[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 34 (Thursday, March 23, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1644-S1645]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                                  GUNS

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, hardly a day goes by that we do not hear 
of another tragic shooting across America. The latest news from Texas 
is still sketchy, but the results are horrible: Four people who 
apparently were injured by gunfire in a church and the assailant taking 
his own life with a gun. It is a constant reminder. Only 2 or 3 weeks 
ago, a Michigan first grader took a loaded handgun to school and killed 
his little classmate. That is America today, a nation of some 300 
million weapons.
  On Capitol Hill, the debate over guns and their future really gets 
pretty heated and inflammatory on both sides, and the parties are at 
it. Frankly, as I travel across the State of Illinois and I talk with 
people from other States, I believe the families in this country get 
it. They understand what this is all about. They appreciate what we can 
and cannot do to make things better.
  They do not believe for a second that we can pass a law that will end 
gun violence in America. That is beyond us. I wish we could. I do 
believe there are things we can do to make America a safer place.
  Some want to argue between the possibilities of increased enforcement 
of current laws and closing loopholes which allow people to get guns 
who should not have them. That is a false choice. This Senator wants 
both. The people who misuse guns should be prosecuted and imprisoned, 
no questions asked. By the same token, we should do everything in our 
power to keep guns out of the hands of criminals, people with a history 
of violent mental illness, and children. I think we need both--zero 
tolerance and zero loopholes. I do not think it is a choice. We need 
both. If we go after both in an aggressive bipartisan approach, we can 
start to see the numbers come down on gun violence; we can have a 
little more peace of mind about our kids going to school and coming 
home safe and sound at the end of the day.
  Last year, we had a bill on the floor of the Senate after the 
Columbine massacre which focused on two major points: If you buy a gun 
at a gun store in America, they do a background check. They will figure 
out whether or not you can legally own a gun. That is the Brady law. 
The Brady law has been successful.
  It is hard to believe, but true, that people with a history of 
committing crimes and felonies, people who have outstanding arrest 
warrants--not very bright, I might add--show up at gun stores trying to 
buy guns. We do not want that to happen. We want to stop them.
  There is a role there for the Federal Government in having this law. 
There is a bigger role for State and local law enforcement in making 
sure those people who have outstanding arrest warrants, for example, 
are prosecuted. That is what happens when you go to a gun store.
  We also know in America one can buy guns at gun shows. There is a 
loophole there: There is no background check. If you happen to have a 
problem under the law--let's say a felony record or perhaps a history 
of mental illness or you are too young--you do not go to the gun store 
where they enforce the law, you go to the gun show where they do not. 
That is the loophole we want to close. That was in the law that was 
passed last year in the Senate. The vote was 49-49, incidentally. Vice 
President Gore cast the deciding vote. We sent the bill over to the 
House where it has languished for almost a year. Nothing has happened.

  The second thing that was in that law, which I think most Americans 
would agree is common sense, was: Is

[[Page S1645]]

there a way for those who own guns to store them safely? The answer is 
obviously yes. It involves trigger locks. You may have heard that Smith 
& Wesson, the largest handgun manufacturer in the United States, 
suggested they will start selling trigger locks automatically with 
their handguns. It is common sense they will give to the gun owner the 
wherewithal to make their gun childproof.
  Some people say: It is the middle of the night and a burglar comes to 
the door; I am fumbling around trying to find the key--you can decide 
what you do at night. When you go off to work and leave the gun behind 
with children in the house or when other kids visit, don't you want to 
lock it up so a kid cannot get his hands on it and shoot himself or a 
playmate?
  That is what trigger locks are all about. That was the second major 
part of the bill that passed the Senate last year and still languishes 
in the House of Representatives.
  What is so radical about those two suggestions: That a gun show will 
try to find out whether or not you are legally eligible to own a gun 
before they sell it to you; that if you are going to sell a gun in 
America, it is with a trigger lock so it can be safer?
  It is time for us to cool down the political rhetoric around here--
and let me be the first to volunteer because I feel very strongly about 
this--and try to see if maybe there is some common ground. If the 
people on one side want more enforcement, such as Operation Exile, 
which is working in some cities across America, I will support it, I 
will vote for it.
  I want more enforcement, too. In fact, I am going to offer an 
amendment in the Budget Committee which is going to say to my 
colleagues, Democrats and Republicans: Let's put some money into this. 
Let's show that we believe in enforcement and prosecution on a 
bipartisan basis. This is not a partisan issue. I do not want criminals 
roaming the streets, gang bangers shooting up the streets of Chicago or 
my hometown of Springfield. I am ready to push for more prosecution and 
enforcement, without question. Let's put the money into more ATF agents 
and more prosecutors to get that job done.
  I will concede to the other side that prosecution and enforcement are 
important. Let's do it. This Democrat will stand with Republicans to 
get that done.
  I ask in return that Republican Senators take a look at what we 
passed last year. Some, including the Presiding Officer, voted for it, 
and I am very proud that he did. We need more. We need to have Senators 
on both sides of the aisle to come forward and say, yes, trigger locks 
make sense; let's make them part of America's landscape to protect 
children; and those who will also say that gun shows should not be 
exempt from the basic laws of this country.
  There are other things we can talk about in terms of sensible, 
commonsense gun control. I do not know if we will get them accomplished 
this year, but certainly I hope that before the first anniversary of 
the Columbine tragedy, this Congress will end its gridlock on the gun 
control issue. The people of this country expect more. They do not want 
to see this historic Chamber grind to a halt because of a special 
interest group in this town. They want to see goodwill on both sides of 
the aisle.

  I will say this: If we fail, if we do nothing, if another day, 
another week, and another month go by with the tragic headlines we see 
so often about killings in churches and schools and day-care centers, 
if that happens, the American people will be justifiably angry in this 
election. They should hold all candidates accountable.
  Members of the House of Representatives, Members of the Senate, and 
the two men who are likely to be the leading candidates for President 
of the United States--all of us, I should say--should be held 
accountable to answer the basic question: When you had the chance 
serving in the U.S. Congress, what did you do? Did you try to do 
anything to make this country safer, to make certain that when I walk 
out on the streets of my town or send my little boy or girl to school, 
I have a little more peace of mind?
  We have the ability; we have the opportunity. The question is whether 
we can summon the political will. One cannot turn on the television in 
this town, and probably in others, without seeing ads from one special 
interest group or the other that wants to get us tangled up in some 
theoretical debate about the second amendment and the future of gun 
control.
  I hope this Congress, and particularly this Senate, can get beyond 
the theory into the reality. The reality is: Over 40 percent of 
Americans own guns; there are over 300 million guns now in our Nation 
of some 275 million people; and even the gun owners believe intensely 
in sensible and responsible gun control. They believe guns should be 
stored safely, that those who own them should know how to use them, and 
they should be kept out of the hands of the wrong people. That is a 
consensus among gun owners, not to mention those who do not own guns 
who feel even more strongly about the same issues.
  I hope this Congress, which tends to lurch back and forth from minor 
but somewhat important issues, will focus on a major and very important 
issue: Making America a safer place.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. MURKOWSKI. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________