs supported a ban 
     on firearms sales by unlicensed persons or, if permitted, 
     urged that Brady checks be required to prevent prohibited 
     persons from acquiring firearms. Other FFLs expressed 
     frustration that unlicensed persons were able to sell to 
     buyers without any paperwork (and advertise this fact), 
     leaving the FFL at a competitive disadvantage. Others 
     suggested that all vendors, licensed or not, should follow 
     the same requirements whether at gun shows, flea markets, or 
     other places where guns are sold. Many of the FFLs 
     recommending additional regulations provided suggestions, 
     some quite detailed, for closing the gun show loophole. These 
     suggestions included registering all firearms owners, 
     licensing promoters, restricting attendance at gun shows, 
     conducting surprise raids at gun shows, requiring that all 
     transfers go through an FFL, and requiring a booth for law 
     enforcement to conduct background checks for all firearms 
     purchases.
       A number of the FFLs who responded believed that the 
     problems at gun shows could be solved if current laws were 
     more strictly enforced. Several of these respondents noted 
     that ATF is already ``spread too thin'' to enforce additional 
     laws. Others suggested that courts need to do a better job of 
     enforcing the existing laws. Many others preferred stiffer 
     sentences for violators of existing law. More than half, 
     however, stated that new laws or restrictions are not the 
     answer. Of this group, many stated that they do not see any 
     illegal activity at gun shows and concluded that no new laws 
     are necessary. Others expressed their belief that sales of 
     private property should not be federally regulated, or they 
     expressed distrust of the Government in general. Also 
     included in this group were FFLs who reported that they do 
     not sell at gun shows for a variety of reasons but oppose new 
     regulations nonetheless.

           Interest Groups, Trade Groups, and Other Responses

       Eight responses were received from firearms interest or 
     trade groups. The National Rifle Association (NRA) opposes 
     any changes to existing laws, contending that only 2 percent 
     of firearms used by criminals come from gun shows. The NRA 
     suggested that regulating the private sale of firearms would 
     create a vast bureaucratic infrastructure and that ATF 
     should instead continue to prosecute those who illegally 
     trade in firearms. The NRA also suggested that many of the 
     current unlicensed dealers would be under ATF scrutiny had 
     they not been discouraged from holding a firearms license. 
     The NRA expressed willingness to publicize the licensing 
     requirements for those who deal in firearms. Similarly, 
     Gun Owners of America recommended no changes to existing 
     law, but suggested a ``stop to this insidious ongoing 
     Federal government assault on American citizenry and to 
     return to the rule of law.''
       By contrast, the National Alliance of Stocking Gun Dealers 
     (NASGD), a trade association consisting of firearms dealers, 
     suggested that every firearm sale at a gun show be regulated 
     and that the purchaser undergo a NICS check. In addition, 
     NASGD suggested: (1) licensing all gun show promoters, 
     auctioneers, and exhibitors; (2) limiting the number of times 
     an FFL may sell at gun shows in a given year; (3) having 
     nonlicensees comply with the same standards as FFLs; (4) 
     requiring promoters to provide ATF and other authorities with 
     the list of vendors at a gun show; and (5) having promoters 
     maintain firearms transaction records and NICS transaction 
     records for all firearms sold at a gun show.
       Handgun Control, Inc. (HCI), suggested that gun show 
     promoters be licensed and that they be authorized to conduct 
     a NICS check on every firearms transfer by an unlicensed 
     dealer. HCI also suggested that a 30-day temporary license be 
     issued (limited to one per year) to any individual wishing to 
     sell at a gun show. The proposed license would permit the 
     sale of no more than 20 handguns, the serial numbers of which 
     would be included in the license application. HCI suggested 
     that ``engaged in the business'' be defined to limit the 
     number of handguns sold from a ``personal collection'' to no 
     more than 3 in a 30-day period. This restriction would not 
     apply to sales to licensees or within one's immediate family. 
     The Coalition to Stop Handgun Violence suggested licensing 
     promoters, requiring a background check on all gun purchases, 
     additional recordkeeping, a limit on the number of firearms 
     purchased by any one person at a gun show, and increased 
     enforcement resources and penalties.
       The Trauma Foundation of San Francisco recommended 
     requiring a background check for all firearms sales, 
     licensing promoters, permitting only FFLs to sell at gun 
     shows, and limiting the number of firearms purchased at a gun 
     show. The United States Conference of Mayors supported one-
     gun-a-month legislation, background checks on all purchases, 
     and increased funding for law enforcement.
       Finally, in reply to open letters posted on the Internet, 
     ATF received 274 responses. The vast majority of these 
     responses either opposed any new restrictions on gun shows or 
     favored enforcement of existing law. Approximately 5 percent 
     favored new laws, usually suggesting a background check for 
     firearms purchasers.


                           4. recommendations

                     Summary of the Recommendations

       These recommendations close the gun show loophole by adding 
     reasonable restrictions and conditions of firearms transfers 
     at gun shows.\53\ The recommendations also ensure that there 
     are adequate resource to enforce the law and that all would-
     be sellers of firearms at gun shows understand the law and 
     the consequences of illegally disposing of guns. Each 
     recommendation will be discussed in detail, but they may be 
     summarized as follows:
       1. Define ``gun show'' to include specialized gun events, 
     as well as flea markets and other markets outside of licensed 
     firearms shops at which 50 or more firearms, in total, are 
     offered for sale by 2 or more persons.
       2. Require gun show promoters to register and to notify ATF 
     of all gun shows, maintain and report a list of vendors at 
     the show, and ensure that all vendors acknowledge receipt of 
     information about their legal obligations.
       3. Require that all firearms transactions at a gun show be 
     completed through an FFL. The FFL would be responsible for 
     conducting a NICS check on the purchaser and maintaining 
     records of the transactions. The failure to conduct a NICS 
     check would be a felony for licensees and nonlicensees.
       4. Require FFLs to submit information necessary to trace 
     all firearms transferred at gun shows to ATF's National 
     Tracing Center. This information would include the 
     manufacturer/importer, model, and serial number of the 
     firearms. No information about either an unlicensed seller or 
     the purchaser would be given to the Government. Instead, as 
     today with all firearms sold by licensees, the FFLs would 
     maintain this information in their files.
       5. Review the definition of ``engaged in the business'' and 
     make recommendations within 90 days for legislative or 
     regulatory changes to better identify and prosecute, in all 
     appropriate circumstances, illegal traffickers in firearms 
     and suppliers of guns to criminals.
       6. Provide additional resources to combat the illegal trade 
     of firearms at gun shows.

[[Page H8609]]

       7. In conjunction with the firearms industry, educate gun 
     owners that, should they sell or otherwise dispose of their 
     firearms, they need to do so responsibly to ensure that they 
     do not fall into the hands of felons, unauthorized juveniles, 
     or other prohibited persons.

