[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 3 (Wednesday, January 6, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H94-H99]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           GUN CONTROL AND AMERICANS' SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 2015, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Stutzman) is 
recognized until 10 p.m. as the designee of the majority leader.


                             General Leave

  Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks 
and include extraneous materials on the topic of this Special Order.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Indiana?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today along with quite a few 
Members to address the issue of gun control and Americans' Second 
Amendment rights.
  Mr. Speaker, I have the honor of representing the Third District of 
Indiana. In the Hoosier State, we cherish our constitutional right to 
bear arms. For many years I also had the honor of serving in the 
Indiana General Assembly, where I was proud to coauthor and get signed 
into law the lifetime concealed carry permit so that Hoosiers could 
protect themselves, their families, and their homes.
  Starting in 2013, in response to the push for radical gun control 
legislation from Senate Democrats, we founded the Republican Study 
Committee's Second Amendment Initiative here in Congress, which serves 
as a platform for House Republicans to share the most important facts 
about gun control and the Second Amendment.
  Tonight I will be joined on the House floor by many members of the 
Second Amendment Initiative and other proud Members who steadfastly 
defend Americans' gun rights.
  Mr. Speaker, we come to the House floor tonight to set the record 
straight. Yesterday President Obama announced his intentions to 
unilaterally pursue executive actions on gun control.
  Like times past, I wholeheartedly oppose the manner in which the 
President has chosen to pursue changes to current law. In fact, when 
reports surfaced this past fall that the President was considering 
executive actions on guns, I led over 30 of my House colleagues in 
sending a letter to the White House requesting information on what 
exactly he planned to do and why.
  My colleagues and I had a number of very simple questions. First, if 
the President is planning on closing the supposed gun show loophole, 
did the Vice President and his gun control commission recommend this 
policy for inclusion among the 23 executive actions announced by the 
White House in January of 2013? If so, why was it excluded from the 
announcement?

  Second, is the White House relying on any new data that was not 
available when those 2013 actions were announced?
  Third, does the White House have any evidence private sellers' 
transaction volumes and propensity for illegal sales are positively 
correlated?
  Fourth, does the White House believe this new policy would have 
prevented any of the recent year's major shootings?
  Finally, does the White House expect criminals to voluntarily comply 
with these new rules?
  The White House still has not responded to our letter. Tomorrow, the 
President plans to hold a Q&A townhall televised on CNN regarding guns 
in America.
  Mr. Speaker, I fear after this event, Americans will continue to be 
left with more questions than answers, like, first and foremost, why 
does President Obama insist on infringing on Congress' lawmaking 
authority?
  The reason we don't have any answers to the questions about this new 
gun control policy is because it was crafted in back rooms, out of view 
of the public, instead of in Congress, where we would have held 
hearings, committees would have reviewed the policy, and our 
constituents would have had the opportunity to comment on it.
  Mr. Speaker, in the event Congress would have held a hearing on this 
issue, we probably would have uncovered the glaring reality that there 
is no gun show loophole. If you were one of the 55,277 federally 
licensed gun dealers in America in fiscal year 2014, you would have 
been required, by law, to run background checks on individuals, no 
matter if you sold a gun at your place of business or at a gun show.
  Congress would probably also have come across the Department of 
Justice's study of inmates from 2001 that

[[Page H95]]

