[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 58 (Thursday, May 11, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S3882-S3887]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              GUN VIOLENCE

  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I am going to continue discussing the 
issue we were talking about earlier. In my earlier remarks, while 
talking about trade, we talked about the value of trade with the sub-
Saharan nations, whose economic subjugation created all kinds of 
problems. We talked about the economic strangulation that presents so 
many problems and creates violence and corruption and lawlessness in 
some of these countries. We are hoping that this trade can suppress 
those differences and that violence.
  I was making the point that we in this country have a problem of our 
own regarding gun violence, which is very detrimental to the harmonious 
functioning within our society. We have these huge differences between 
those who think that ``guns unlimited'' ought to be the rule. I had the 
opportunity to hear a brilliant author, Gary Wills, talk about why it 
is that people distrust Government. One of the issues he brings up--and 
I am paraphrasing some here--is that when people see that violence 
pervades our society, we have to have some sense of a regulation. He 
pointed out that if we didn't have regulations on our highways, highway 
safety programs, our system would be rendered useless because people 
would be afraid to go out on the highways because of the mayhem it 
would create.
  I think it is a fairly simple thing to understand that if you were 
able to drive as fast as you wanted on either side of the road, we 
would be killing and maiming one another. I don't understand why it is 
that we can't have some sensible gun violence control in this country, 
some regulation. Why is this one part of our society so exempt from any 
kind of sensible regulation that says a person who wants to buy a gun 
ought to be qualified physically and emotionally to do so, and that if 
they want to buy a gun they ought not have any history of violent 
behavior?
  I wrote legislation regarding spousal abuse. I said anybody convicted 
of a misdemeanor for spousal abuse ought not to be able to own a gun. I 
had terrific resistance in this place. I could not get it through, 
really. Finally, we got it through as a piece of legislation on a 
budget.
  What has happened in 3\1/2\ years? Well, 33,000 people who are not 
qualified by virtue of violence against a spouse or their children--
domestic abusers--have been prevented from getting guns, where maybe 
they pointed a gun at somebody and said, ``If you don't listen to me, I 
will blow your brains out.'' I think it was a positive measure.
  The Brady bill was fought tooth and nail before it was passed. The 
Brady bill gave Government time to check out these individuals who are 
applying for guns or gun ownership at such a prolific rate that we 
ought to have some measure of control. Well, after a long debate and a 
lot of suffering, had Jim Brady, who was shot while an attempt was made 
on the life of President Reagan, not wheeled himself around the 
Capitol, it never would have passed.
  What was the effect of the Brady bill--the thing the gun lobby was so 
afraid of that would ``impair freedom"? Baloney, as we say. Well, 
500,000 people were prevented from getting guns, thank the Lord. What 
would have happened? Those 500,000 people who were not qualified either 
by virtue of personal characteristics, background, a tendency toward 
violence, or trouble, could have gotten guns. Thank goodness they were 
not able to get guns.
  We wonder whether or not, with a Million Moms March imminent on 
Mother's Day, anybody thinks mothers are clamoring to leave their homes 
and march in protest because they have nothing better to do on Mother's 
Day. That is the most revered holiday, next to Christmas, that we have 
in our society. It is when people flock to see moms. I know my children 
want to see their mother. My grandchildren want to see their mother. A 
lot of them in my family will be out there marching because they are 
sick and tired of worrying about whether or not their children, when 
they go to school to learn, to sing, to play, to make friends, are 
going to get shot, are going to get assaulted, are going to get killed 
or wounded in such a way that they never recover. That doesn't only 
mean those who were hit with a bullet. It means friends who saw their 
classmates at Columbine lying down and trying to crawl out windows to 
get away from the madness, in fear for their lives.
  What was the impact of that throughout the school? Did the wounding 
stop with those hit with a bullet? Or do those wounds go on forever? 
Some lost friends who were 16 and 17 years old--kids in the prime of 
life. Those wounds will last forever. So it is not only those who are 
involved in the fracas; it is everybody--all of us across the country.
  Look at the physical cost: metal detectors, guards, cameras, rigid 
processes for transportation. It costs a fortune. Frankly, I think we 
should just put a lid on this proliferation of guns and stop the 
unlicensed gun dealers from selling guns and not asking any questions 
of the buyer--``buyers anonymous''--at gun shows across the country. If 
you want to buy guns, just put your money down, brother, and you can 
have all the guns you want and walk away. You could be one of the 10 
most wanted criminals in the United States on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted 
list. Even if they recognize you, they have no obligation in the States 
that don't