                   Explanation of the Recommendations

                         Definition of Gun Show

       There would be a new statutory definition of ``gun show.'' 
     \54\ The definition would read as follows: ``Gun Show. Any 
     event (1) at which 50 or more firearms, 1 or more of which 
     has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign 
     commerce, are offered or exhibited for sale, transfer or 
     exchange; and (2) at which 2 or more persons are offering or 
     exhibiting firearms for sale, transfer, or exchange.''
       This definition encompasses not only events at which the 
     primary commodities displayed and sold are firearms but 
     qualifying flea markets, swap meets, and other secondary 
     markets where guns are sold as well. Requiring there to be 
     two or more persons offering firearms exempts from the 
     definition FFLs selling guns at their business location, as 
     well as the individual selling a personal gun collection at a 
     garage or yard sale. In addition, the legislation requires a 
     minimum of 50 firearms to be offered for sale in order for an 
     event to become a gun show that is subject to the other new 
     requirements. This minimum quantity ensures that private 
     sales of a small number of firearms can continue to take 
     place without being subject to the new requirements.

                           Gun Show Promoters

       Any person who organizes, plans, promotes or operates a gun 
     show, as newly defined, would be required to register with 
     ATF. Gun show promoters would complete a simple form which 
     entitles the promoter to operate a gun show. The registration 
     requirement would go into effect 6 months after the enactment 
     of the legislation to allow time for gun show promoters to 
     comply.
       Thirty days before any gun show, a promoter would be 
     required to inform ATF of the dates, duration, and estimated 
     number of vendors who are expected to participate. This 
     information serves four purposes: First, it advises ATF that 
     a gun show will be taking place. If ATF is in the process of 
     investigating individuals who are violating the law at gun 
     shows in a particular field division, the advance notice will 
     assist ATF in determining whether the target of the 
     investigation might appear at the gun show. Second, the 
     information gives ATF a good idea about the scope and scale 
     of the gun show to enable the agency to make the 
     determination whether ATF should allocate resources to the 
     show for the purpose of investigating possible crimes there. 
     Third, it allows ATF to notify State and local law 
     enforcement about the show, as suggested by the National 
     Sheriffs Association. Finally, the notice involves the 
     promoter at an early stage in identifying who is 
     participating at the gun show.
       Next, by no later than 72 hours before the gun show, the 
     promoter would provide a second notice to ATF identifying all 
     the vendors who plan to participate at the show. The 
     promoter's notice would include the names and licensing 
     status, if any, of all those who have signed up to exhibit 
     firearms. The primary benefits of this notification are 
     twofold. First, the notice gives ATF specific information 
     about vendors who plan to participate at the gun show, along 
     with their status as an FFL or nonlicensee. For any open 
     investigations, this information would prove extremely useful 
     in ATF's enforcement activities. Second, promoters will learn 
     the identities of the vendors so that they can plan for the 
     show. For example, the promoter can determine which of the 
     FFLs will conduct background checks for nonlicensees and, if 
     a significant number of nonlicensees plan to participate in 
     the show, the promoter can plan to have enough ``transfer'' 
     FFLs \55\ present to meet the demand for NICS checks.
       Although vendors who do not sign up for the gun show by the 
     time that the promoter submits the 72-hour notice may still 
     sign up to participate at the show, they will be required to 
     sign the promoter's ledger acknowledging their legal 
     obligations before they may transact business. The promoter 
     will be required to submit the ledger to ATF within 5 
     business days of the end of the show. All vendors will also 
     be required to present to the promoter a valid driver's 
     license or other Government-issued photographic 
     identification.
       A gun show promoter who fails to register or comply with 
     any of these requirements would be subject to having his or 
     her registration denied, suspended, or revoked, as well as 
     being subject to other civil or administrative penalties. 
     Certain violations would be subject to criminal penalties. 
     Vendors who sell at gun shows without signing the promoter's 
     ledger would be similarly subject to civil and criminal 
     penalties. In addition, if the vendor provides false 
     information to the promoter in the ledger, the vendor would 
     be liable for making a false statement.
       Imposing these requirements on gun show promoters will make 
     them more accountable for controlling their shows and 
     ensuring that only vendors who comply with the law 
     participate at gun shows. Although promoters will not be 
     directly responsible for the performance of NICS background 
     checks at gun shows, it will be in the promoter's interest to 
     make sure that background checks are being performed in 
     connection with each and every firearms transfer that takes 
     place in whole or in part at the gun show. Gun show promoters 
     profit greatly from the gun sales that take place at gun 
     shows. However, until now, the Federal Government has not 
     imposed any obligations on the promoter to encourage 
     compliance with the law by all of the participants at the gun 
     show. Placing an affirmative obligation on gun show promoters 
     to notify vendors of their legal obligations will go a long 
     way toward ensuring that only lawful transactions take place 
     at gun shows.
       Requiring vendors to sign the ledger and acknowledge that 
     they have received information about and understand their 
     legal obligations will prevent vendors from claiming that 
     they did not know that they were required to complete all 
     firearms transactions at a gun show through an FFL.

                              NICS Checks

       No gun would be sold, transferred, or exchanged at a gun 
     show before a NICS background check is performed on the 
     transferee. the Brady Act permit exception would apply to 
     firearms sales at gun shows. FFLs who participate in the gun 
     show would be required to request NICS checks for all buyers, 
     whether the FFL sells firearms out of the FFL's inventory or 
     the FFL's personal collection. Nonlicensed sellers at the gun 
     show must arrange for all purchasers to go to a transfer FFL 
     to request a NICS check. Any FFL attending a gun show may act 
     as a transfer FFL to facilitate nonlicensee sales of 
     firearms. However, FFLs will not be required to perform this 
     service; they will do so only voluntarily. FFLs may choose to 
     charge a fee for providing this service. By having the FFL 
     request the background check, the proposal takes full 
     advantage of the existing licensing scheme for FFLs, the 
     FFLs' knowledge of firearms, and the FFLs' access to NICS.
       The unlicensed seller may not transfer the firearm to the 
     purchaser until the seller receives verification that the 
     transfer FFL has performed a NICS background check on the 
     purchaser and learned that there is no disqualifying 
     information. The FFL's role is limited to facilitating the 
     transfer by performing the NICS check and keeping the 
     required records. Any FFL or non-FFL who transfers a firearm 
     in whole or in part at a gun show without completing a NICS 
     check on the purchaser to determine that the transferee is 
     not prohibited could be charged with a felony.\56\
       Prohibiting any firearms from being sold, transferred, or 
     exchanged in whole or in part at a gun show until the 
     transferee has been cleared by a background check establishes 
     parameters that encompass all vendors, regardless of whether 
     they are licensed. No FFL may claim that a background check 
     is not required because the firearm is being sold out of the 
     FFL's personal collection, nor will the distinction between 
     FFLs and non-licensed dealers make any difference for NICS 
     checks. When any part of the transaction takes place at a gun 
     show,\57\ each and every vendor at a gun show will require a 
     transferee to undergo a background check before the firearm 
     can be transferred.\58\

