[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 58 (Thursday, April 25, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H2336-H2343]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 3, 2013, the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Hartzler) is
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mrs. HARTZLER. When I was 10 years old, I got my first job. It would
require skill and perseverance and patience, and it would have a real
potential economic impact on our family hog farm. My dad hired me. He
paid me 15 cents a unit.
[[Page H2337]]
What was my job? It was shooting sparrows around our farm. At that
time, there was a disease going around rural America, and sparrows were
taking it from farm to farm. So it had a real practical purpose.
But, as I'm a parent now, I look back on it. I used to tag around
with my dad all the time, and I wonder maybe if he just kind of wanted
to give me something to do, in addition to a job.
But I had a lot of fun that summer going around the grain bins and
the sheds on our farm and our buildings and trying to catch that bird
unawares. And I think over the entire summer, I may have earned around
45 cents. So it wasn't a big moneymaker, but I sure had a lot of fun.
And I learned some important things. I learned that using firearms
can be a fun hobby and hunting can be fun; also, that using firearms
can have a real practical purpose. And over the years, I've shot a lot
of different kind of firearms now and different sizes, but I really
appreciate what our Founding Fathers did when they established our
Second Amendment and gave us that as our basic right.
This afternoon, my colleagues and I want to highlight not only why
the Second Amendment is important to us and to the people in our
districts, but how it is also important to this country. We want to
dispel the myths that decisions about how to address violence are based
on facts and not emotions.
As a lifelong gun owner as well as a former public schoolteacher, I
appreciate the thoughtful discussion that our country has been having
after the tragic school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. My heart has
gone out to those families, as I know everyone in America's heart has,
and our prayers as well. We want to understand the desire to stop the
violence. I share that goal but believe that many of the proposals
being put forth miss the mark. So let's look at some of the proposals
and compare them to the facts.
One proposal that is being talked about and has been talked about is
to ban what's called assault rifles. Well, the fact is that lawbreakers
ignore the laws. Banning firearms would only take guns away from our
law-abiding citizens and ensure that lawbreakers have guns.
I was watching TV a couple of weeks ago, and I saw the sponsor of the
Senate bill to ban these assault rifles and she was giving a rationale
why she thought it was important. She was saying, Well, gangs in
California have assault rifles, and we've got to get these off the
streets and out of the hands of our gang members, so we need to pass
this bill. And I just kind of scratched my head and thought, Do you
really believe that gang members are going to listen and pay attention
to a law that Washington, D.C., passes? They break laws every day. I
really can't see them getting together and having an organizational
meeting and saying, Well, let's have the legislative report and have
the gentleman, the gang member, say, Well, they passed a new law in
D.C., so I guess we can't use assault rifles anymore.
We've got to look at the facts about whether passing this law would
really address violence. In this case, it certainly wouldn't.
As far as that legislation, also the word ``assault'' is an
adjective. It is not a gun. What gun control advocates call an assault
rifle is actually a regular rifle with only a few cosmetic differences
on the outside, such as a pistol grip, a hand guard, and a removable
magazine. It is misleading to label firearms with negative words in
order to advance a gun control agenda.
The fact is that more deaths have been inflicted using fists and
knives and baseball bats than with a gun. In fact, one-and-a-half times
as many homicides are committed with blunt objects such as a baseball
bat, over two times as many homicides with fists, and five times as
many with knives.
So why aren't proponents of bans on firearms calling baseball bats
assault baseball bats or assault knives? Well, the reason is because
the American people know that objects are only tools of people who wish
to do others harm. They are not the cause. Now, it's a slogan, it's a
bumper sticker, but it is true: guns don't kill people; people do.
So that's one proposal that I think misses the mark.
Another proposal is to create universal background checks. Well, the
fact is that the vast majority of gun sales already have background
checks with the sale, because all firearm sales through dealers must
complete the instant background check. The only transactions that do
not require the background checks are sales between individual gun
owners; and they are not the problem. Requiring law-abiding citizens to
have to go to a dealer and get a background check on their neighbor in
order to sell him a gun would do little to stop mass killings.
Imposing the new law would not have stopped the Sandy Hook killer. He
stole the guns he used to carry out his evil scheme. The same with the
Aurora, Colorado, shooter in the movie theater. He actually had passed
a background check. So passing a new law like this does not really
address the issue.
{time} 1610
It's time for all of us to address the real issue of how to protect
our children and schools rather than to use a tragedy to impose more
government control on law-abiding citizens or infringe on our Second
Amendment rights.
Several of my colleagues are going to join me today to share their
insights into why the Second Amendment matters to them and their
constituents, and to discuss how to address the real issues of violence
in our country.
I would like to start off with my fellow colleague from the great
State of Missouri (Mr. Luetkemeyer). So gentleman, what would you like
to share about our Second Amendment rights?
Mr. LUETKEMEYER. Thank you, Congresswoman Hartzler. It's always good
to work with another fellow Member from Missouri, the Show Me State,
where we can give some folks a little insight as to what's going on.
Mr. Speaker, when I was growing up in rural Missouri, firearms were a
regular part of my life. Beyond learning how to safely handle firearms
while hunting and shooting, I learned also to respect them. Like so
many parents, I made sure those same lessons were instilled in my own
children.