[[Page S3883]]

have control because the Federal Government doesn't have it all; they 
are under no obligation to say, hey, we know you are sought after. We 
know you are a criminal.
  There are no rules. We ought to stop that and we ought to make a 
pledge to the mothers who are going to be out there on Sunday that we 
are going to do something about it, instead of sitting on our hands 
over a year since Columbine. It is almost a year now since we passed 
the gun show loophole closure in this body and sent it over to the 
House as part of a conference. That is what we do here. The House and 
the Senate confer and they try to agree on a bill. They don't want to 
act on it. The action is no action. That inaction is the rule because 
they don't want to bring up the gun issue. It is too sensitive. It 
might be too offensive to the NRA. It might be too offensive to the gun 
lobby. We are saying, no, we have to do something about it. The least 
thing we are going to do today is offer a resolution and, we hope, get 
it passed.

  We ask those on the other side who won't join us to stand up in front 
of the American public and say: I don't think you are entitled to send 
your child to a safe school; you have to run the risk. After all, guns 
are more important than my kids or my grandchildren. I can tell you 
that the so-called ``freedom to own a gun and maim people,'' and the 
Constitution says you are allowed to shoot at anybody you want to, is 
not a matter--in the wildest imagination--of the second amendment.
  Mr. President we have a limit of time. How much time do I have 
remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Allard). The Senator has 20 minutes.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I want to give as much time as my colleague from New 
York needs, not more than 7 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from New Jersey for 
yielding. I thank him for not only his generosity in yielding time but 
for his leadership this year and last year on this issue, and in the 18 
years he has been in the Senate. We will really miss him in many ways 
as he goes on to other things, but one of the most important reasons we 
will miss him is as the leader in this fight to bring sensibility and 
rationality to gun laws.
  I hope we will pass the resolution the Senator from New Jersey is 
offering and that it will not be blocked. I hope people will let us 
vote because we are voting in the shadow of a momentous movement that 
is taking place in America.
  I have been fighting in the Congress for gun control for 20 years. I 
have seen the various ebbs and flows in public opinion on guns. I have 
seen modest gun control measures, such as this one, bottled up in 
committee and picked to death by those who do the NRA's bidding. I was 
on the front lines when we scratched and clawed our way through a few 
victories such as Brady and the assault weapons ban.
  We are on this floor now because the world changes on Mother's Day. 
On Mother's Day, the political landscape will undergo a seismic shock. 
There is a classic sign in the movie ``Network'' where a TV commentator 
shouts, ``I am mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore.'' And 
that leads to a spontaneous reaction where families heave their TV set 
out the window.
  That is what the Million Mom March is. It is a spontaneous assemblage 
of ordinary citizens who are not going to take it anymore. It is 
bigger, more passionate, and more widespread than any movement we have 
seen in years. It is a movement more powerful and more numerous than 
any of us could ever have hoped.

  When the mothers of this Nation gather on Constitution Avenue, their 
collective footsteps will sound like a shot heard around the world. 
They are not going to put up with lame excuses from Congress about why 
the Lautenberg amendment is bottled up. They are not going to put up 
with any more reasons about why we can't pass the most basic, 
commonsense gun measures.
  Let me say to George Bush, and anyone else who is standing in the way 
of closing the gun show loophole, that our mothers are watching. On 
Mother's Day, the mothers of this Nation will give us the gift of 
common sense. There is a new force in the country today and its name is 
Mom. Today we are simply giving this body a chance to not make Mom too 
angry.
  I thank the Senator and yield any time I have not used to the Senator 
from New Jersey.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Jersey.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I thank the Senator from New York.
  Mr. President, we are in morning business, I believe. Is that 
correct?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 17 minutes remaining in 
morning business.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I would like to make a unanimous 
consent request. In fairness, I want to see a Republican on the floor 
before we make that request about time. So if the staff would arrange 
to have someone come to the floor, I would appreciate it because I want 
to continue talking about this resolution we have already sent up to 
the desk.
  We are looking for very simple, commonsense changes. I can't imagine 
anybody saying we should not prohibit juveniles from possessing assault 
weapons. It is hard to oppose that. Does anyone seriously believe 
juveniles need assault weapons? Additionally, we should require child 
safety locks to be sold with handguns. It is a simple step we can take 
to try to protect kids who get a hold of guns. We know that the 6-year-
old who used a gun to murder another 6-year-old would not have been 
able to do so, A, if the gun had been properly protected from reach by 
a child; or, B, if the gun had had a safety lock, the child wouldn't 
have been able to operate it.
  We also ought to study--I know the Senator from California wants to 
talk about this--the marketing of guns to juveniles. She spoke about it 
a few moments ago. I heard her talk about it. It was so clear and so 
precise that it is hard to argue against it.
  Why shouldn't we examine what it is we are doing to convince little 
kids that their mark of maturity is going to be to own a gun? I don't 
understand why.

