[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 106 (Friday, July 29, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Page S9445]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       UNANIMOUS CONSENT REQUEST

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert the 
letters from the Fraternal Order of Police and the Law Enforcement 
Alliance of America in that section of the Record containing the debate 
on the Kennedy amendment relating to armor-piercing ammunition.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                                                      Grand Lodge,


                                    Fraternal Order of Police,

                                    Washington, DC, July 29, 2005.
     Hon. Larry Craig,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Craig: I am writing to advise you of our 
     strong opposition to Amendment 1615, offered by Senator 
     Kennedy to S. 397, the ``Protection of Lawful Commerce in 
     Arms Act.''
       Senator Kennedy will certainly present his amendment as an 
     ``officer safety issue'' to get dangerous, ``cop-killer'' 
     bullets off the shelves. Regardless of its presentation, the 
     amendment's actual aim and effect would be to expand the 
     definition of ``armor-piercing'' to include ammunition based, 
     not on any threat to law enforcement officers, but on a 
     manufacturer's marketing strategy.
       The truth of the matter is that only one law enforcement 
     officer has been killed by a round fired from a handgun which 
     penetrated his soft body armor--and in that single instance, 
     it was the body armor that failed to provide the expected 
     ballistic protection, not because the round was ``armor 
     piercing.''
       It is our view that no expansion or revision of the current 
     law is needed to protect law enforcement officers. To put it 
     simply, this is not a genuine officer safety issue. If it 
     were, Senator Kennedy would not be offering this amendment to 
     a bill he strongly opposes and is working to defeat.
       The Kennedy amendment was considered and defeated by the 
     Senate Judiciary Committee in March 2003 on a 10-6 vote. We 
     believe that it should be rejected again.
       On behalf of the more than 321,000 members of the Fraternal 
     Order of Police, I thank you for taking our views on this 
     issue into consideration. Please do not hesitate to contact 
     me, or Executive Director Jim Pasco, through our Washington 
     office if I can be of any further assistance.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Chuck Canterbury,
     National President.
                                  ____

                                      The Law Enforcement Alliance


                                                   of America,

                                                    July 29, 2005.
     Hon. Larry Craig,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Craig: Speaking on behalf of the 75,000 
     Members and Supporters of the Law Enforcement Alliance of 
     America (LEAA), we wish to add our voice to the growing group 
     of law enforcement representatives who strongly oppose 
     efforts to gut or kill S. 397, the ``Protection of Lawful 
     Commerce in Arms Act.''
       Senator Ted Kennedy's effort to portray his poison pill 
     amendment, number 1615, as a law enforcement safety issue by 
     using the term ``cop-killer bullet'' is a thinly veiled 
     fraud. Senator Kennedy opposes the effort to reign in runaway 
     trial lawyers who are bent on driving the legitimate firearm 
     industry out of business and this amendment has everything to 
     do with killing a bill he opposes, not protecting cops.
       The Kennedy amendment is an effort to label some bullets as 
     ``bad'' while others are ``good;'' this is ill considered and 
     misleading at best. Law enforcement officers are killed and 
     assaulted by criminals. Criminals bent on attacking officers 
     will use whatever tool they can to hurt and kill. There are 
     no good bullets or bad bullets; in this case there are only 
     bad amendments whose true intent is to be a ``poison pill'' 
     to S. 397.
       This amendment, along with other hostile amendments, should 
     be identified for what they really are: an outright effort to 
     kill S. 397 and they should be defeated.
       Please know that many in the law enforcement community 
     encourage you to continue steadfastly in support of America's 
     gun manufacturers who provide our officers the tools to 
     return home safely at the end of their shift.
       Thank you for your unwavering support of America's brave 
     men and women who wear a badge. Please do not hesitate to 
     contact me or Ted Deeds if we can be of further assistance.
           Sincerely,
                                                   James J. Fotis,
     Executive Director.

                          ____________________