It is because of the efforts of parents or adults who can have a
positive influence on a child that the culture of safety and respect
toward firearms have been so well maintained in rural America. Our
communities and families work very hard to ensure this heritage, and it
is very upsetting when lawmakers--many of whom know nothing about
firearms--attempt to place limitations on our Second Amendment right to
keep and bear arms.
The Second Amendment is, in fact, a primary constitutional right that
sets America far apart from nations around the world. Our Founders got
this right. They knew ensuring the right of a citizen to keep and bear
arms would always be vital to ensuring personal freedoms.
I have spent my time as an elected official--first in the Missouri
State House of Representatives, and now in Congress--working to protect
the Second Amendment. However, not only is it important to protect the
right to own the gun; it is also important to protect the privacy of
the information about the ownership of the gun and the conceal-carry
permits and things like that.
I will give you an example. In my State just recently--in fact, we're
barely finished working on this--it has come to our attention that the
Department of Revenue and Highway Patrol, in working in conjunction
with the Social Security Administration's Inspector General, was
looking into getting control of the conceal-carry permit list of all
the folks in the State of Missouri to compare it for mental health
disability fraud in our State. While we were satisfied in going through
all the different informational checks and crosschecks with regard to
the Federal side of this--that they did everything legally they were
supposed to do as well as the information was protected and not
compromised--it still pointed out some of the looseness and sloppiness
that went on with regards to the way that the State folks handled our
information. To me, that is something that we have to be constantly
watchful for.
Someone once said the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. I think
with regard to Second Amendment rights, it certainly is something that
is very true.
[[Page H2338]]
Mrs. HARTZLER. I thank you, gentleman. I think well said there. Our
rural heritage is based on our Second Amendment rights, and well said.
Certainly, being from Missouri, I appreciate your work--and we've
worked together on this. This is a very real concern. I call it the
Department of Revenue debacle.
I certainly appreciate State Senator Kurt Schaefer and others there
in Missouri who have been on the forefront of getting to the bottom of
this and how our conceal-carry list was released to Federal authorities
without all of the permissions and all of the safety guards in place.
That is very, very disturbing. So thank you for your work on that and
for your comments.
I would now like to yield to a new Member here, who has just hit the
ground running and who brings so much to our whole delegation with his
service. I appreciate the gentleman from New York (Mr. Collins), and I
would be happy to yield time to you, gentleman.
Mr. COLLINS of New York. I want to thank both the gentlewoman and
gentleman from Missouri for their comments.
Mr. Speaker, I come to the House floor this afternoon to stand in
support of the Second Amendment. I also proudly stand here in support
of all the law-abiding gun owners in New York's 27th Congressional
District and all across our country.
As a father and a grandfather, the recent violent tragedies in our
country have left my heart heavy. But as a gun owner with a carry
permit, I proudly carry my dad's Ithaca .45 from World War II. As a
Member of Congress representing thousands of law-abiding gun owners, I
join my colleagues and say we refuse to allow these tragedies to be
used for political gain.
These recent crimes should not be used as a pretense to weaken our
constitutional rights. And law-abiding citizens should not fall victim
to additional laws and regulations which have no impact on reducing
crime.
Let us not kid ourselves. What was recently proposed in the Senate
and what has recently become law in my home State of New York would
have done nothing to prevent the Newtown or Christmastime shootings of
firefighters in Webster, a community just outside my district.
I strongly support the Second Amendment and the right of an
individual to protect themselves and their family. The actions of
depraved killers should not punish law-abiding gun owners. And the
actions of this Congress should not pick away at the rights guaranteed
by our Constitution.
Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you, gentleman. That is well said. Tragedies
should not be used for political gain. That is so true. We want to get
at the heart of what causes violence and how to protect children, and
not just pass laws that wouldn't even address the problem.
I'm glad to see my colleague from South Dakota here. She is quite a
champion of gun rights. We're looking forward to hearing your comments,
lady, about the Second Amendment.
Mrs. NOEM. Well, thank you. I appreciate that, and I thank the
gentlelady from Missouri for her leadership on this issue.
You know, people sacrificed for the rights that we have. The
Constitution is so important to me. It's important to the people of
South Dakota and to my family, and the Second Amendment is very dear to
our heritage.
That's why I wanted to come to the floor today, because I wanted to
talk about how the Constitution guarantees us the individual's right to
keep and bear arms. That's why I strongly support the Second Amendment.
This right isn't abstract to me. It's part of my family's heritage,
and it's my State's culture. I am a gun owner and a member of the
Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus. I'll continue to fight and defend
this right for the people of South Dakota and for our way of life.
You know, the Second Amendment has been described in many different
ways over the years, such as it is there to support our natural rights
of self-defense. It is there for resistance of oppression. It even was
described as a civic duty to act in concert in the defense of the
State. These are all reasons that we need to make sure that we are
continuously talking about the benefits of this right, what it means to
mothers and fathers who are protecting their families, and what it
means to us growing up in a country where people sacrificed, bled and
died to protect the rights that we had.
You know, growing up in South Dakota, I've always had an enormous
amount of respect and appreciation for the outdoors and for hunting. If
you aren't familiar with South Dakota, I'll tell you that hunting is a
very important part of it. It's one of our greatest traditions and ways
of life across the State.
I grew up hunting and taking hunting trips--sometimes for weeks on
end, one- or two-week trips to the mountains to hunt with my dad and my
brothers. It was good family quality time. We had a lot of
conversations while we were enjoying the outdoors.