                     Records for Tracing Crime Guns

       Before clearing a transfer of any firearm by a nonlicensee, 
     the transfer FFL would complete a form similar to the 
     firearms transaction record currently used by FFLs. This 
     firearms transaction record would be maintained in the FFL's 
     records, along with the other records of firearms transferred 
     directly by the FFL.
       In addition, FFLs would be responsible for submitting to 
     the NTC strictly limited information concerning firearms 
     transferred at gun shows, whether the FFL is the seller or 
     merely the transfer FFL. The information would consist of the 
     manufacturer/importer, model, and serial number of the 
     firearm. No personal information about either the seller or 
     the purchaser would be given to the Government. Instead, as 
     today with all firearms sold by FFLs, the licensees would 
     maintain this information in their files. The NTC would 
     request this information from an FFL only in the event that 
     the firearm subsequently becomes the subject of a law 
     enforcement trace request. In addition, FFLs would complete a 
     multiple sale form if they record the sale by a nonlicensee 
     of two or more handguns to the same purchaser within 5 
     business days, as is currently required for transactions by 
     FFLs.
       This requirement provides a simple and easy-to-administer 
     means of reestablishing the chain of ownership for guns that 
     are transferred at gun shows. If the firearm appears at a 
     crime scene and there is a legitimate law enforcement need to 
     trace the firearm, ATF will be able to match the serial 
     number of the crime gun to the record and identify the FFL 
     who is maintaining the firearms transaction form. ATF can 
     then go to the FFL who submitted the information on the 
     firearm and review the record that is on file with the FFL. 
     This form will contain information about the transferor and 
     transferee, and ATF can trace the firearm using that 
     information. It is important to emphasize that ATF traces 
     guns according to specific protocols and requirements, 
     ensuring that the firearms information will not be used to 
     identify purchasers of a particular firearm except as 
     required for a legitimate law enforcement purposes.

               Definition of ``Engaged in the Business''

       Not surprisingly, significant illegal dealing in firearms 
     by unlicensed persons occurs at

[[Page H8610]]

     gun shows. More than 50 percent of recent ATF investigations 
     of illegal activity at gun shows focused on persons allegedly 
     engaged in the business of dealing without a license. 
     Unfortunately, the current definition of ``engaged in the 
     business'' often frustrates the prosecution of people who 
     supply guns to felons and other prohibited persons. Although 
     illegal activities by unlicensed traffickers often become 
     evident to investigators quickly, months of undercover work 
     and surveillance are frequently necessary to prove each of 
     the elements in the current definition and to disprove the 
     applicability of any of the several statutory exceptions.
       To draw a more distinct line between those who are engaged 
     in the business of firearms dealing and those who are not, 
     and to facilitate the prosecution of those who are illegally 
     trafficking in guns to felons and other prohibited persons--
     at gun shows and elsewhere--the GCA should be amended. 
     Accordingly, the Department of the Treasury and the 
     Department of Justice will review the definition of 
     ``engaged in the business'' and make recommendations 
     within 90 days for legislative or regulatory changes to 
     better identify and prosecute, in all appropriate 
     circumstances, illegal traffickers in firearms and 
     suppliers of guns to criminals.

                     Need for Additional Resources

       To adequately enforce existing law as well as the foregoing 
     proposals, more resources are needed. There are more than 
     4,000 specialized gun shows per year, and enforcement and 
     regulatory activity must also occur at the other public 
     venues where firearms are sold.
       All of the previous recommendations will help close the 
     existing gun show loophole, but they will not completely 
     eradicate criminal activity at gun shows and in the rest of 
     the secondary market. As the review of ATF investigations and 
     United States Attorney prosecutions revealed, a substantial 
     number of the crimes associated with gun shows are committed 
     by FFLs who deal off the book and ignore their legal 
     obligations. While a requirement that all gun show 
     transactions be recorded and NICS checks completed will make 
     it somewhat easier to identify off-the-book dealers, a 
     markedly increased enforcement effort will be required to 
     shut down these illegal markets. Further, ATF will need to 
     focus on preventive educational initiatives, as described 
     below. To accomplish all of these goals, significant 
     resources will be required for more criminal and regulatory 
     enforcement personnel, as well as prosecutors.
       Without a commitment to financially support his initiative, 
     its effectiveness will be limited. The Departments of Justice 
     and the Treasury will submit budget proposals to fund this 
     initiative at an appropriate level.

                          Educational Campaign

       Finally, a campaign should be undertaken in conjunction 
     with the firearms industry to educate firearms owners that, 
     should they sell or otherwise dispose of their firearms, they 
     need to do so responsibly to ensure that the weapons do not 
     fall into the hands of felons, unauthorized juveniles or 
     other prohibited persons. The vast majority of firearms 
     owners are law-abiding and certainly do not want their 
     firearms to be used for crime but, under the current system, 
     they can unwittingly sell firearms to prohibited persons.
       The educational campaign could involve setting up booths at 
     gun shows to explain the law, encouraging unlicensed sellers 
     to ``know their buyer'' by asking for identification and 
     keeping a record of those to whom they sell their firearms; 
     developing videos and news articles for promoters, dealers, 
     trade groups, and groups of firearms owners describing legal 
     obligations and liability and the need to exercise personal 
     responsibility; and distributing posters and handouts with 
     tips for identifying and reporting suspicious activity.


                             5. conclusion

       Although Brady Act background checks have been successful 
     in preventing felons and other prohibited persons from buying 
     firearms from FFLs, gun shows leave a major loophole in the 
     regulation of firearms sales. Gun shows provide a large 
     market where criminals can shop for firearms anonymously. 
     Unlicensed sellers have no way of knowing whether they are 
     selling to a violent felon or someone who intends to 
     illegally traffic guns on the streets to juveniles or gangs. 
     Further, unscrupulous gun dealers can use these free-flowing 
     markets to hide their off-the-book sales. While most gun show 
     sellers are honest and law-abiding, it only takes a few to 
     transfer large numbers of firearms into dangerous hands.
       The proposals in this report strike a balance between the 
     interests of law-abiding citizens and the needs of law 
     enforcement. Specifically, the proposals will allow gun shows 
     to continue to provide a legal forum for the sale and 
     exchange of firearms and will not prevent the sale or 
     acquisition of firearms by sportsmen and firearms 
     enthusiasts. At the same time, this initiative will ensure 
     background checks of all firearms purchasers at gun shows and 
     assist law enforcement in preventing firearms sales to felons 
     and other prohibited persons, as well as inhibiting illegal 
     firearms trafficking. The proposals also ensure that gun show 
     promoters run their shows responsibly, that all firearms 
     purchases at gun shows are subject to NICS checks, and that 
     all firearms sold at the shows can be traced if they are used 
     in crime. Further, these recommendations will guarantee that 
     everyone selling at gun shows understands the legal 
     obligations and the risks of disposing of firearms 
     irresponsibly and that law enforcement has the resources 
     necessary to investigate and prosecute those who violate the 
     law. In short, as requested by President Clinton, the 
     proposals will close the gun show loophole.