found that less than 1 percent of inmates, when interviewed, actually 
bought their crime gun at a gun show. In contrast to this, almost 40 
percent reported acquiring their guns illegally, such as by theft.
  Members of Congress would have also found interesting a December 10 
Fact Checker's column in The Washington Post which reported as true the 
fact that none of the past year's and month's tragic mass shootings 
would have been prevented by newly proposed gun laws.
  Due to the President's insistence on going it alone and pursuing 
actions that challenge the Constitution, today we introduced H.R. 4321, 
the Separation of Powers Restoration and Second Amendment Protection 
Act. Joined by over 60 colleagues in the House, this bill would render 
any executive action that violates the Second Amendment or infringes on 
Congress' article I responsibilities as having no force or effect, and 
to prohibit funds for such actions and established standing for 
Congress, State, and local governments, and for aggrieved persons to 
challenge such actions in District Court. This legislation is the House 
companion bill to Senator Rand Paul's bill S. 2434.
  Mr. Speaker, it is time the White House cut out the distractions. 
Stop blaming gun owners and start taking threats to Americans' safety 
seriously. Instead of continuing to blame Congress for not enacting new 
laws, perhaps the President should look to laws already on the books.
  Reports suggest that some Federal prosecutors are choosing not to 
prosecute straw purchasers as a matter of policy. These are the 
individuals that purchase guns and illegally give or sell them to 
individuals they know could not pass a background check. For example, 
in 2012, the U.S. attorney for Chicago announced a transition to 
focusing on interstate trafficking and other violations instead of 
these illegal straw purchases.
  On top of this solution, the President could also look to Congress 
for ideas. For example, States have been expanding concealed carry 
reciprocity to the point that Federal laws ought to catch up. I have a 
bill, H.R. 923, the Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act, 
which would do just that.
  Mr. Speaker, in the coming months, I look forward to working with 
House Republican leadership on bold strategies to actually make America 
safer.
  At this time, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from Michigan 
(Mr. Huizenga).
  Mr. HUIZENGA of Michigan. I thank my friend from Indiana for doing 
so. It has been a pleasure working with him on this and many other 
issues.
  I have to tell you, my heart breaks for those families who have been 
impacted by violent crimes. These tragedies, however, do not give 
President Obama the authority to circumvent the Constitution.
  Just yesterday, the President announced unilateral actions to 
undermine the Second Amendment without input from Congress, making good 
on his vow from an October 2015 speech of his willingness to politicize 
tragedies to advance his gun control agenda.
  The President needs to enforce the laws currently on the books. 
Criminals who abuse firearms or obtain them illegally should be 
prosecuted to the fullest extent, and that isn't always the case 
currently.
  I wish President Obama understood what a majority of Americans 
already know, and especially those of us who have purchased weapons and 
purchased guns. Those who abuse firearms or obtain them illegally 
should be prosecuted. However, purchasing a legal gun is not quick or 
easy.
  They also know limiting the rights of law-abiding citizens will not 
solve this problem. Instead of pursuing his political agenda, the 
President should join the bipartisan effort to fix our Nation's broken 
mental health system.
  I am a proud cosponsor of Representative Tim Murphy's Helping 
Families in Mental Health Crisis Act. This legislation would overhaul 
our Nation's inadequate and outdated mental health system so people who 
need treatment can receive it. Simply throwing more money at this issue 
without these reforms is like giving the VA more money without 
demanding better care for our veterans.
  According to ABC News, 63 percent of Americans see mass shootings as 
a reflection of problems identifying and treating people with mental 
illness and mental health problems rather than adding more restrictive 
gun laws.
  Also, according to The New York Times, not exactly a conservative 
newspaper, 77 percent of those asked said that they thought that better 
access to mental health treatment and screening would reduce gun 
violence.
  The American people are correct. These people who have been polled on 
this are absolutely correct. Responsible gun ownership is not the 
problem. The House must remain vigilant to protect the American people 
from an ever-encroaching Obama administration that is more interested 
in creating a political issue than a solution.
  As a responsible gun owner myself, I am committed to being an 
advocate for Second Amendment rights, the constitutional legislation 
that will actually help prevent gun violence across America, and those 
who have been impacted by its violence.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from North 
Carolina (Mr. Hudson).
  Mr. HUDSON. Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, I want to voice my 
strongest opposition to the Obama administration's continued assaults 
on our Second Amendment rights.
  After seeing his gun control agenda fail in the Democrat-controlled 
Senate, President Obama is once again trying to go around the will of 
the American people and unilaterally take action through executive 
fiat.
  This latest effort to unconstitutionally restrict one of our most 
fundamental rights has nothing to do with safety and security and has 
everything to do with government control. This is neither what the 
American people want nor deserve.
  In fact, the executive action the President announced yesterday would 
not have prevented the recent tragedies our Nation has experienced, 
including the San Bernardino attack. Instead, it would trample the 
rights of law-abiding citizens. It could actually have a chilling 
effect on people seeking help for mental illness.
  Nobody wants to see guns in the hands of someone who is dangerous 
because of mental incapacity, but we really need to look at the 
consequences of this type of action. It is just common sense. If folks 
believe that they could potentially lose their rights for simply 
seeking mental health, it is going to be a deterrent to folks actually 
seeking that help.
  Let me give you an example. In our country, we have an absolute 
tragedy of veteran suicide. If one veteran who returns home from the 
conflict doesn't seek help for issues that may have arisen from that 
service, then shame on the President for this action. If they are 
afraid that if they go seek help, that one day they could lose their 
gun rights the rest of their life, what a deterrent effect that might 
have on a population that desperately needs help.

