[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 151 (Friday, October 5, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2074]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       NATIONWIDE GUN BUYBACK ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, October 4, 2007

  Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, I was first encouraged to introduce the 
Nationwide Gun Buyback Act, NGBA, in 2003 after actions taken by the 
District of Columbia residents on Father's Day. On that day, citizens 
who had lost relatives and representatives of 20 advocacy and victim-
support groups gathering at Freedom Plaza, a stone's throw from the 
White House, to declare a moratorium on murder for the Father's Day 
weekend. Not only did their moratorium have important symbolic value; 
in fact there was only one murder that weekend. Of primary importance 
was the fact that the moratorium was entirely citizen initiated. 
Residents themselves, around the country, must take responsibility for 
crime and not regard criminal activity as a matter for the police 
alone. In 2006 we had the fewest murders on record for the District of 
Columbia in 20 years, however, 2007 is on pace for an increase in the 
murder rate for the first time in 5 years, a trend reflected in many 
metropolitan cities, and nearly all of these killings were committed by 
handguns.
  This bill would provide Federal funds to local jurisdictions to 
engage in gun buyback programs like the successful programs that have 
been conducted by the District of Columbia. Under the bill, funds would 
be distributed through the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 
HUD. After evaluation of proposals, added weight would be given to 
jurisdictions with the greatest incidence of gun violence. The NGBA 
would require that a jurisdiction certify that it is capable of 
destroying the guns within 30 days, that it can conduct the program 
safely, and that an amnesty appropriate for the jurisdiction will be 
offered. Not only individuals, but groups such as gangs and crews could 
take advantage of the buyback provisions to encourage them to disarm 
themselves.
  This bill is necessary because, despite the extraordinary 
demonstrated success of the gun buyback program in the District, local 
jurisdictions have no readily available funds for similar programs. The 
District was forced to find money on an ad hoc basis and ran out of 
funds despite many residents who still desired to turn in guns. 
Initially, the District conducted a pilot program using funds from HUD. 
Confronted with long lines of residents, the Police Department then 
took the program citywide, using drug asset forfeiture funds. Even so, 
after using $290,000, the city ran out of funds, but not out of guns 
that could have been collected. The guns were a ``good buy,'' but hard-
pressed jurisdictions, especially big cities, should not have to rob 
Peter to pay Paul when it comes to public safety. The federal 
government can play a unique and non-controversial role in reducing gun 
violence by providing the small amount authorized by my bill, $50 
million, to encourage buybacks efforts where a local jurisdiction 
believes they can be helpful.
  This bill is also a timely reminder as the District's handgun ban 
goes before the Supreme Court of the United States, the first time 
since 1939 that a Second Amendment case has been brought before the 
Supreme Court. Handguns and their impact on inner cities are 
indisputable. This legislation offers a common sense attempt to help 
local jurisdictions reduce killings. All jurisdictions, regardless of 
local views or laws, want to eliminate the special menace of illegal 
guns.
  Importantly, the bill does not conflict with most stances on the 
controversial issue of gun control. The bill would simply allow people 
who desire to remove guns from their homes to do so without incurring 
criminal penalties for possession. Families, and especially mothers, 
have feared guns in their homes, but often do not know how to get rid 
of them. In most jurisdictions, a grandmother, petrified that there is 
a gun in the house for example, or her grandson, who may possess the 
illegal weapon, cannot turn it in without subjecting themselves to 
prosecution. This is reason enough for gun buyback efforts.
  Like tax amnesty, gun amnesty, puts a premium on the ultimate goal. 
When the goal is taxes, the government puts a premium on getting 
payment for the amount owed. When the goal is guns, the premium is on 
getting deadly weapons off the streets and out of peoples' homes. This 
bill is entirely voluntary and does not compel anyone to give up her 
handgun, even one that is illegally held, it simply offers those who do 
not want guns in their homes an opportunity to safely dispose of them.
  I encourage colleagues to support this very important legislation.

                          ____________________