                               footnotes

     \1\ See exhibit 1.
     \2\ As required by the Gun Control Act, FFLs must complete 
     multiple sales records whenever two or more handguns are sold 
     to the same purchaser within 5 business days.
     \3\ ATF interviewed promoters, made field observations, and 
     reviewed data obtained over a 5-year period to provide 
     information for this report.
     \4\ This information was provided by officials from the 
     National Association of Arms Shows, which represents many of 
     the gun show promoters.
     \5\ Semiautomatic assault weapons may be legally transferred 
     in unrestricted commercial sales if they were manufactured on 
     or before September 13, 1994. Weapons manufactured after that 
     date may be transferred to or possessed by law enforcement 
     agencies, law enforcement officers employed by such agencies 
     for official use, security guards employed by nuclear power 
     plants, and retired law enforcement officers who are 
     presented the weapons by their agencies upon retirement. (See 
     18 U.S.C. 922(v).)
     \6\ Curios or relics are firearms of special interest to 
     collectors by reason of some quality other than those 
     associated with firearms intended for sporting use or as 
     offensive or defensive weapons. Curios or relics include 
     firearms that are at least 50 years old, are certified by the 
     curator of a Government museum to be of museum interest, or 
     are other firearms that derive a substantial part of their 
     value from the fact that they are novel, rare, or bizarre or 
     because of their association with some historical figure, 
     period, or event. (See 27 CFR 178.11.)
     \7\ Magazines with a capacity of more than 10 rounds may be 
     transferred or possessed without restriction if they were 
     manufactured on or before September 13, 1994. Large capacity 
     magazines manufactured after that date may be transferred to 
     or possessed by law enforcement agencies, law enforcement 
     officers employed by such agencies for official use, security 
     guards employed by nuclear power plants, and retired law 
     enforcement officers who are presented the magazines by their 
     agencies upon retirement. (See 18 U.S.C. 922(w).)
     \8\ The National Firearms Act (NFA), 26 U.S.C. Chapter 53, 
     regulates machineguns, which are defined as any weapon which 
     shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to 
     shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual 
     reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term also 
     includes the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part 
     designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination 
     of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a 
     weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from 
     which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the 
     possession or under the control of a person. (See 26 U.S.C. 
     5845.) Machineguns must be registered with the Secretary of 
     the Treasury, and those manufactured on or after May 19, 
     1986, are generally unlawful to possess. (See 18 U.S.C. 
     922(o).) Parts for machineguns that do not fall within the 
     statutory definition of machinegun (e.g., they are not 
     conversion kits or frames or receivers) may be legally sold 
     without restriction.
     \9\ When appropriate, ATF investigated these complaints and 
     took action ranging from warning letters explaining the need 
     for a license to engage in the business of dealing in 
     firearms, to referring a case to the United States Attorney 
     for prosecution.
     \10\ David M. Kennedy and Anthony Braga, both of the John F. 
     Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
     \11\ See Appendix, table 1. The large majority of the 
     investigations reviewed for this report were from 1997 and 
     1998. The remainder of the investigations was from the years 
     1994 through 1996, with one investigation each from 1991 and 
     1992. Forty-one investigations involved what may be described 
     as flea markets, and three investigations involved firearms 
     sales at auctions. The methodology of the review and a more 
     detailed analysis of the results are set forth in the 
     appendix.
     \12\ See Appendix, table 2.
     \13\ See Appendix, table 3. Current and former FFLs were the 
     subject of a significant number of investigations.
     \14\ See Appendix, table 3.
     \15\ See Appendix, table 4.
     \16\ See Appendix, table 4.
     \17\ See Appendix, table 5.
     \18\ See Appendix, table 6. Because tracing a firearm 
     generally requires an unbroken chain of dispositions from 
     manufacturer to first retail purchaser, used guns--including 
     those sold at gun shows--have rarely been traceable.
     \19\ See Appendix, table 7.
     \20\ A ``straw purchase'' occurs when the actual buyer of a 
     firearm uses another person, the ``straw purchaser,'' to 
     execute the paperwork necessary to purchase a firearm from an 
     FFL. Specifically, the actual buyer uses the straw purchaser 
     to execute the firearms transaction record, purporting to 
     show that the straw purchaser is the actual purchaser of the 
     firearm. Often, a straw purchaser is used because the actual 
     purchaser is prohibited from acquiring the firearm because of 
     a felony conviction or another disability.
     \21\ ``Off-the-book'' sales are those made by FFLs without 
     conducting Brady Act background checks and without recording 
     the sale as required by the law and regulations.
     \22\ Under the NFA, certain firearms and other weapons must 
     be registered. (See 26 U.S.C. chapter 53.) Table 8 shows the 
     types of weapons involved in the investigations involving NFA 
     violations. For example, more than half of the NFA 
     investigations involved machineguns, while 11 percent 
     involved grenade launchers.
     \23\ 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 922(a)(1) and 923(a).
     \24\ See id.
     \25\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 922(a)(1), (a)(3), (a)(5), 
     (b)(2), and 923(g).
     \26\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(d). The 1986 amendments to the 
     GCA also made it unlawful for any person to transfer any 
     firearm to any person knowing or having reasonable cause to 
     believe that such person is a prohibited person.
     \27\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 922(b)(1), 922(b)(3), and 
     922(x).
     \28\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(t). A NICS check is not required 
     if the buyer represents to the FFL, a valid permit to possess 
     or acquire a firearm that was issued not more than 5 years 
     earlier by the State in which the transfer is to take place, 
     and the law of the State provides that the permit is to be 
     issued only after a Government official verifies that the 
     information available to the official, including a NICS 
     check, does not indicate that the possession of the firearm 
     by the person would violate the law.
     \29\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 923(g)(7).
     \30\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 923(g)(1)(B). Warrantless inspections 
     are limited to those conducted (1) in the