The first person that taught me how to hunt and to carry a gun
correctly was my grandmother. She and I and her black lab BJ would go
out and spend hours together. It was during those times that she not
only taught me the proper way to handle a firearm and to enjoy the
wildlife, but also life lessons that I don't think I would have gotten
if I hadn't spent that much time with her in the outdoors enjoying that
heritage.
This belief in the Second Amendment is critically important to South
Dakotans, and I certainly appreciate the fact that I had the
opportunity to enjoy it. Now I have the chance with my own kids and
with my husband, Brian.
Opening day of pheasant season is always big in South Dakota. It's a
family reunion, but obviously there are many, many friends that show up
for that as well. It starts with a big breakfast. We all gather
together for good entertainment and conversation until it's time to go
out and start enjoying the day together. It's a tradition that we don't
want to lose. Every year, sportsmen and -women flock to South Dakota to
enjoy this tradition and take advantage of our State's abundance of
hunting and wildlife.
I want to give you a few facts about South Dakota. With over 700,000
acres of public hunting land, South Dakota is home to the Nation's best
pheasant hunting, and it's the pheasant hunting capital of the world.
In fact, last year, pheasant hunters were able to put 1.55 million
roasters in their game bags.
In 2011 alone, the pheasant hunting season had an economic impact of
over $225 million to our State. It's our number two industry as
tourism, and a big part of that happens during the hunting season. A
majority of the money spent from that $225 million comes in from out-
of-state visitors.
Hunting and maintaining a healthy habitat for wildlife is one of the
great things that I appreciate about South Dakota, and it's why I'm so
proud to call it home.
During the debates that have occurred here in Washington, D.C.,
recently, I received many, many--thousands, actually--letters from
South Dakotans. I just want to read a couple of excerpts from a couple
of those if I have the chance.
The first one was from Kevin in Aberdeen. He said:
I urge you to oppose any and all antigun legislation that
will simply penalize law-abiding gun owners. Instead, focus
on improvements to our Nation's mental health system and
enhancing school security, while respecting our Second
Amendment rights.
Mike, who is also from Aberdeen, in talking about a bill that had
been proposed said:
This is clearly the wrong answer for a real issue. Taking
away a right that has been proven to save lives time and
again is the wrong reason against obvious mental issues and
security lapses.
{time} 1620
The last one I want to touch on is from Greg. He says:
I agree that work needs to be done to keep weapons out of
the hands of mentally ill individuals, but this isn't the
answer. I regularly use a rifle that would be banned under
some proposed legislation when controlling coyotes and the
rabbit populations on my farm. I've also used the rifle for
controlling prairie dog populations on other landowner
property, in addition to hunting on public lands.
That's one of the things you don't talk about a lot. For many people
in the middle of the country out in western South Dakota, they simply
wouldn't be able to be in business anymore if they didn't have the
opportunity to control predators that could
[[Page H2339]]
wipe out their entire livestock herd. The Second Amendment guarantees
them the right to have the ability to do that.
This is just a small glimpse into the traditions that we have in
South Dakota and the heritage that gun ownership offers all of us.
I want to thank the gentlelady for giving me the opportunity to talk
about that. The Second Amendment is critically important. It needs to
be defended, and I was very proud to stand here and do that with you
today.
Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you, lady. It was sure important, I think, that
those voices from South Dakota would be heard and how it is a part of a
heritage of so many people in this country and how it has very
practical and real benefits to the citizens. We need to focus on
solutions that are based on facts and not emotions.
One thing that the lady talked about is that it is a constitutional
right. And I wanted to just reiterate that the U.S. Supreme Court has
affirmed that gun ownership is an individual right. In District of
Columbia v. Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court held that D.C.'s complete
gun ban infringes on the Second Amendment rights of the D.C. citizens,
and it clarified that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental
individual right to have a firearm in the home.
So this isn't something just that was talked about and established
years ago when our country was founded; it has been upheld recently. We
are very thankful for that and want to continue to protect that right.
We have a gentleman here from Texas, who I'm sure knows all about
rights and wants to share a little bit about Texas views on why it's
important to have our Second Amendment rights. This is Blake
Farenthold, and I yield to the gentleman.
Mr. FARENTHOLD. Thank you very much.
As I was listening to the gentlelady from South Dakota (Mrs. Noem),
her stories about growing up around firearms and the quality time that
she spent with her grandmother learning marksmanship and learning gun
safety and learning about life in the outdoors really struck home with
me.
I remember growing up with my grandfather, driving around the ranch
learning to shoot a .22, moving up and learning how to shoot a shotgun
and learning how to do so safely. In Texas, gun control is hitting what
you aim at, and that's part of growing up, with an understanding of
firearm safety and marksmanship. It's part of many American's lives,
just like it was a part of my life.
I got a lot of letters as the debate about gun control was going
through the Senate, as well, urging me to continue to stand up for the
Second Amendment rights that our Founding Fathers realized was so
important--the right to bear arms; the right that those in the
Revolutionary War fought for.
One of the letters came just this week from a student and a Boy Scout
named Caleb. He said:
Dear Representative Farenthold:
I wanted to thank you for your beliefs on gun control in
our State. I believe that we all have a right to bear arms
and protect ourselves if we are in harm.
And that really kind of sums up the feeling of a lot of folks in
Texas and a lot of the farmers and ranchers that I represent.