  When it comes to guns, we are talking about deadly weapons. We are 
not talking about play toys that might turn over or something such as 
that. This is automatically associated with killing, with death, with 
injury--a gun in the wrong hands.
  No, we are not saying that every gun owner is out for murder. We are 
not saying every gun owner is out to hurt people, but there are enough 
people that it makes an enormous difference whether or not guns are out 
there in the hands of the wrong people. We ought to make sure they are 
not being sold as toys.
  These are all commonsense measures. They passed this Senate as part 
of a juvenile justice bill just about a year ago next week. It was sent 
over to the House. We got our conference committee together.
  How much time do I have, Mr. President?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 14 minutes remaining.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I would like to yield 10 minutes to my 
colleague from California.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California is recognized.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I thank my friend from New Jersey. Let me 
echo what he has said on the floor in this matter--that we want to 
protect our children and our families from gun violence. He will be 
sorely missed.
  I want to pick up on something that was said about the million moms. 
I think Senator Lautenberg, as a grandfather, has spoken most 
eloquently as to what the women of this country really want.
  It is hard to generalize about it to people, but I can truly say, if 
there is anyone in our society who is more selfless than any other, it 
happens to be moms. When you love someone more than you love yourself, 
that is what happens. The fact that they are coming here in such 
amazing numbers is truly remarkable. I think when everyone across the 
Nation who is coming here on this issue is added up, it will be a 
million moms.
  There is a web page for the Million Mom March. It is called the 
Tapestry, and moms are calling that site; they are writing their 
stories.
  One woman from El Cerrito writes:

       Ten years ago, my beautiful son, Andrew, killed himself 
     with a bullet to his brain. He

[[Page S3884]]

     was mentally ill, and never should have been able to buy a 
     gun. I will be at the March with one of my daughters, who is 
     also a mother, because something has got to bring Congress to 
     its senses.

  Then there are several others. One wrote the following:

       Once I wrote a letter to my Congressman asking him to 
     support sensible gun laws. He sent me back a three-page 
     letter upholding the second amendment, but this had no effect 
     on me as in my life I have lost my father and uncle and a 
     nephew by marriage to guns. One was murder, one was a 
     suicide, and one was accidental. Had guns not been around and 
     easy to get, none of these untimely and sad deaths would 
     have occurred.

  We are at a time in our history when we can look back at what is 
happening to our people. When I was a young mom--now I am a grandmom--
the reason I got involved in politics was that I thought the Vietnam 
war was wrong. I marched with my children in California at that time to 
say enough is enough; let's end the killing.
  We lost 58,168 of our valued sons and daughters in that war. For that 
period of 11 years, let's look at the statistics we have in our Nation 
from a different kind of war, a war in our streets, in our suburbs, in 
our schools, in our counties, our cities, in churches and child care 
centers: 395,441 dead. If the moms of America marched to end the war in 
Vietnam where 58,168 died--and they did help end it--we can turn around 
this tragic number and win this war in our streets.
  I say straight from my heart, we will not win this war unless people 
in this body have the guts and the courage to stand up to the gun 
lobby. We will not win this war if people in this body and in the House 
of Representatives do not have the heart and the guts and the courage 
to stand up to the gun lobby and its power. I pray that we will have 
that courage and we will have the strength to do it and turn around 
what is happening.
  Senator Lautenberg has talked about the juvenile justice bill. It is 
stuck in limbo, twisting in the wind in the conference committee after 
we had five sensible gun laws attached to it. They are very sensible 
and include: closing the gun show loophole so that people who shouldn't 
have a gun cannot get a gun at a gun show; banning the importation of 
high-capacity ammunition clips for automatic weapons, Senator 
Feinstein's amendment; requiring child safety devices be sold with 
every hand gun, Senator Kohl; an amendment by Senator Ashcroft that 
says it is illegal to sell or give a semiautomatic to anyone under the 
age of 18; and the fifth, requiring the Federal Trade Commission and 
the Attorney General to study the extent to which the gun industry 
markets to juveniles.
  If we thought Joe Camel was bad--and we know Joe Camel was bad--let's 
look at what the National Rifle Association is doing to market to our 
children. This is the beautiful, quite lovely NRA logo with the eagle. 
This is their logo. Here we see the cartoon version of that eagle, 
``Eddie the Eagle.'' This is the gun lobby kids' cartoon. This is the 
eagle of the NRA. These kids are not 18. They are nowhere near 18. They 
are babies.
  What makes us think the gun lobby wants to market to kids? Let's take 
a look at what they say in an ad from a firearm manufacturer: 
``Building the next generation of customers takes work and commitment. 
But it must be done.'' ``Our greatest threat is the lack of a future 
customer base.'' ``We continue to look for every opportunity to reach 
young people. . . .''
  There shouldn't be any question about it. Just as Joe Camel was aimed 
at kids, so is Eddie the Eagle aimed at kids.
  Here is Joe Camel, the cartoon version of the camel advertisement. 
Here is the gun lobby kids' cartoon. It is hard to do this all in 10 
minutes, but that is all my colleagues on the other side would let me 
have. Here are Eddie Eagle products for kids: Eddie Eagle lunch box, 
Eddie Eagle Jitter Critter, 3D glasses, tattoo pac, Eddie E. B-Nee 
baby.
  That is not marketing to grownups, my friends; it is marketing to 
kids. The gun lobby doesn't want us to look at it, but we will.