[[Page H8611]]

     course of a criminal investigation of a person other than the 
     licensee, (2) during an annual compliance inspection, and (3) 
     for purposes of firearms tracing. Id. Inspections may also be 
     conducted pursuant to a warrant issued by a Federal 
     magistrate upon demonstration that there is reasonable cause 
     to believe that a violation of the GCA has occurred and that 
     evidence of such violation may be found on the licensee's 
     premises. See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 923(g)(1)(A).
     \31\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 923(e) and 924(a)(1)(D). Under 
     current law, an FFL's failure to perform a NICS check is a 
     misdemeanor.
     \32\ S. Rep No. 1501, 22, 25 (1968).
     \33\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 923(b).
     \34\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 922(a)(2), (a)(3).
     \35\ See 7 C.F.R. Sec. 178.11.
     \36\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 922(a)(1), and 923(a).
     \37\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 923(g)(2), (g)(1)(C).
     \38\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 923(g)(7).
     \39\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(t)(1).
     \40\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 922(t), and 923(g)(1)(A).
     \41\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(a)(3). An exception to this rule 
     is provided for sales of rifles or shotguns by licensed 
     dealers to nonlicensed persons if the purchaser appears in 
     person at the dealer's licensed premises and the sale, 
     delivery, and receipt comply with the legal conditions of 
     sale in both the seller's State and the buyer's State. See 18 
     U.S.C. Sec. 922(b)(3).
     \42\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(a)(5). Exceptions to this 
     prohibition are provided for transfers of firearms made to 
     carry out a bequest or intestate succession of a firearm and 
     for the loan or rental of a firearm for temporary use for 
     lawful sporting purposes. Id.
     \43\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(d).
     \44\ See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 922(x). A number of exceptions apply 
     to this prohibition, including temporary transfers in the 
     course of employment, for ranching or farming, for target 
     practice, for hunting, or for firearms safety instruction. 
     These exceptions all require that the juvenile to whom the 
     handgun is transferred obtain prior written consent from a 
     parent or guardian and that the written consent be in the 
     juvenile's possession at the time the juvenile possesses the 
     handgun. Id.
     \45\ Compare United States v. Gross, 451 F.2d 1355, 1357 (7th 
     Cir. 1971) (one engages in a firearms business where one 
     devotes time, attention and labor for the purpose of 
     livelihood or profit) with United States v. Shirling, 572 
     F.2d 532, 534 (5th Cir. 1978) (profit motive not 
     determinative where one has firearms on hand or ready to 
     procure them for purpose of sale).
     \46\ See United States v. Hernandez, 662 F.2d (5th Cir. 1981) 
     (30 firearms bought and sold over a 4-month period); United 
     States v. Perkins, 633 F.2d 856 (8th Cir. 1981) (three 
     transactions involving eight firearms over 3 months); United 
     States v. Huffman, 518 F.2d 80 (4th Cir. 1975) (more than 12 
     firearms transactions over ``a few months''); United States 
     v. Ruisi, 460 F.2d 153 (2d Cir. 1972) (codefendants sold 11 
     firearms at a single gun show); United States v. Gross, 451 
     F.2d 1355 (7th Cir. 1971) (11 firearms sold over 6 weeks); 
     United States v. Zeidman, 444 F.2d 1051 (7th Cir. 1971) (six 
     firearms sold over 2 weeks).
     \47\ 18 U.S.C. Sec. 921(a)(21)(C).
     \48\ 18 U.S.C. Sec. 921(a)(22).
     \49\ 18 U.S.C. Sec. 923(a).
     \50\ T.D. ATF-191, 49 Fed. Reg. 46,889 (November 29, 1984).
     \51\ The ``secondary market'' refers to the sale and purchase 
     of firearms after FFLs sell them at retail.
     \52\ A recent case of an unlicensed individual who bought and 
     sold numerous firearms illustrates the difficulty involved 
     with prosecuting defendants charges with engaging in the 
     business of dealing in firearms without a license. ATF agents 
     discovered that an unlicensed person had purchased 124 
     handguns and 27 long guns from an FFL, as well as additional 
     firearms from flea markets and garage sales. When questioned, 
     the defendant admitted that he intended to resell them. At 
     trial, the defendant contended that buying and selling guns 
     was his hobby. The court, relying on the statutory 
     definition, instructed the jury that a person engages in the 
     business of dealing in firearms when it occupies time, 
     attention, and labor for the purpose of livelihood and 
     profit, as opposed to as a pastime, hobby, or being a 
     collector. When the jury asked for a definition of 
     ``livelihood,'' the court explained that the term was not 
     defined in the law and that the jury needed to rely on its 
     common understanding of the term. The jury acquitted the 
     defendant for engaging in the firearms dealing business. 
     However, the jury convicted the defendant for falsely stating 
     on the firearms transaction record executed at the time of 
     purchase that he was the actual buyer, when in fact, he had 
     intended to resell them.
     \53\ All of the recommendations except number 7 and part of 
     number 5 would require legislation.
     \54\ Although the GCA does not define ``gun show,'' the GCA 
     does refer to ``gun shows'' in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 923(j), the 
     exception that permits FFLs to sell firearms away from their 
     business premises under certain circumstances, including 
     ``gun shows.''
     \55\ The transfer FFL does not act as the seller, but rather 
     acts voluntarily in connection with a transfer by a 
     nonlicensee or licensed collector.
     \56\ The legislative proposal would elevate the gravity of 
     the offense of not conducting a NICS check for FFLs from a 
     misdemeanor--which is presently contained in the Brady Act--
     to a felony regardless of the venue of the transaction.
     \57\ Requiring a NICS check when ``any part of the 
     transaction takes place at a gun show''ensures that buyers 
     and sellers do not attempt to avoid the requirement by 
     completing only a part of the sale, exchange, or transfer at 
     the gun show. For example, if a nonlicensed vendor displays a 
     gun at a gun show but the actual transfer occurs outside the 
     gun show in the parking lot, the vendor is prohibited from 
     transferring the gun without a NICS check on the purchaser.
     \58\ The recommendations made in this report would be in 
     addition to any requirements imposed under State or local 
     law.

                              [Exhibit 1]

                                                  The White House,


                                Office of the Press Secretary,

                                   Highfill, AR, November 6, 1998.
     Memorandum for the Secretary of the Treasury
     The Attorney General
     Subject: Preventing Firearms Sales to Prohibited Purchasers.
       Since 1993, my Administration has worked hand-in-hand with 
     State and local law enforcement agencies and the communities 
     they serve to rid our neighborhoods of gangs, guns, and 
     drugs--and by doing so to reduce crime and the fear of crime 
     throughout the country. Our strategy is working. Through the 
     historic Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 
     1994, we have given communities the tools and resources they 
     need to help drive down the crime rate to its lowest point in 
     a generation. Keeping guns out of the hand of criminals 
     through the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act's 
     background checks has also been a key part of this strategy. 
     Over the past 5 years, Brady background checks have helped 
     prevent a quarter of a million handgun sales to felons, 
     fugitives, domestic violence abusers, and other prohibited 
     purchasers--saving countless lives and preventing needless 
     injuries.
       On November 30, 1998, the permanent provisions of the Brady 
     Law will take effect, and the Department of Justice will 
     implement the National Instant Criminal Background Check 
     System (NICS). The NICS will allow law enforcement officials 
     access to a more inclusive set of records than is now 
     available and will--for the first time--extend the Brady 
     Law's background Law's background check requirement to long 
     guns and firearm transfers at pawnshops. Under the NICS, the 
     overall number of background checks conducted before the 
     purchase of a firearm will increase from an estimated 4 
     million annually to as many as 12 million.
       We can, however, take additional steps to strengthen the 
     Brady Law and help keep our streets safe from gun-carrying 
     criminals. Under current law, firearms can be--and an untold 
     number are--bought and sold entirely without background 
     checks, at the estimated 5,000 private gun shows that take 
     place across the country. This loophole makes gun shows prime 
     targets for criminals and gun traffickers, and we have good 
     reason to believe that firearms sold in this way have been 
     used in serious crimes. In addition, the failure to maintain 
     records at gun shows often thwarts needed law enforcement 
     efforts to trace firearms. Just days ago, Florida voters 
     overwhelmingly passed a ballot initiative designed to 
     facilitate background checks at gun shows. It is now time for 
     the Federal Government to take appropriate action, on a 
     national level, to close this loophole in the law.
       Therefore, I request that, within 60 days, you recommend to 
     me what actions our Administration can take--including 
     proposed legislation--to ensure that firearms sales at gun 
     shows are not exempt from Brady background checks or other 
     provisions of our Federal gun laws.
                                               William J. Clinton.