As Representative Noem was talking about, spending time shooting with
her children, one of the things that I look back on in raising my
daughters--they are now in college--and you look back and think, well,
what should I have done? I should have spent more time outside with
them. I should have spent more time passing on some of the things that
I've learned. But there's still an opportunity.
Morgan, my 24-year-old daughter, came to me just a couple of weekends
ago when I was back home in Corpus Christi and said, ``Dad, can we take
a concealed-carry class together this summer?'' So that's on the agenda
for when I'm back in Texas is passing on the tradition of the safe and
responsible use of firearms in my family.
I'm looking forward to spending time with her in that concealed-carry
class, and I hope it instills in her the same passion that I have for
the sport of shooting. If this plays out well, we're going to spend
time on the skeet range; we're going to spend some time out hunting.
It's something that I'm really looking forward to. It's an important
part of America. It's an important part of folks' family lives.
The Second Amendment has got to be protected, and the traditions of
safe firearms use in this country needs to continue for a myriad of
reasons--just more reasons than I can list.
I see you've got quite a few other people here who want to talk about
their experiences with the Second Amendment and their beliefs, so I'm
not going to eat up all the time. Thank you.
Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you very much, Blake. I'll look forward to
hearing how it goes in August with your daughter there.
I think you made a really great point about the important role of
protection and how firearms provide a very practical and very, very
vital role in self-protection. Estimates range anywhere from 83,000
times a year up to perhaps 1 million times a year citizens of this
country use firearms in order to protect themselves. In Missouri, let
me share with you just a couple of examples.
In 2008, there was a woman in Cape Girardeau who endured a horrific
crime. Someone broke into her apartment through a window and she was
raped. Two days later she came home and that person was there again.
She had the window repaired, but they were there. This time, though,
she was prepared. She had borrowed a friend's shotgun, and she
protected herself this time with the shotgun and the outcome was
totally different and the person is in jail now.
There's another example in Kansas City. There was a man who had a
restraining order against someone who was trying to do him harm. He
entered his home and, once again, he was attacked by this person with a
knife. But, thanks to having a gun in the home, he was able to stop
him, and that person is behind bars as well.
We could go on with many, many examples, but Americans every day use
their Second Amendment rights to protect and defend their families and
themselves. It is so important that we keep that ability to do that.
That's why our Founding Fathers established this right.
Now I would like to turn to my friend from Michigan, Tim Walberg, to
share your thoughts on the Second Amendment. Gentleman, thank you for
being here.
Mr. WALBERG. I thank the gentlelady, my friend from Missouri, for
holding this opportunity for us to speak on the Second Amendment.
I've often said at town hall meetings that we're talking about the
Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, the Second Amendment in the
Bill of Rights, that namely speaks to the issue that was declared so
strongly in the Declaration of Independence, that document, one of two
documents that could be considered the greatest manmade documents ever
penned, the Declaration of Independence and then the Constitution.
The Bill of Rights understood what the Declaration said, that all men
are created equal and endowed with certain unalienable rights, namely,
the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
I think the Framers and Founders understood with the First Amendment,
the right to free speech and the freedom of religion, but also that
understanding that the right to life involved making sure that I could
defend myself, protect myself, care for myself, feed myself with the
use of a weapon in the field in hunting, but not simply that. Mr.
Speaker, I will say, it was there to make sure that a citizen, a free
citizen of the United States, was able to care for himself or herself,
his family or her family, in any shape or form.
And so I see the First Amendment as important, but I see equally
important the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms. And as
my friend Ted Nugent says: ``Keep'' is defined as ``It's mine. It's not
yours. You're not going to take it from me.''
Very simple. Very simple.
I think we need to understand as there are laws that are being
thought of, well-intentioned even, and yet laws that really aren't
based in reality of what takes place around civilization, when it
understands that we need to make sure that we don't step on other
[[Page H2340]]
people's rights and their freedoms and their opportunities, yet there
is a place when we must be prepared to defend ourselves so that those
rights can be carried on, not only for ourselves, but for those that
count on us to care.
{time} 1630
In a famous quote, Benjamin Franklin said it this way:
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
temporary safety deserve neither safety nor liberty.
Well said.
I think there are people with well-meaning intentions right now that
aren't thinking of the fact that liberty comes with a cost, that it
comes with the responsibility and an accountability to continue on to
make sure that liberty continues, not only for me, but for you and
everyone else, and that liberty is protected from those who would take
away our freedoms, our rights, even our lives.
I like to hunt, and I love to trapshoot, and I love to shoot skeets,
and I love to shoot sporting clay, and I love to target practice. On my
farm, we have a target range, and my wife uses it as well. In fact, she
uses it better than I do with a pistol. Yet with the fun and enjoyment
that can come from being trained, we also understand the concerns that
are there as with any tool, as my dad taught me. He taught me not only
how to shoot a gun and about the inherent dangers that were there that
also demanded my responsibility and accountability, but he also taught
me how to use a radial saw. He said it would work very well in doing
the things it was meant for, but you have to be careful with it.
So, yes, we who believe in the Second Amendment believe that there
ought to be training and that people ought to care for how they use
their weapons, but we believe they ought to be allowed for us to freely
use as they were intended for all good purposes. I grew up on the south
side of Chicago. Leroy Brown and Junkyard Dog were my neighbors. I love
that area of Calumet City where I grew up, but I also know that there
are dangers. I also know that protection is required and that the
protection to fit the need and the concern is what must be there.