  When they had the tobacco lawsuits, we were able to find out what the 
tobacco company said in secret memos: ``If our company is to survive 
and prosper . . . we must get our share of the youth market.'' 
``Today's teenager is tomorrow's potential regular customer.''
  Sound familiar to the gun lobby?
  Look at what they say: ``The greatest threat we face is the lack of a 
future customer base. . . .'' ``We continue to look for every 
opportunity to reach young people. . . .''
  Cigarette companies, Joe Camel, firearms company, Eddie the Eagle.
  I don't have any objection in terms of a family learning to hunt, but 
tell me what is right about teaching a 4-year-old child how to load a 
handgun. Yet this ad is proudly displayed in gun magazines. This child 
is 4 years old.
  This sums it all up. How is this for an ad in Gun World: ``Start 'em 
Young! There is no time like the present.''
  This is a very young boy, maybe 15, holding a toy gun, that looks 
like a real gun, shooting at a can of soda. It is a little bit of a 
love letter from him about shooting. ``Start 'em Young!''
  In the juvenile justice bill, I was fortunate enough to get through 
this Senate, by a unanimous vote, a study of the gun dealers marketing 
to children. Guess what. Ed Markey took that on the House side and got 
the same thing passed. So we have identical amendments in the House and 
Senate. Out of all of the gun amendments we passed, this is the only 
one that had identical language in the House and Senate. What does that 
mean? It means we could make this the law of the land tomorrow if there 
were good faith in this Republican Congress. We can in good faith take 
my amendment that passed here by unanimous vote, and passed over in the 
House unanimously, and start this study right now.
  But no. To all who say politics doesn't matter, let me state what 
this wasted time means. It means that every day they are starting them 
young. It means that every day, a child might pick up a gun because it 
so much fun--they see it in the ads. And they can pick up a gun and 
accidentally injure themselves or someone else.
  It is an unbelievable situation that a year after we passed five 
sensible gun measures, we have done nothing.
  Let me close with something from the Million Mom March from Janet 
Lazar of Menlo Park, CA. Listen to this.

       As a social worker for children and families, I have heard 
     the voices of many children who have become victims of 
     violence. Listen to the still voice of a child describing her 
     mother held at gunpoint by her father. Listen to the cold, 
     dead voice of a beautiful 15-year-old girl describe the six 
     friends and relatives she lost to gang warfare. Listen to her 
     bewilderment as she wonders if she will live to raise 
     children of her own. Listen to the suicidal voice of the 
     young man who accidentally killed his best friend as they 
     fooled around with an unlocked handgun.

  She writes:

       My heart cries for someone to listen to the children. The 
     time to act is now.

  To the creator of the Million Mom March, who is a constituent of 
Senator Lautenberg--and how appropriate that is--I say thank you. I say 
thank you for caring about the children. I say thank you for giving up 
your Mother's Day and coming here. I say thank you for taking a risk 
that maybe your idea would not catch on. I say thank you for doing what 
we Americans do best, acting--acting on facts, acting on information, 
and, yes, acting on anger.
  It is an honor to be on the floor today with my friend, Senator 
Lautenberg. It is an honor to stand by his side as we, together, fight 
to make sure the laws of this land reflect the priorities of the people 
and the mothers and the children and the families.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. I thank the Senator from California for her ever 
persistent fight to protect children and protect the families in this 
country. We are going to continue, no matter what turn of events we 
see. We want the public to be heard.
  Mr. President, how much time do I have left?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 2 minutes.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I have a resolution that simply 
commends the participants of the Million Mom March this weekend for 
rallying for their communities to demand sensible gun safety 
legislation. It calls on Congress to complete action on the juvenile 
justice bill before the Memorial Day recess.
  I ask unanimous consent the Senate proceed to the immediate 
consideration of S. Res. 305, which was introduced by me, that the 
resolution and