 EXHIBIT 2.--DIGEST OF SELECTED STATES WITH LAWS REGULATING TRANSFERS OF FIREARMS BETWEEN UNLICENSED PERSONS OR
                                              GUN SHOWS (12/21/98)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               State                   Regulation of gun shows?        Regulation of all firearms transfers?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pennsylvania: 18 Pa. Stat. Ann.      NO.........................  YES. Nonlicense wishing to transfer firearm to
 Sec.  6111; Sec.  6113..                                          nonlicense must do so through licensee or at
                                                                   county sheriff's office. The licensee must
                                                                   conduct background check as if he or she were
                                                                   the seller. Exclusions apply for certain
                                                                   firearms, family member transfers, law
                                                                   enforcement, or where local authority
                                                                   certifies that transferee's life is
                                                                   threatened.
California: Cal. Penal Code Sec.     YES. Must receive state      YES. All transfers for firearms must be
 12071.1; Sec.  12082..               certificate of eligibility   through a licensed dealer who must conduct a
                                      to operate gun show..        background check.
Illinois: 430 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann.  NO.........................  YES. No one may lawfully possess any firearm
 Sec. Sec.  65/2(a)(1), 65/3..                                     without possessing a Firearms Owner's
                                                                   Identification Card (FOIC) issued by the
                                                                   State police. Each transferee of any firearm
                                                                   must possess a valid FOIC. Transferor must
                                                                   keep record of transaction for 10 years.
Virginia: Va. Code Ann. Sec. Sec.    YES. Promoter of firearm     NO.
 52-8.4:1, 54.1-4200, 54.1-4201.1..   show must provide 30 days'
                                      notice, and provide pre-
                                      and post-show list of each
                                      vendor's name and business
                                      address..
District of Columbia: D.C. Code      NO.........................  YES. It is unlawful to possess any firearm
 Ann. Sec.  6-2311..                                               that is not registered.
Virgin Islands: V.I. Code tit. 23,   NO.........................  YES. No transfer of a firearm is lawful
 Sec.  461..                                                       without prior approval by Commissioner of
                                                                   Licensing and Consumer Affairs.
Florida:...........................  NO.........................  Under Art. VIII, Sec. 5 of Florida
                                                                   Constitution, counties are now free to impose
                                                                   waiting periods and background checks for all
                                                                   firearm sales in places where public has the
                                                                   right of access; ``sale'' requires
                                                                   consideration.
Puerto Rico: P.R. Laws Ann., tit.    NO.........................  YES. All firearms must be registered and
 25, Sec. Sec.  429, 438, 439..                                    transfers must be through a licensed dealer.
North Carolina: N.C. Gen. Stat.      NO.........................  NO. However, no transfer of a pistol is lawful
 Sec.  14-402..                                                    without the transferee first obtaining a
                                                                   license from the county sheriff.
Hawaii: Haw. Rev. Stat. Sec. Sec.    NO.........................  YES. No person may acquire ownership of a
 134-2, 134-3, 134-4..                                             firearm until the person first obtains a
                                                                   permit from the local police chief. A
                                                                   separate permit is required for each handgun
                                                                   or pistol; a shotgun or rifle allows multiple
                                                                   acquisitions up to one year.
Iowa: Iowa Code Ann. Sec.  724.16..  NO.........................  NO. However, it is unlawful to transfer a
                                                                   pistol or revolver without an annual permit
                                                                   to acquire pistols and revolvers.
Minnesota: Minn. Stat. Ann. Sec.     NO.........................  NO. However, it is unlawful to transfer a
 Sec.  624.7131, 624.7132..                                        pistol or semiautomatic assault weapon
                                                                   without executing a transfer report, signed
                                                                   by transferor and transferee and presented to
                                                                   the local police chief of the transferee, who
                                                                   shall conduct a background check.

[[Page H8612]]

 
Maryland: 27 Md. Code Ann. Sec.      YES. Nonlicensed persons     NO.
 Sec.  442, 443A(a)..                 selling a handgun or
                                      assault weapon at a gun
                                      show must obtain a
                                      transfer permit; a
                                      background check is
                                      conducted on the
                                      applicant. An individual
                                      is limited to five permits
                                      per year..
Missouri: Mo. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sec.   NO.........................  YES. It is unlawful to buy, sell, exchange,
 571.080..                                                         loan, or borrow a firearm without first
                                                                   receiving a valid permit authorizing the
                                                                   acquisition of the firearm.
South Dakota: S.D. Codified Laws     NO.........................  NO. However, it is unlawful to transfer a
 Sec. Sec.  23-7-9, 7-10..                                         pistol to a person who has purchased a pistol
                                                                   until after 48 hours of the sale. Exceptions
                                                                   apply for holders of concealed pistol permit.
New York: NY Penal Law Sec.          NO.........................  YES. As a general matter, no person may
 400.00(16) and Sec. Sec.  265.11-                                 possess, receive, or sell a firearm without
 13..                                                              first obtaining a permit or license from the
                                                                   State. Thus, all lawful firearms transfers in
                                                                   New York, including those at gun shows, would
                                                                   be between licensees or permittees.
New Jersey: N.J. Stat. Ann. Sec.     NO.........................  YES. It is unlawful to sell a firearm unless
 2C: 39-3; 58-3..                                                  licensed or registered to do so. No
                                                                   unlicensed person may acquire a firearm
                                                                   without a purchase permit or firearms
                                                                   purchaser identification card.
New Hampshire: N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann.  NO.........................  NO. However, it is unlawful for a nonlicensee
 Sec.  159..                                                       not engaged in the business to transfer a
                                                                   pistol to a person who is not personally
                                                                   known to the transferor.
Connecticut: Connecticut General     NO.........................  YES. Anyone who sells 10 or more handguns in a
 Statute Sec. Sec.  29-28 through                                  calendar year must have a FFL or a State
 29-37..                                                           permit. Nonlicensees wishing to transfer a
                                                                   firearm must receive from the prospective
                                                                   purchaser an application which is then
                                                                   submitted to local and State authorities.
                                                                   Exceptions are for licensed hunters
                                                                   purchasing long guns and members of the Armed
                                                                   Forces.
Massachusetts: Mass. Gen. Laws Ann.  NO.........................  NO. However, State law provides that any
 Ch. 140 Sec.  129C; Sec.  128A;                                   person may transfer up to four firearms to
 Sec.  128B..                                                      any nonlicensed person per calendar year
                                                                   without obtaining a State license, provided
                                                                   seller forwards name of seller, purchaser,
                                                                   and information about the firearm to State
                                                                   authorities.
Rhode Island: R.I. Gen. Laws Sec.    NO.........................  YES. No person may sell a firearm without
 Sec.  11-47-35, 36, 40..                                          purchaser completing application which is
                                                                   submitted to State police for background
                                                                   check. Seller obligated to maintain register
                                                                   recording information about the transaction,
                                                                   such as date, name, age and residence of
                                                                   purchaser.
Michigan: Mich. Comp. Laws Sec.      NO.........................  NO. However, no transfer of a pistol is lawful
 Sec.  750.223; 750.422..                                          without the transferee first obtaining a
                                                                   handgun purchase permit from the local CLEO.
Nevada: Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. Sec.    NO.........................  NO. However, a private person wishing to
 202.254..                                                         transfer a firearm may request a State
                                                                   background check on the prospective
                                                                   transferee.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                APPENDIX