So I would say to my friend and colleague, as well as to the Speaker
and to those who might listen to these words, that the Second Amendment
is not the problem; and the law-abiding citizen who carries out the
responsibilities of the Second Amendment is not the problem. Most of us
fit in that category. Nothing in the bill that was put forth in the
Senate, or any other thoughts, would take care of those criminals. It
would not have changed the Boston bombers in their ability to get and
to use for criminal, terrorist purposes any change or impingement on
the Second Amendment. They would have still committed their atrocities,
and they would have still gotten their weapons. The only negative
impact would have been on law-abiding citizens, the ability to keep and
to bear arms, to protect themselves--to carry out the constitutional
right.
So I thank the gentlelady from Missouri for allowing us to speak on
this issue.
Hopefully, some would hear the common sense of it all and not just
hear what some would say: that if we appreciate weapons, we are
warmongers or that we are living in danger and producing danger in
other people's lives. The fact is just the opposite: we are there to
ensure safety, ensure liberty and to make sure that people are
protected against criminals who would abuse us regardless of what the
law or the Constitution says.
I will defend that, and I thank my colleagues for standing for this
reality and truth for the Second Amendment.
Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you, Mr. Walberg. Well said.
I like how you point out that the right to life is tied to the Second
Amendment--to be able to defend ourselves and protect that life. That
is so true. Also, it's not a safety issue. In fact, violent crime has
dropped by 72 percent since 1993 in this country; and, actually, there
has been a 47 percent increase in U.S. households that have guns. We
now have 47 percent of us who own a gun, and crime has gone down. So an
excellent point there.
I would like to yield to my friend from Louisiana, Representative
Steve Scalise. He is a champion of our Second Amendment.
Thank you for coming.
Mr. SCALISE. I want to thank my colleague, Mrs. Hartzler from
Missouri, for hosting this leadership hour to talk about our Second
Amendment rights and for yielding time as well.
I am very proud to rise in strong support of our Second Amendment
rights and also in opposition to many of these bills that have been
floating around Congress that would take away those rights that are so
precious to all Americans. Those rights were so important that the
Second Amendment to the Constitution--part of our Bill of Rights, the
first set of amendments to our Constitution--enshrined this right to
the American people to bear arms. This wasn't a right that they just
gave to the militia, to the military, to our local law enforcement.
This was a right that was granted to all Americans because it was so
precious and important.
We were all shocked and saddened by the murders at Sandy Hook; but I
think what is also disappointing is, when you have these tragedies,
unfortunately, there are people--Washington politicians--who try to
take advantage of those tragedies, who then come behind and try to
impose their own agendas in the name of somebody else. When you look at
a lot of these bills that have been filed, they have absolutely nothing
to do with those murders or with any of these other tragedies that
we've seen.
You look at Sandy Hook. He stole the gun. The gun was from his
mother. He murdered his own mother. I think they counted over 40
different laws that were broken by the Sandy Hook murderer. Then
somebody is going to tell you that one more law, which makes it harder
for law-abiding citizens to get a gun, would have stopped him from
doing that when, in fact, he didn't even break the laws that they're
proposing.
So I think people see through that. People realize that these bills
are, unfortunately, the same bad ideas that have been floating around
for decades by people who just want to take away our Second Amendment
rights. They just don't share those same beliefs that our Founding
Fathers had when they felt that it was so important that all American
citizens have these protections.
I am proud to come from Louisiana. We call ourselves a Sportsman's
Paradise. There, when you talk about the Second Amendment, we're not
just talking about hunting. Some people want to say that the Second
Amendment is really just about hunting. It's not about hunting. It's
about a lot more than hunting. It's about the ability for people to
protect themselves.
I was in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. During those days,
there were some very dark days. We had a few weeks, not just hours or
days, where you couldn't pick up the phone and call 911. There was no
911 system. In many cases, there was no power for weeks. You couldn't
get law enforcement to come if there were somebody trying to come and
loot your house or worse, so the citizens at home in their houses with
their guns was the only protection that people had for not just days,
but for weeks after Hurricane Katrina.
One of the more frightening things that happened after Hurricane
Katrina--there were many frightening things that happened during
Katrina--but after Katrina, local law enforcement gave an order to have
the police actually go door to door in the city of New Orleans and
confiscate guns from law-abiding citizens. It actually happened. It has
been well documented to the point where I was in the State legislature
at the time, and I filed legislation to prevent that from ever being
able to happen again. In fact, the NRA, which is so decried by all of
these gun control advocates, actually stood up and said that it's wrong
for government to go door-to-door and take your guns from you.
People said, Oh, that can never happen in America.
Yet, it happened. It happened in an American city--in New Orleans.
After Katrina, there is actual video footage of a woman, Ms. Connie.
She was in her house in uptown New Orleans, and the police actually
came to her house to take her gun. She didn't want to give up her gun,
and they tackled her. They broke her collarbone. I actually brought her
to testify for my bill. I am proud to say my bill passed back then and
that no longer can anybody in Louisiana take away your guns
[[Page H2341]]
even during a natural disaster. Fortunately, because of the NRA's
leadership, they made this a national law. It's now a national law. But
that actually happened.
So this Second Amendment right is incredibly sacred, and it's
unfortunate that some try to take advantage of disasters to go and try
to chip those rights away. That's why we're here today, and that's why
I'm proud of my colleague from Missouri and of so many others who are
here to stand up for that right that we all hold dear.