                              {time}  2130

  We will never regulate people's actions by regulating their freedoms. 
If that were the case, then the streets of Chicago would be some of the 
safest streets in America, because they have some of our strictest gun 
control laws.
  Rather than infringing on our Second Amendment and governing by 
executive fiat, this administration should work with Congress on 
commonsense reforms that would actually reduce gun violence, like 
confronting our mental health crisis and preventing criminals and 
terrorists from actually entering our country in the first place.
  Mr. Speaker, like many of my constituents back home in North 
Carolina, I am a responsible, law-abiding gun owner who cherishes our 
Second Amendment freedom. This right to keep and bear arms is a freedom 
by which we protect all of our other freedoms as a fundamental first 
freedom. For that reason, I encourage my colleagues in the House to 
stand with me against the President's proposed executive actions.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Indiana for organizing this 
tonight and bringing us together for this very important discussion.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Ratcliffe).
  Mr. RATCLIFFE. Mr. Speaker, the President's plan to once again bypass 
Congress and unilaterally implement gun control measures represents yet 
another, sadly, all too familiar assault

[[Page H96]]

on our Constitution. This time, the President is doubling down with a 
two-for-one special by proposing executive orders which violate our 
Second Amendment rights, while at the same time abusing the separation 
of powers written in our Constitution. In the process, the President 
claims that the overwhelming majority of Americans, including gun 
owners, support his executive actions.
  Mr. Speaker, I can assure him that when it comes to the Texans that I 
represent, the President is dead wrong. This isn't the first time I 
have had to fight the President's radical agenda on gun control--and 
just like before, I won't back down.
  So today, I stand in support and as a cosponsor of the Separation of 
Powers and Second Amendment Protection Act, a critical bill that we 
now, unfortunately, need to put a stop to any action by this President 
to weaken our Second Amendment rights.
  I refuse to let this President use these unconstitutional executive 
orders as a way to distract the American people from his epic foreign 
policy failures, to turn our focus away from his failure to keep 
Americans safe not from the Second Amendment, but from ISIS-inspired 
terrorists in our own homeland. San Bernardino was not, as the 
President called it, ``an act of violence.'' It was terrorism.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Yoho).
  Mr. YOHO. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, Mr. Stutzman, for 
putting this important Special Order together.
  Yesterday, President Obama moved unilaterally, via executive order, 
in a misguided attempt to curb gun violence in America. He stated he 
had to take unilateral action because the Congress refused to support 
his initiatives. That is true, somewhat, but not because this Nation 
wishes to curb gun violence that has fallen upon innocent victims of 
America--victims like Kathryn Stienle.
  This young lady was murdered in San Francisco by a person here 
illegally--a person that had been deported over four times and should 
have been deported once again, but instead was allowed to stay in this 
country illegally because of this President's policies and the policies 
promoted by sanctuary cities like San Francisco.
  Obviously, I cannot speak for her family, but I would venture to say 
her family would have had a very different holiday this year than the 
one they experienced had the justice system not failed them and the man 
who murdered her had been deported. She would be here today if the 
President and his administration had chosen to simply enforce the laws 
on the books.
  President Obama's executive order will not curb this kind of 
violence. Only the enforcement of the laws will. And, Mr. President, 
you know this.
  Please abide by article II, section 3 of our Constitution: The 
executive shall faithfully execute the laws of the land.
  Now, I agree with the President that we should appropriate more money 
to mental health, as has been talked about here tonight. The lack of 
resources for those seeking mental health in this country is abysmal. 
Thirty years ago, this Nation had over 500,000 hospital bed facilities 
for mental health care. Today, there are less than 50,000. This is 
inexcusable.
  I also agree with the President that we should increase the number of 
ATF inspectors to process background checks more quickly and more 
efficiently. We can work this out through the legislative process--the 
way it should be done--and not through, again, executive fiat.
  With all due respect, Mr. President, your phone and pen are not a 
substitute for the other two branches of government.
  Aside from sidestepping Congress again, your other initiatives 
encroach on Americans' personal liberties and freedoms. Take, for 
example, your plan to revoke gun ownership from folks whose oversight 
of their finances are turned over to someone else--specifically, those 
receiving disability through the Social Security Administration or the 
Department of Veterans Affairs.
  For reasons beyond their control, sometimes additional help is needed 
in managing one's finances. Sometimes they do it voluntarily. This does 
not mean they are incapable of making sound, moral decisions, and 
certainly does not mean their Second Amendment rights can and should be 
infringed upon.
  As an aside, I want to highlight how this President's administration 
allowed for Syrian rebels to receive military grade weapons and they 
supplied Mexican drug cartels with weapons through the failed Fast and 
Furious program administered under Attorney General Eric Holder at the 
time. All of this has been done irresponsibly and without conducting 
background checks.
  This administration's gun policies have killed innocent people. 
Customs and Border Security Agent Brian Terry was a victim of this. Yet 
this President's solution to gun violence is to restrict law-abiding 
American citizens from one of our most basic rights of American freedom 
and liberty. It simply does not make sense.
  The Second Amendment of our Constitution is very clear and concise. 
Allow me to read it: ``A well regulated militia, being necessary to the 
security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms 
shall not be infringed.''
  This amendment was not added in the early years of our Nation's 
founding for hunting or sporting purposes, but for personal protection 
to fend off an overbearing, tyrannical government. It is very clear and 
has consistently been upheld by the Supreme Court.
  Mr. President, I understand and sympathize with your frustrations, 
but please uphold the Constitution and come to Congress. Let's work 
together on those areas where we agree upon to curb gun violence. And 
let's preserve the Second Amendment. Let's all respect and revere 
the Constitution for all Americans.