[[Page S3885]]

the preamble be agreed to en bloc, and the motion to reconsider be laid 
upon the table with no intervening action.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. I object, as a Member of the Senate from the 
State of Colorado.
  Objection is heard.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, and ladies and gentlemen who can hear 
me, what an irony it is. What an irony it is. The Senator from Colorado 
objects to simple gun safety legislation. What an irony it is that this 
place is empty, but the voice of negativism creeps through.
  I want all the million moms across the country to hear this. They are 
saying: No, no to sensible gun safety legislation. They are saying: No, 
Mom, your kids are going to go to school and it is too bad, it is too 
bad if some little maniac, or some confused child has a gun in his or 
her hand. Too bad, too bad, unless it is their kid, God forbid.

  What are we witnessing here? Foolishness. The public ought to know 
it. They ought to stand up and shout: We are not going to take it 
anymore. A million mothers marching across this country--I hope they 
are made furious by this objection.
  Object to a resolution? A resolution, for my friends who do not know, 
is not a law. It is simply a thought. It is the way we think we ought 
to do things. We are far from legislation. We just think we ought to 
protect children. We think we ought to make it tougher for people to 
have guns randomly. We think we ought to make it tougher for young 
children to learn that guns are a step toward manhood. They ought to 
learn. They ought to learn.
  Remember the image--the kids at Columbine, the bleeding boy reaching 
out the window for help: Somebody, help me before I get killed. Or the 
little children at the school in Califor
nia--little kids, like my grandchildren, like your grandchild, being 
led by policemen so they could get away from a gunman. Or the 
youngsters saying a prayer in Waco, TX, heads bent in prayer, and some 
idiot comes by and starts shooting. Or that 6-year-old child killing 
another 6-year-old child.
  So we cannot enact a law that says you have to put your gun away if 
you have one, so a child can't get ahold of it? Or make it childproof?
  The Republicans say: No. We have 51-50 vote when the Vice President 
cast a tie vote and it went to the House. The House didn't want to 
cooperate, the Republican majority there said: No, no, let's bury this 
thing.
  Bury it. What a terrible term. What a terrible term. Because we are 
talking about funerals and burials, instead of laughter, instead of 
love, instead of friendship. It is a black day, a bad day for America. 
I hope the million moms, when they get together, will talk about this.
  Mrs. BOXER. Will the Senator yield for one last question?
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Yes.
  Mrs. BOXER. Was it part of my friend's resolution, welcoming the 
million moms to Washington?
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. It was a resolution to welcome them.
  Mrs. BOXER. Let's be clear here about what is being objected to. This 
is a resolution that says to the million moms: Thank you for caring 
about our children; thank you for being good mothers; Thank you for 
giving up Mother's Day to be here, to stand for a cause that is bigger 
than each of us separately.
  It is hard for me to believe the Republicans would object to 
welcoming the million moms to this town, moms who are Democrats, 
Republicans, those declining to state--maybe they don't have a party. 
This is not a partisan issue.
  I say to my friend, thank you for bringing this to the floor. I think 
the American people are finally going to see who stands up for what is 
right.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I yield the floor, not in exhaustion, 
not in fatigue, but ours to fight another day.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I commend our colleague, Senator 
Lautenberg, for his efforts. He has done the Senate a service and has 
called the Senate and the Nation's attention to the importance of the 
Million Mom March. I appreciate as well the participation and the 
leadership Senator Boxer is always able to provide for our caucus on so 
many issues before the Senate. They have articulated very ably and 
admirably for our caucus today in expressing to all of those coming 
from all parts of the country how important it is they express 
themselves, how important it is they exercise their constitutional 
opportunities in this great country, how important it is they send a 
message to the rest of the country, as well as to Members of the 
Congress, the critical nature of the need to address the gun issue in 
an effective way.
  That is all they are coming to express themselves on, and it is 
appropriate at this time, and given the tremendous message that numbers 
of women will send by their presence, that we acknowledge their 
presence and welcome them to this city; that we tell them we are 
listening; that we resolve to respond in as effective a way as we can.
  Again, I thank the senior Senator from New Jersey for his efforts, 
and the Senator from California for participating, for sending that 
message loudly and clearly and for doing all they can to recognize the 
importance of what will happen in Washington on Sunday.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. WARNER. Mr. President, did the Senator wish to respond?
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Can I have 1 minute?
  Mr. WARNER. Without losing my right to the floor, I yield to my 
colleague.
  Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Virginia for 
his always courteous response to a request.
  It was disheartening to see we could not get a resolution adopted--
not law, a thought, an idea, what we would like to do, that says we 
welcome the committed women who are involved in the march who are going 
to gather in places across this country to protest the threat of 
violence to their children.
  I thank our leader, and my colleague from California, for being such 
active supporters of this protest against violence. I am sorry we did 
not have a chance to get a vote on it. I thank the Senator from South 
Dakota for his friendly remarks as well.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, this weekend, hundreds of thousands of 
mothers and ``honorary mothers'' will convene in Washington, DC and 
communities around the country to call for sensible gun legislation for 
safe kids.
  On Sunday, Americans will unite for the Million Mom March, the first-
ever national march for gun-safety. The mothers from Michigan and 
around the country come from all walks of life. They live in cities, in 
suburbs and in rural America. They are of all races, all religions and 
all political persuasions. They are our friends and neighbors, our 
community leaders.
  On Mothers' Day, 2000, these ``mothers and others'' will join 
together to grieve over the loss of their loved ones, and the loss of 
more than 4,000 young people who are killed by gunfire each year.
  Among these mothers will be Veronica McQueen, the Michigan mother who 
lost her six year old daughter, Kayla Rolland, to gun violence earlier 
this year. Ms. McQueen said, ``I just don't want to see another parent 
have to bury another baby over this, over something that is 
preventable, something that is very, very preventable.''
  Gun violence is preventable. But mothers can not act alone. Mothers 
in the Million Mom March know: In order to reduce the level of gun 
violence in their homes and communities, Congress must pass legislation 
to keep guns out of the hands of children and criminals.
  Some of us in this Congress have heard the cry of families around 
this country and worked to pass sensible legislation to protect our 
nation's children. That legislation would limit access to guns by 
prohibited persons by, among other things, closing the gun show 
loophole-- applying background checks to guns sold at gun shows.
  The Lautenberg-Kerrey gun show amendment that passed in the Senate,