Mrs. HARTZLER. Thank you very much, Steve.
It's very helpful, I think, to be reminded of the firsthand account
of what can happen and what did happen in Louisiana when the government
came to take the guns away from the citizens there. We don't ever want
to see that happen again because, like you said, it's imperative for
personal protection besides its being a personal right. So thank you
for sharing that. I appreciate it.
{time} 1640
Mrs. HARTZLER. Well, we have my friend and colleague from Indiana,
who's come to join us here, Marlin Stutzman.
You brought a couple of guests here with you today to be a part of
our Special Order?
Mr. STUTZMAN. I did.
Mrs. HARTZLER. Very good. Well, I yield to you. I want to hear what
you have to share.
Mr. STUTZMAN. I thank the lady from Missouri for yielding. I brought
my two sons, Payton and Preston, along today. So it's a father and son
outing here. Payton asked if he could come along to hear us talk about
the Second Amendment.
We, of course, we're farmers back in Indiana, and I grew up with BB
guns. And Payton now has his little BB gun and a 410/22, and Preston
has a little BB gun. So we enjoy the sport out on the farm.
I want to just thank you for bringing this issue to the floor today
because it's such an important issue for our country, and obviously a
lot of things have happened over the past several years that brings
this issue to us appropriately. I believe that we do need to have a
discussion not only about our Second Amendment rights, but about gun
safety and how each of us as Americans who owns a gun is responsible.
Of course, my wife, Christy, and I are grieving, along with our
family which is grieving for those who lost loved ones in Newtown and,
of course, in Arizona, Colorado, Virginia and so many other places.
We've had some cases in Fort Wayne of just irresponsibility, but also
intended murder. But, of course, as we saw what happened in Boston, bad
people can take any device and hurt people with those devices, and it
is always sad to see.
But one of the things that I know from constituents back home is that
they don't expect knee-jerk reactions from Washington when it comes to
legislation. And now I would like to just quote a couple of quotes from
our Founding Fathers that I think are so important and quotes about our
Second Amendment rights.
George Washington said, ``A free people ought to be armed.''
Thomas Jefferson says that, ``The strongest reason for the people to
retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect
themselves against tyranny in government.''
He also says, ``The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will
not be needed until they try to take it.''
I think that is why this motivates people to contact their Members of
Congress, to let them know how they feel.
Madam Speaker, we are a democracy that is represented by people we
send to Washington. As we saw the votes unfold in the Senate, I think
that each one of those Members in the Senate was representing the
people that they were elected by. Of course, the President was very
critical of the Senate after they were not able to pass a bill that he
had wanted. But when he is criticizing them, he is criticizing each one
of those particular Members and also the people that sent them to the
United States Senate. To watch each different vote take place, I think
it tells us that Americans across the country are not about just knee-
jerk reactions but about responsibility when it comes to gun ownership,
and it also shows their passion about protecting the Second Amendment.
Many of these Members in the Senate did not want to vote for tighter
gun control laws because they were representing the people from their
particular States.
So I believe that last week the American people spoke. It wasn't just
the Senate. The American people, through their representatives, said
that they don't want stricter gun legislation. We've already tried
Senator Feinstein's so-called ``assault weapons'' ban in the nineties
and it failed to reduce murder rates then, and it would, I believe,
fail to reduce murder rates now. The American people understand that,
and I believe that the United States Senate understands that, as well.
They've seen this before.
So while we watched the Senate work through the gun legislation,
there was one particular amendment that I thought was very intriguing,
and that was the amendment that Senator Cornyn from Texas offered. That
was an amendment that--I have a bill filed here in the House, H.R. 578.
It's called the Respecting States' Rights and Concealed Carry
Reciprocity Act of 2013, which basically allows law abiding citizens
that have a concealed weapon permit to carry across State lines to
those States that do have concealed carry permits.
Senator Cornyn offered a very similar amendment to the underlying
bill in the Senate. It almost passed. It was within three votes of
passing, which I thought was very interesting that while the President
was trying to enact stricter gun legislation, a bill that would
actually let us as Americans travel across the country almost passed in
the Senate. I think that sends a strong message to all of us as
Americans that the Senate does understand and respect the importance of
the Second Amendment but also is interested in letting those folks who
are abiding by the law to also carry throughout the country.
The bill that I've authored understands that instead of pursuing
ineffective gun controls, we really do need to strengthen the
protections for law abiding citizens who exercise their right to self-
defense every day.
One other comment is that my bill would simply make sure that law
abiding gun owners who legally carry a concealed weapon in their home
State may do so in other States. Illinois does not have a permit, so
they would not be allowed to carry there, but just about every other
State does.
I think Americans have seen over the past couple of weeks that both
sides of the aisle see that sweeping gun control legislation is
misguided and it is an attack on law-abiding gun owners, and it is
designed to advance another agenda instead of really saving lives.
I believe what we really should be focused on is the people behind
the weapon, the people that plant the bomb, the people that are taking
these particular tools and hurting other people, whether it's with a
ball bat or a crowbar or any other sort of device that people could
pick up with their hands and hurt others. We really need to focus on
the mental challenges that these people have. There has to be. There is
information that we know about these particular people, and I believe
that's who we need to focus on.
We as Americans need to make sure that we teach our children safety.
