[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 94 (Tuesday, July 18, 2006)]
[House]
[Page H5364]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   GUN AMENDMENTS TO SCIENCE, COMMERCE, JUSTICE, STATE APPROPRIATIONS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from New York (Mrs. McCarthy) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mrs. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, this body's war on common sense 
continues.
  Before the Independence Day recess, the House approved two amendments 
to the Science, Commerce, Justice, State Appropriations bill that 
promote irresponsible gun ownership and discourage police departments 
from working together to solve gun crimes. Last year the House passed 
legislation that would make sure that gun locks are included with all 
handgun sales. Last month the House stripped away that provision.
  Gun safety locks can save lives. I agree with the proponents of these 
measures that most gun owners are responsible and store their guns 
safely and securely. I am not worried about these gun owners. Many 
responsible gun owners already voluntarily equip their guns with safety 
locks. Gun locks are needed to prevent accidents with the minority of 
gun owners who are not responsible. And while the pro-gun lobby does 
not like to talk about it, yes, there are irresponsible gun owners out 
there.
  Last month in New Jersey an 11-year-old found his grandfather's gun 
and killed his 12-year-old best friend. A gun lock that you can 
purchase online for less than $7 would have prevented this tragedy. 
According to the CDC, 151 children died of accidental shotgun wounds in 
2003. Mandatory gun locks would have saved some of those children's 
lives.
  Gun locks prevent stolen guns from being used in crimes. Opponents of 
mandatory gun locks cite that the cost of gun locks prevent gun 
ownership. That is truly nonsense. This is like saying the added cost 
of air bags and seat belts prevent people from buying cars. And, again, 
trigger locks are relatively inexpensive. Seven dollars could save a 
child's life. Mr. Speaker, is a $7 gunlock really infringing on second 
amendment rights? Of course not.
  I wish I could say that the amendment stripping away the gunlock 
provision was the only nonsensical amendment to the Department of 
Justice appropriations bill, but it was not. Once again, this bill 
would have made felons out of law enforcement officials who share ATF 
gun tracing information with police departments in other jurisdictions.
  The ATF's gun-tracing program helps local police solve gun crimes by 
analyzing the unique marks made on bullets and cartridge cases when 
guns are fired. The images of these markings can be compared with other 
images in more than 200 Federal, State, and local law enforcement 
laboratories. But this appropriation bill would have made it a crime, a 
crime, for a police department to share information from the database 
with another department.
  Say a police department in my district on Long Island obtains 
ballistic information from the ATF and a similar shooting occurs in New 
York City. The Long Island department could not share that information. 
In fact, an officer who did share this information would be arrested. 
This is absolutely insane.
  Instead of cracking down on criminals using guns, this provision 
would treat police officers like criminals. To paraphrase my friend, 
Mayor Bloomberg of New York, it is a god-awful bill.
  Again, some Members of this body put their allegiance to the NRA 
above common sense. The tracing program provides law enforcement 
agencies with valuable information about gun trafficking that can 
prevent crimes from happening. Tracing helps the public identify gun 
dealers and traffickers who are supplying illegal guns in our 
communities. But this provision would prevent the use of trace data as 
evidence in any State or Federal court or any nonATF administrative 
procedure. This provision cuts local law enforcement out of the loop. 
Without this tracing data, local law enforcement officers will not be 
able to pursue gun suppliers that have been implicated in crimes 
without the ATF's getting involved first. And we all know the ATF does 
not have the resources to get involved in every civil issue regarding 
gun crimes.
  We let our police departments go after taverns that serve underage 
drinkers, but Congress will not allow them to crack down on the 1 
percent, 1 percent, of dealers in this country who sell guns involved 
in 57 percent of the crimes.
  Mr. Speaker, it is time for common sense. I hope the other body and 
the eventual conferees who will determine the final version of this 
appropriation bill will exercise more common sense than the House did 
last month.
  Mr. Speaker, I have been here 10 years. I have never put any 
legislation forward that would take away the right of someone to own a 
gun. I am here for gun safety issues. I am here to save lives. I am 
here to keep down medical costs. I am here to protect our communities. 
We can do better. And we can with commonsense laws.

                          ____________________