                              Methodology

       The following analyses are based on a survey of ATF special 
     agents reporting information about recent investigations 
     associated with gun shows. The investigations reflect what 
     ATF has encountered and investigated; they do not necessarily 
     reflect typical criminal diversions of firearms at gun shows 
     or the typical acquisition of firearms by criminals through 
     gun shows. Furthermore, they do not provide information about 
     the significance of diversion associated with gun shows with 
     respect to other sources of diversion. Nevertheless, they 
     suggest that the criminal diversion of firearms at and 
     through gun shows is an important crime and public safety 
     problem.
       The analyses use data from investigations referred for 
     prosecution and adjudicated, and investigations that have not 
     yet been referred for prosecution. Thus, not all violations 
     described will necessarily be charged as crimes or result in 
     convictions. As a consequence, the exact number of offenders 
     in the investigation, the numbers and types of firearms 
     involved, and the types of crimes associated with recovered 
     firearms may not have been fully known to the case agents at 
     the time of the request, and some information may be 
     underreported. For example, it is likely that the number of 
     firearms involved in the investigations could increase, as 
     could the number and types of violations, as more information 
     is uncovered by the agents working the investigations.
       Information generated as part of a criminal investigation 
     also does not necessarily capture data on the dimensions 
     ideally suited to a more basic inquiry about trafficking and 
     trafficking patterns. For example, investigative information 
     necessary to build a strong case worth of prosecution may 
     provide very detailed descriptions of firearms used as 
     evidence in the case but may not even estimate, much less 
     describe in detail, all the firearms involved in the 
     trafficking enterprise.
       Information was not provided with enough consistency and 
     specificity to determine the number of handguns, rifles, and 
     shotguns trafficked in a particular investigation. Likewise, 
     special agents may not have information on trafficked 
     firearms subsequently used in crime. Such information is not 
     always available. Comprehensive tracing of crime guns does 
     not exist nationwide and, until the very recent Youth Crime 
     Gun Interdiction Initiative, most major cities did not trace 
     all recovered crime guns. The figures on new, used, and 
     stolen firearms reflect the number of investigations in which 
     the traffickers were known to deal in these kinds of weapons. 
     The figures on stolen firearms are subject to the usual 
     problems associated with determining whether a firearm has 
     been stolen. Many stolen firearms are not reported to the 
     police. Such limitations apply to much of the data collected 
     in this research.
       Finally, except where noted, the unit of analysis in the 
     review of investigations is the investigation itself. The 
     data show, for example, the proportion of investigations that 
     were known by agents to involve new, used, and stolen 
     firearms, but these figures do not represent a proportion or 
     count of the number of new, used, or stolen firearms being 
     trafficked at gun shows. The data show what proportion of 
     investigations were known to involve a firearm subsequently 
     used in a homicide, but not how many homicides were committed 
     by firearms trafficked through gun shows. It was not possible 
     to gather more specific information within the short 
     timeframe of the study.
       It was, for the most part, not possible to review and 
     verify all of the information provided in the survey 
     responses. However, ATF Headquarters personnel took a random 
     sample of 15 cases each from the 31 investigations reported 
     to have involved 101-250 firearms and from the 30 
     investigations reported to have involved 251 or more 
     firearms, and reviewed with ATF field personnel the 
     information leading to those reports. A breakdown of the 
     results of this review showing the basis for reporting the 
     firearms volume is provided below. Based on this review, ATF 
     concludes that the numbers of firearms reported in connection 
     with the investigations have a reasonable basis.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           N = 32\1\
                      Procedure                      -------------------
                                                       Number    Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Firearms seized/purchased/recovered and                     10      31.2
 reconstruction of dealer records...................
Reconstruction of dealer records....................         9      28.1
Firearms seized/purchased/recovered.................         6      18.8
Reconstruction of dealer records and confidential            3       9.4
 information........................................
Firearms seized and admission by defendant(s).......         2       6.2
ATF NTC compilation and confidential information....         1       3.1
Unknown.............................................         1       3.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This breakdown includes, in addition to the basis for the numbers of
  firearms reported in the randomly selected cases, the basis for the
  numbers of firearms reported in the two investigations involving the
  largest volumes of firearms, 10,000 and 7,000 firearms respectively.
  The case involving 7,000 firearms used a combination of an audit of
  firearms seized and the reconstruction of dealer records, while the
  case involving 10,000 firearms used a combination of NTC records and
  information from confidential informants.


                  TABLE 1.--INITIATION OF INVESTIGATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          N=314
                    Reason                     -------------------------
                                                   Number      Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confidential informant........................           74         23.6
Referred from another Federal, State, or local           60         19.1
 investigation................................
ATF investigation at gun show (e.g., gun show            44         14.0
 task force)..................................
Trace analysis after firearms recovery........           37         11.8
Review of multiple sales forms................           34         10.8
Licensed dealers at gun shows reported                   26          8.3
 suspicious activity..........................
Tip or anonymous information..................           18          5.7
Field interrogation after firearm recovery....            4          1.3
Gun show promoter reported suspicious activity            2          0.6
Analysis of out-of-business records...........            1          0.3
Unknown.......................................           14          4.4
------------------------------------------------------------------------