If someone has decided to purchase a gun, they have a responsibility to
understand how that particular weapon operates and the safety measures
that go along with it, just like I learned in my hunter safety course
when I was 12 years old, and also by my father, who threatened me many
times if any more windows were shot out that I was going to be paying
for them.
There are so many different exciting and joyful opportunities that
families can do together as a family with firearms, but also there is a
great responsibility that comes along with that.
Also, as the quotes that I read before from our Founding Fathers
show, there is an even greater right behind that, a principle behind
that, that we do have a responsibility not only to protect ourselves
but to protect other citizens that we live with.
So thank you for bringing this issue to the floor, and thank you to
all of those who have spoken, as well. I believe that as we continue
these discussions that it should be thoughtful, that
[[Page H2342]]
it be careful, and we in Congress have a responsibility to let people
know that we do understand that this issue is an important matter. But
as we've seen in the votes from the Senate, people want to know gun
safety is the most important issue that we're dealing with.
{time} 1650
Mrs. HARTZLER. Absolutely. Very well said. I appreciate your
comments, and I'm so glad you brought Payton and Preston along. I was
sharing earlier that I got my start on the farm with my BB gun as well.
I'm glad to hear you're well on your way to having a lot of years of
fun hunting and doing it safely with your father teaching you.
My friend from Indiana brought up so many great points. The quotes
from the Founding Fathers really bring home what this is all about and
why it is so important that we as a country retain the right as
citizens to be able to protect ourselves, not just from individuals,
but from the government even. Well said there.
As far as the Senate vote, I think you brought up an excellent point
as well, that the American people really did speak. I think
overwhelmingly the American people understand that taking away guns or
putting new restrictions on law-abiding citizens is not going to
address the problems of violence in our society, and it would not have
prevented the tragedy that occurred in Connecticut or any of the other
shootings that we have experienced. So we need to, as I said earlier,
focus on the facts and not on emotions.
I wanted to share with you some of the comments from people in my
district. I think lots of times people in the country have the pulse of
what is common sense and what is wise policy for our country, more so
than in the heat of the moment sometimes with some things that have
gone on here at the Capitol.
This is an example from Samantha of what happened recently in our
district in Randolph County, and I think she has a very interesting
perspective on this. She said:
I am a citizen of Randolph County, and on Easter Sunday,
two men went on a crime spree in our area and shot two very
close friends of mine, pistol whipped an elderly lady, and
killed a woman from Moberly. These suspects were on the run
from police for over 12 hours, including overnight. The
residents of this area didn't sleep well not knowing what was
going on. Houses were on lockdown. It was a horrible feeling
knowing the armed men were able to get away from police
officers for several hours and not knowing where they would
go next.
As a mother, I was terrified for my family. Knowing that we
were protected in case these perpetrators came in our
neighborhood was the only thing that made that night even
bearable. Please vote to keep our Second Amendment rights. It
is our right to protect ourselves from these criminals who
will always be able to get guns no matter what they do, such
as drugs, because drugs are illegal as well. If they want
them, they will get them. Let normal, law-abiding citizens
keep their guns to protect themselves. We should not have
them taken away because there are people who are
irresponsible for them. Those people will get guns no matter
what, but law-abiding citizens need to be able to protect our
families. It is our right, just as freedom of speech is, and
should not be taken away.
Well said, Samantha. I think that is a perfect example of what
happens potentially when a crime is occurring, and how important it is
for families to be able to defend themselves in that event.
Here's a comment from Carol from Lowry City. She said in an email to
me:
By definition, criminals do not care about laws. They will
acquire guns and whatever weapon they want to use for their
nefarious activity regardless of what the law is. The only
thing that this unconstitutional gun grab will do is put
innocent, law-abiding citizens in harm's way by preventing
them from protecting themselves, their property and their
family. If stringent gun control which stripped Second
Amendment rights from the people were the answer to
alleviating violence, then the city of Chicago would be a
model of safety. Instead, Chicago, which has some of the most
strict gun control laws in the Nation, led the country in
number of deaths related to firearms at 532. The people could
not protect themselves against the criminal activity around
them, and many paid for it with their lives.
I wanted to share some statistics from the World Health Organization.
It lists, and you probably can't see it, but two pages' worth of
countries here that have a higher percentage of murders per 100,000
citizens than we do. You have countries everywhere from the Bahamas,
Puerto Rico, Jamaica, Panama, Brazil, Greenland, Costa Rica, Russia,
British Virgin Islands, Philippines, Uruguay, Thailand, and on and on.
Two pages of countries that have very high murder rates, and yet here
is the United States below all of them. And you know what all of these
other countries have in common? All of these countries have banned guns
100 percent from their citizens.
So this validates what Carol from Lowry City said to me in her email,
that when you take guns away from individuals, crime rates actually go
up because criminals will have the guns and the law-abiding citizens
won't be able to protect themselves. I thought that was a really good
point that she makes.
Here's a comment in an email from Vicki Jo from Clinton, Missouri.
She said:
I would like you to know that I do not support more
regulations on any guns, accessories, or ammunition. These
items are only tools some people choose to use as weapons
against others. I feel the Second Amendment gives me the
freedom to own and operate any firearm that I choose. I'm a
hunter and, if needed, would use my firearms for protection
from harm. I feel that more attention needs to be spent on
those dealing with mental illness and pose a threat to
others' welfare. We law-abiding citizens don't need more laws
to take more freedoms away from us. Please pursue the
violators of these crimes and not their ill-chosen tools.