[[Page S3886]]

but not in the House of Representatives, is one of the most important 
provisions we can pass this Congress. It will close the loophole that 
allows criminals and other prohibited persons to buy guns at gun shows 
that they would not otherwise be permitted to purchase.
  It a loophole that is often exploited by those who do not want to 
undergo background checks--including Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, the 
Columbine killers. Harris and Klebold used four semiautomatic assault 
weapons in their now infamous attack on their classmates. Of the four 
guns, three were purchased by Robyn Anderson at a gun show in Adams 
County, Colorado.
  Robyn, who was 18 at the time, bought three semiautomatic assault 
weapons for her younger friends. She later testified before the 
Colorado Legislature about her purchase and the need to close the gun 
show loophole. She said: ``Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold had gone to 
the Tanner gun show on Saturday and they took me back with them on 
Sunday. . . While we were walking around, Eric and Dylan kept asking 
sellers if they were private or licensed. They wanted to buy their guns 
from someone who was private--and not licensed--because there would be 
no paperwork or background check.''
  Robyn continues: ``I was not asked any questions at all. There was no 
background check. All I had to do was show my driver's license to prove 
that I was 18. Dylan got a shotgun. Eric got a shotgun and a black 
rifle that he bought clips for. He was able to buy clips and ammunition 
without me having to show any I.D. The sellers didn't write down any 
information.''
  ``I would not have bought a gun for Eric and Dylan if I had had to 
give any personal information or submit any kind of check at all. I 
think it was clear to the sellers that the guns were for Eric and 
Dylan. They were the ones asking all the questions and handling all the 
guns.''
  Robyn concluded: ``I wish a law requiring background checks had been 
in effect at the time. I don't know if Eric and Dylan would have been 
able to get guns from another source, but I would not have helped them. 
It was too easy. I wish it had been more difficult. I wouldn't have 
helped them buy the guns if I had faced a background check.''
  The Columbine killers took advantage of the gun show loophole and the 
result was deadly. Congress has the chance to close this loophole with 
the Lautenberg amendment. That amendment requires prospective 
purchasers to undergo background checks at gun shows and gives law 
enforcement up to three business days to those checks if there is any 
potentially disqualifying information--as set forth in the current 
Brady law.
  Honest, law-abiding Americans are not affected by these background 
checks. 72 percent of the checks are completed within three minutes, 
and 95 percent are cleared within two hours. FBI records reveal that 
the five percent of people whose background checks take more than 24 
hours to complete, are 20 times more likely to have a criminal record 
or otherwise be prohibited from accessing weapons.
  Congress must pass legislation that gives law enforcement up to three 
business days, when needed, to complete background checks at gun shows, 
and truly close the gun show loophole. As of this day, Congress has 
failed to do so, and has subsequently failed the families of the 
Columbine victims and others who have lost loved ones to gunfire.
  On this Sunday, I will march with the families of those victims from 
Michigan and around the country, who are calling on Congress to end 
their agony. In the words of one mother, it's time to turn tears into 
action. Congress must pass ``sensible gun laws for safe kids.'' Let's 
start by closing the gun show loophole today. It's time to end the 
plague of gun violence on America's children.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I join my colleagues in welcoming the 
Million Mom March to Washington this weekend. Their campaign for 
sensible gun control has captured the attention of the nation, and it 
deserves to capture the attention of Congress too. Their message is 
irresistible. Gun crimes and gun violence are a serious challenge to 