  Mr. STUTZMAN. I thank the gentleman from Florida.
  I yield to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Jody B. Hice).
  Mr. JODY B. HICE of Georgia. I thank my colleague and good friend 
from Indiana for organizing this Special Order, and I am very pleased 
to be here this evening to help defend our Second Amendment, which is 
the amendment giving teeth to all our other amendments and rights.
  The Second Amendment is one of the most fundamental principles of our 
Republic. And yet the Obama administration and the Democratic Party as 
a whole have now been engaged for years in an attempt to undermine the 
rights of law-abiding American citizens to keep and bear arms.
  President Obama, as has already been discussed this evening, has come 
before the American people just yesterday announcing his attempt to yet 
again infringe upon the rights of law-abiding American citizens by 
unilaterally instituting new restrictions on firearm sales.
  The President's blatant disregard for the constitutional role of 
Congress to write the laws of the land is absolutely astounding to me. 
This latest move is just yet a larger part of executive abuse that has 
been going on for quite some time and an overreach.
  In 2013, Congress rejected legislation that would have expanded 
background checks. I fully believe that that would have the same result 
today. And yet because it was not in accord with the wishes of the 
President, he now claims that Congress has relinquished its 
responsibility. Therefore, he somehow has the right to create laws as 
he sees fit. Well, he is wrong.
  As well as being unconstitutional, this moral imperative that the 
President claims to have regarding gun controls is not even 
statistically or logically on sound ground. In fact, the President has 
pointed directly to a string of domestic terror attacks as the reason 
for his executive action. And yet we all know that his unconstitutional 
executive order would not have prevented any of these terror attacks.
  So the real issue here is that this gun grab by the President is a 
smokescreen to hide from his own failed policies and his refusal to 
deal with terrorism and to eliminate it. And it is time for the truth 
to be told and for us to stand in opposition against this continued 
assault on the Second Amendment.
  Personally, my defense of the Second Amendment is firm and 
unwavering. I will never support any measure that infringes upon the 
rights of law-abiding American citizens to purchase, use, and keep 
firearms and ammunition. I believe that any law that restricts these

[[Page H97]]

