[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.

                          ____________________