the nation, and it is wrong for the United States Senate to bury its 
head in the sand on this fundamental issue. More than a year has passed 
since the Columbine tragedy, and we have failed to finish the job we 
began last year on the Juvenile Justice Bill. Democrats have repeatedly 
asked for the House and Senate conferees to meet and approve a final 
bill that includes the Senate-passed gun control provisions. We wait 
and wait and wait, while schools and children across the country 
continue to suffer from the epidemic of gun violence that plagues so 
many of our communities.
  Too many children are in continuing danger of gun violence in their 
homes and schools and neighborhoods. These are not new problems, but 
they have become increasingly serious, and it is irresponsible for 
Congress to look the other way and ignore them.
  Our goal is to support parents, youths, educators, law enforcement 
authorities, and communities. We have a shared responsibility to find 
solutions to these problems. Fifty million school children are waiting 
for our answer.
  The greatest tragedy of the school shootings across the nation is 
they have not shocked us into doing everything we can to prevent them 
in the future. By refusing to learn from these tragedies, Congress is 
condemning the country to repeat them. How many wake-up calls will it 
take before Congress finally responds?
  Current statistics on children and guns are unacceptable.
  For every child killed with a gun, four others are wounded. According 
to the Centers for Disease Control, the rate of firearm deaths of 
children 0-14 years old is twelve times higher in the United States 
than in 25 other industrial nations combined.
  Over 6,000 students were expelled in 1996-97 for bringing guns to 
school. The Journal of the American Medical Association reports that 
between 36% and 50% of male eleventh graders believe they could easily 
get a gun if they wanted one.
  In a 1997 survey, 9% of high school students had carried a weapon to 
school during the 30 days preceding the survey; 6% had a gun.
  Between July 1, 1994 and June 30, 1998, there were 173 violent deaths 
in schools.
  In a recent survey of over 100,000 teenagers conducted last month, 
30% said they could get a gun in a few hours and 11% more said they 
could get a gun in one day.
  1 in 5 of these teenagers have felt afraid at school since the 
Columbine High School shootings a year ago.
  4 in 10 of these same teenagers said there are guns in their homes, 
and more than half of them say they have access to those weapons.
  In 1996, more than 1300 children aged 10-19 committed suicide with 
firearms. Unlike suicide attempts using other methods, suicide attempts 
with gun are nearly always fatal, which means that a temporarily 
depressed teenager will never get a second chance at life. Two-thirds 
of all completed teenage suicides involve a firearm.
  The firearm injury epidemic, due largely to handgun injuries, is ten 
times larger than the polio epidemic of the first half of this century.
  The nation's gun laws are a disgrace. We need to close the gun show 
loophole, support child safety locks on guns, and provide greater 
resources for strict enforcement of the gun laws now on the books.
  The guns used to kill nine of the 13 people murdered at Columbine 
High School were purchased at a gun show. The woman who bought the guns 
for Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold said that she would never have 
purchased those guns if she had to submit her name for a background 
check.
  More than 800 Americans, young and old, die each year from guns fired 
by children under the age of 19. It shouldn't take a Columbine, a 
Jonesboro, or an urban drive-by shooting to persuade us to act.
  Perhaps six-year-old Kayla Rolland would be alive today if the gun 
that her classmate used had a child safety lock on it.
  Perhaps a 13-year-old school girl in Deming, New Mexico and a school 
vice-principal in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania would still be alive if 
the young shooters did not have access to the guns.
  American children are more at risk from firearms than the children of 
any