Well said.
Larry from Mexico, Missouri, said:
Guns can do no harm by themselves. They are no more harmful
than any large vehicle like a truck or bus that has mass or
weight as a part of their structure.
It's interesting that Larry would say that because yesterday I saw a
clip on the news of someone who actually went after someone else in a
car. The other person was on a bicycle, and they tried to kill them.
They were able to save the person. Thankfully, he wasn't hurt, but they
are still looking for the person in the car. So are we going to ban
cars because they can be used to kill people? Of course not, because
what we need to do is find the person who was trying to commit the
crime.
Continuing on, Larry says:
Sick individuals can take any truck and drive it into a
school or mall, killing our loved ones just as a gun can. I
don't want anyone to be hurt or die, but feel that this path
of legislation is wrong. As others have suggested, we need to
focus on people. People are the motor driving the gun, truck,
bus or any other object. The focus has to become helping the
mentally ill.
And we have Jessica from Warrensburg. She said:
If a fraction of the time, energy, money and passion that
went into debating gun control went toward establishing a
more efficient national or State mental health outreach
campaign, perhaps we would have less heartbreaking tragedies
involving individuals who felt unheard, isolated, and
alienated. A commonly heard phrase is guns don't kill people,
people kill people. If that is true, What are we doing to
help people?
I think that brings up the point of mental health issues in our
country and how we should be focusing more on these killers and what
caused them or led them to do it. What about violent video games? If
you look at the Newtown, Connecticut, shooter as well as the Aurora,
Colorado, shooter, Madam Speaker, you'll find that both of them spent
an inordinate amount of time playing violent video games where they
actually were carrying out scenarios of shooting people. How come we
aren't hearing proposals talking about that from gun control advocates
or from those who say that they want to do this to help children. Let's
get to the heart of the issue here.
We have Kelly from Sedalia who adds:
The one thing all of these misguided proposals have in
common is that they won't reduce crime. Criminals by
definition are law breakers. They are not deterred by laws
against murder, rape, armed robbery, et cetera; and they
won't be affected by additional gun control laws on top of
the tens of thousands of existing laws we have on the books
at every governmental level. Again, I urge you to oppose any
and all anti-gun legislation that will simply penalize law-
abiding gun owners and instead focus on improvements to our
Nation's mental health system and enhancing school security
while respecting our Second Amendment rights.
The gentleman from Indiana brought up some really good points awhile
ago, and we share a lot in common. We both come from a farm background,
and we both still have a farm today. We both have children still in
school, and we enjoy sharing our heritage. I say to the
[[Page H2343]]
gentleman, my daughter, we've had a lot of fun with her, teaching her
how to shoot a gun and going out also in our pasture. We have an area
that we've blocked off, and we target shot, and it's a lot of fun and
she enjoys it. But just as importantly as it being enjoyable, I think
just being familiar with guns and for the potential of having self-
protection is so important, as well. And I know you would agree.
{time} 1700
Mr. STUTZMAN. Absolutely. I think that as Payton, our oldest, we've
given him a bow and arrow, and he has his straw bales out in the back
of the barn. And I think that any time he goes out, we always talk to
him about look what's beyond your target and make sure that you're not
shooting in a direction towards a house or towards any other one that's
behind there.
And it really does come down to awareness and responsibility and
making sure that any time you're shooting, whether it's a bow and
arrow, or whether it's a baseball, for that matter, throwing a baseball
or shooting a firearm, that there is an awareness always around you.
I know we see a lot of the tragedies that happen in cities, whether
it could be from a stray bullet, and that's where we need to continue
to focus on those people, whether it's through our churches, whether
it's through charitable organizations, through schools, education, and
helping people understand the great responsibility that comes with
firearms.
I feel fortunate to be raised on a farm where I could start at a very
young age and was taught the lessons of responsibility with gun
ownership. And then we're teaching the same with Payton and Preston.
There is that point of fun and the enjoyment of having firearms as
you're out in the woods or wherever you're at. But it also goes deeper
than that. And I think that's why the Second Amendment goes to the very
heart of Americans and how we were founded. Obviously, the men who
fought in the Revolutionary War needed to have the access to a gun to
defend themselves against the Redcoats at the time, and so they
obviously had to learn the same thing.
And it wasn't just to defend themselves from another army. It was
also a tool used to provide food for themselves.
We're very fortunate in so many ways that we don't have the
responsibility of using a gun on a daily basis like people used to.
With that, people don't use a firearm as often, and they do have a
responsibility to make sure that they're trained when they do purchase
one, and recognizing those that are around them when they're using
them.
But again, it goes to the heart of us as Americans and defending our
freedom. And if it has to absolutely come to that, to defeat tyranny.
That is what Thomas Jefferson mentioned about the Second Amendment.
Mrs. HARTZLER. It's certainly a deterrent, I think, from any
government who would want to take on their citizens. And you look at
this list that I was sharing, two pages of people and countries who
have very high murder rates. I feel for the people of those countries.
I can't imagine what that would be like to live in a country where
you're basically helpless. You and your family are helpless. You are
totally open to and vulnerable to anyone, whether it's somebody in
government, a rogue government, or a criminal who wants to do yourself
or your family harm, and you don't have that ability to protect
yourself.
Madam Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Brooks of Indiana). The time of the
gentlewoman has expired.
____________________