          TABLE 2.--INVESTIGATIONS SUBMITTED BY FIELD DIVISIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        N=314
                                            ----------------------------
               Field division                   Number of
                                             investigations    Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dallas.....................................             43          13.7
Houston....................................             42          13.1
Detroit....................................             41          13.1
Philadelphia...............................             34          10.8
Miami/Tampa................................             20           6.3
Kansas City................................             19           6.1
Nashville..................................             16           5.1
Columbus...................................            1.5           4.8
Seattle....................................             11           3.5
St. Paul...................................             10           3.2
Louisville.................................              9           2.9
New Orleans................................              9           2.9
Phoenix....................................              8           2.5
Washington, DC.............................              8           2.5
Charlotte..................................              8           2.5
Los Angeles................................              6           1.9
Atlanta....................................              6           1.9
Chicago....................................              5           1.6
San Francisco..............................              1           0.3
Baltimore..................................              1           0.3
Boston.....................................              1           0.3
New York...................................              1           0.3
------------------------------------------------------------------------


                 TABLE 3.--MAIN SUBJECT OF INVESTIGATION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        N=314
                                            ----------------------------
                  Subject                       Number of
                                             investigations    Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlicensed dealer..........................            170          54.1
  Unlicensed dealer (never FFL)............            118          37.6
  Former FFL...............................             37          11.8
  Current FFL and former FFL...............              8           2.5
  Unlicensed dealer and former FFL.........              2           0.6
  Current FFL and Unlicensed dealer........              4           1.3
  Current FFL/Former FFL /unlicensed.......              1           0.3
Current FFL................................             73          23.2
Felon purchasing firearms at gun show......             33          10.5
Straw purchasers at gun show...............             20           6.4

[[Page H8613]]

 
Unknown gun show source....................             18           5.7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--Overall, 46.2 percent of the investigations involved a felon
  associated with selling or purchasing firearms. This percentage was
  derived from aggregate investigations in which trafficked firearms
  were recovered from felons; unlicensed dealers' criminal histories
  included felony convictions; felons had purchased firearms at guns
  shows, and a licensed dealer had a convicted felon as an associate.
  When only a licensed dealer was the main subject of the investigation,
  a convicted felon was involved in 6.8 percent (5 of 73) of the
  investigations as an associate in the trafficking of firearms. When
  the investigation involved an unlicensed dealer or a former FFL, 25.3
  percent (43 of 170) of the investigations revealed that he/she had at
  least one prior felony conviction.


TABLE 4.--FIREARMS ASSOCIATED WITH GUN SHOW INVESTIGATIONS KNOWN TO HAVE
                   BEEN INVOLVED IN SUBSEQUENT CRIMES
    [34.4 percent of the investigations (108 of 314) had at least one
                       firearm recovered in crime]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          N=108
                     Crime                     -------------------------
                                                 Number \1\    Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Drug offense..................................           48         44.4
Felon in possession...........................           33         30.6
Crime of violence.............................           47         43.5
  Homicide....................................           26         24.1
  Assault.....................................           30         27.8
  Robbery.....................................           20         18.5
Property crime (burglary, B&E)................           16         14.8
Criminal possession (not felon in poss.)......           15         13.9
Juvenile possession...........................           13         12.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Number of investigations with at least one category.
 
Note.--Since firearms recovered in an investigation may be used in many
  different types of crime, an investigation can be included in more
  than one category.


    TABLE 5.--NUMBER OF FIREARMS RECORDED IN GUN SHOW INVESTIGATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                        N=314
                                            ----------------------------
             Number of firearms                 Number of
                                             investigations    Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Less than 5................................             70          22.3
5 to 10....................................             37          11.8
11 to 20...................................             22           7.0
21 to 50...................................             47          15.0
51 to 100..................................             47          15.0
101 to 250.................................             31           9.9
251 or greater.............................             30           9.6
Unknown....................................             30           9.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--For further details about this information, see the Methodology
  section of this report.


  TABLE 6.--NEW, USED AND STOLEN GUNS KNOWN TO BE INVOLVED IN GUN SHOW
                             INVESTIGATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Number of
              Type of firearm                investigations    Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Used firearms..............................            167          53.2
New firearms...............................            156          49.7
Stolen firearms............................             35          11.1
unknown....................................             75          23.9
 
       MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE CATEGORIES
 
New firearms and used firearms.............             80          25.5
Used firearms only.........................             62          19.7
New firearms only..........................             61          19.4
Used firearms and stolen firearms..........             13           4.1
New firearms, used firearms, and stolen                 12           3.8
 firearms..................................
Stolen firearms only.......................              7           2.2
New firearms and stolen firearms...........              3           0.9
unknown....................................             75         23.9
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--Since more than one type of firearm can be recovered in an
  investigation, an investigation can be included in more than one
  category.


             TABLE 7.--VIOLATIONS IN THE MAIN INVESTIGATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                Number of
                 Violation                   investigations    Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Engaging in the business of dealing without            169          53.8
 license...................................
Possession and receipt of firearm by                    76          24.2
 convicted felon...........................
Illegal sales and/or possession of NFA                  62          19.7
 weapons...................................
Licensee failure to keep required records..             60          19.1
Providing false information to receive                  54          17.2
 firearms..................................
Transfer of firearm to prohibited person...             46          14.6
Straw purchasing...........................             36          11.5
False entries/fraudulent statements in                  27           8.6
 licensee records..........................
Illegal transfer of firearms to resident of             27           8.6
 another State by nonlicensee..............
Illegal transfer of firearms to resident of             21           6.7
 another State by licensee.................
Receipt and sale of stolen firearms........             15           5.8
Obliterating firearms serial numbers.......             14           4.5
Drug trafficking...........................             11           3.5
Trafficking of firearms by licensee                      9           2.9
 (unspecified violation)...................
Transfer of firearm in violation of 5-day                7           2.2
 waiting period............................
Illegal out of state sales by nonlicensee..              7           2.2
Licensee doing business away from business               5           1.6
 premises..................................
Illegal manufacture and transfer of assault              3           1.0
 weapon....................................
Sales by a prohibited person...............              2           0.6
Forgery or check fraud to obtain firearms..              2           0.6
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note.--Since an investigation may involve multiple violations, an
  investigation can be included in more than one category.


      TABLE 8.--WEAPONS ASSOCIATED WITH NFA VIOLATIONS IN GUN SHOW
                             INVESTIGATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                          N=62
                 NFA violation                 -------------------------
                                                 Number \1\    Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Macine guns...................................           33         53.2
Converted guns................................           19         30.6
Silencers.....................................            9         14.5
Explosives (e.g., grenades)...................            8         12.9
Grenade launchers.............................            7         11.3
Conversion kits/parts.........................            7         11.3
Other (short barrel)..........................            5          8.1
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Number of NFA investigations with at least one category.
 
Note.--Since investigations may involve different types of NFA
  violations, an investigation can be included in more than one
  category. However, ``converted guns'' have not been included in the
  ``machinegun'' count.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hansen). The time of the gentlewoman 
from New York (Mrs. McCarthy) has expired.
  Without objection, the previous question is ordered on the motion to 
instruct.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct 
offered by the gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy).
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the noes appeared to have it.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX, further 
proceedings on this question will be postponed.

                          ____________________