[[Page S3887]]

other industrial nation. In a recent year, firearms killed no children 
in Japan, 19 children in Great Britain, 57 children in Germany, 109 
children in France, 153 children in Canada--and 5,285 children in the 
United States.
  Shame on the National Rifle Association, shame on the Republican 
Party, and shame on the United States Congress for tolerating figures 
like that. My fervent hope is that the Million Mom March will succeed 
where so many other efforts in recent years have failed, and that 
Congress at long last will be persuaded to act. The irresistible force 
of the Million Mom March is about to meet the immoveable object of 
Congress--and I intend to do all I can to see that the immoveable 
object of Congress finally moves.
  Mr. ROCKEFELLER. Mr. President, I am proud today to recognize and 
welcome the visit to Washington, DC by a group of my fellow West 
Virginians for this Sunday's ``Million Mom March.''
  The Million Mom March, coinciding with Mothers' Day, is a grassroots 
effort led by people across the country--Dads and Kids included--
dedicated to educating our children and our nation about guns; both the 
dangers posed by their misuse and the tragic toll this misuse has taken 
on our country's youth, their friends, and their families. The people 
who attend this event here in Washington will have gathered in the 
parking lots of schools, churches, and synagogues across the country, 
and will have come here to let those of us in Congress know, in no 
uncertain terms, that we need to be doing more to protect our children.
  I am pleased to say that among those relaying that message this 
weekend will be a delegation of Moms from West Virginia, many with 
their entire families in tow. As they point out, one difference many of 
these West Virginian Moms may have from others participating in this 
weekend's events is that they also have hunters in their own families. 
In fact, it would not surprise me at all to find out that more than a 
few of the folks marching were hunters themselves.
  In West Virginia, we respect the rights of law-abiding citizens to 
keep and bear arms, and we consider parents and children hunting 
together to be a time-honored tradition. Yet our state legislature has 
already taken the responsible step of limiting possession and legal 
ownership of handguns to those 18 and older. Now the West Virginian 
Moms join with their counterparts from around the nation to demand that 
Members of Congress respond appropriately to the epidemic of American 
children killed and injured by accidents and crime involving guns.
  Unfortunately, all too often when we in Congress discuss the misuse 
of guns, the debate turns into a pointless back-and-forth about whether 
we have too many gun laws, or too few. Rather than engage in that 
debate, I would just invite my colleagues to consider these staggering 
statistics:
  One in 910 American children die because of the misuse of guns before 
the age of 20.
  American children under the age of 15 are twelve times more likely to 
die from gunfire than children in 25 other industrialized countries 
combined.
  Seventy-seven percent of murder victims aged 13-17 are killed by a 
firearm.
  Last year:
  4,205 children and teens were killed by gunfire;
  2,562 were murdered by gunfire;
  1,262 committed suicide using a firearm; and
  306 died from an accidental shooting.
  Each day:
  Two children under the age of 5 are murdered;
  Six children and youths under 20 commit suicide;
  Ten children and youths under 20 are homicide victims; and
  Twelve children and youth under 20 die from firearm misuse.
  Between 1979 and 1997, gunfire killed nearly 80,000 children and 
teens in America--25,000 more than the total number of American 
soldiers killed in battle in Vietnam.
  Firearms wounded an additional 320,000 children during this same 
period.
  In that period, more than 25,000 children took their own lives with 
firearms, and nearly 10,000 died as a result of an accidental shooting.
  In 1997, my home state of West Virginia lost 23 children younger than 
20 to firearm misuse, up seven from the previous year. Nine were 
murdered, ten committed suicide, and three were the victims of 
accidents.
  Mr. President, last year the United States Senate passed the Juvenile 
Justice bill. Among its provisions, this bill contained some courageous 
efforts to address the culture of crime and violence in which our 
children are being raised. The bill also featured some common-sense 
measures designed to make guns safer, and provisions to keep firearms 
out of the hands of criminals. The Senate also sought to close the so-
called gun show loophole. Sadly, our seeming inability to have any 
discussion about guns has kept the conferees on this bill from 
reporting back to the respective houses with a version for final 
passage.
  My purpose here today is to join the Million Moms in calling 
attention to the bottom line. We live in a society in which the lives 
of children are tragically at risk because of the virtually unfettered 
availability of guns. Our respect for the constitutional rights of gun 
owners should never overwhelm the love and caring we have for our 
children. I commend the Moms, from West Virginia and around the 
country, who come to remind us what our priorities should be.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Virginia has the floor.

                          ____________________