rights is unconstitutional and should be steadfastly opposed.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the time to share this tonight. And I 
am just reminded of Thomas Jefferson's statement: ``No freeman shall 
ever be debarred the use of arms.''
  This is an issue upon which our liberties rest.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. I thank the gentleman for the reminder from one of our 
Founding Fathers, and I appreciate your service to the citizens in 
Georgia.
  I yield to another Member from the great State of Georgia (Mr. 
Loudermilk).
  Mr. LOUDERMILK. I thank my colleague from Indiana for reserving this 
time and for giving me a few minutes to speak on this very important 
and critical issue.
  Mr. Speaker, as I am standing here, I see the word ``liberty'' 
engraved at the base of the rostrum. One of the great principles of 
this Nation is one of the principles of which our Founding Fathers 
sought to take on in the field of battle the most powerful military 
force in the history of the world for an idea, a principle of liberty.
  One of the great influencers on our Founding Fathers was Charles 
Montesquieu, an 18th century philosopher and judge. He said that when 
the legislative and the executive power is vested in one person or one 
body, there can be no liberty.
  Many of my colleagues that stood here before I came this evening have 
testified to the role that the President has taken upon himself to 
become both the legislator and the executive in this matter. In fact, 
in his statement on the White House Web site, he said that he was going 
to have to take action, even though some of the gaps in our gun laws 
could only be fixed by legislative action by Congress. But because 
Congress failed to act, he is going to have to take action.
  Clearly, he is admitting to stepping into the constitutional role of 
this body and the body on the other side of this building. When that 
happens, there can be no liberty.
  Now, the President has said he must take this action because Congress 
has failed to act. No, Congress did act. But Congress did not act in 
the way that he wanted us to. And because we didn't act in the way that 
he specifically wanted, now he has to take action. And the action he 
says that he must take is to make America safe.
  Many have talked about the constitutional issues. Clearly, he is 
taking an unconstitutional approach in this decision that he has made 
and in this action. But I want to highlight the ultimate hypocrisy of 
his statement that his actions are to make America safe.
  This body has taken actions which he has ignored that would truly 
make America safe. Back in February, as a member of the Committee on 
Homeland Security, I traveled to our open and porous southern border, 
and I traveled side-by-side with Border Patrol agents, the Coast Guard, 
and local law enforcement who have committed their time and their 
lives. It is their mission to secure that border. We saw that the 
border is controlled by illegal cartels that smuggle human traffic. 
They smuggle narcotics and they smuggle drugs across the border into 
this country.
  Now, if guns just arbitrarily kill people, then maybe the action the 
President is taking would have some effect. But I have been around guns 
all my life and I have yet to have a gun jump up and just arbitrarily 
start shooting anyone. Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

                              {time}  2145

  Bad people that use guns come into this country, and often those guns 
are smuggled in through the southern border.
  Now, as a result of being on the border, we realized that the only 
way to secure that border is we have to have a combination of physical 
barriers, of technology, but, most importantly, boots on the ground.
  We have talked about building fences and building walls. Well, I had 
one Border Patrol agent say that those are really ineffective unless 
you have boots on the ground. You build a 12-foot wall. The cartels buy 
13-foot ladders.
  The cartels use high technology. They use engineers to build tunnels. 
They use aircraft to drop contraband on our side of the border and 
smuggle people, many people who are intent to do ill to people in this 
Nation, as we saw in San Francisco earlier this year.
  But the President has basically ignored Congress' call to secure the 
border. Instead of putting more Border Patrol agents on the border to 
secure the border, he wants to bring 200 more ATF agents to investigate 
American citizens.
  Just a few weeks ago, we dealt with the threat of ISIS and al Qaeda 
that says they are going to exploit our refugee resettlement program to 
get operatives into this Nation to conduct terrorist attacks against 
this Nation.
  This Congress, out of this body, passed a bill to pause that program 
until we could fully vet every person. The President decided he would 
ignore the call of Congress, and he pursued on with the refugee 
program.
  As a member of the Homeland Security Committee, I was able to 
question the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Director of the 
FBI, saying: If we do bring these refugees in, how are you going to 
monitor them?
  The FBI said: We don't have the resources to monitor 10,000 new 
refugees coming into this Nation.
  But, yet, in his executive order, the President wants to hire 230 
administrators, administrative personnel, to conduct background checks 
instead of providing us with more FBI agents to investigate terrorist 
activities. You tell me who is wanting to make America safe.
  He also has proposed $500 million toward mental health care and 
eventually tie mental health assessments to background checks. I 
applaud that.
  But, at the same time, we have thousands of soldiers coming back from 
war areas suffering from PTSD that this administration and the Veterans 
Administration has ultimately abandoned.
  Finally, he wants to use taxpayer dollars and resources to research 
and test smart gun technology. Well, maybe that is a technology in the 
future that could be applicable.
  But, yet, the TSA has postponed time and time again putting in new 
scanning technology that is desperately needed at our airports to stop 
contraband and banned items from getting through to our Nation's 
airlines and into our transportation system. Once again, that has been 
postponed.
  Mr. Speaker, I say that the President and his call that he wants to 
make America safer is making America more dangerous because he 
continues to ignore what the will of the people is.
  What this Congress is calling for is that we need to close our 
borders, we need to put more FBI agents investigating terrorist 
activities, we need to take care of our war veterans, we need to stop 
the influx of refugees that we know are going to be exploited by our 
enemies, and we also need to invest in technologies to make our 
transportation safe and secure.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. I thank the gentleman from Georgia and appreciate his 
comments tremendously. I think he made some very good points.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Nebraska. I appreciate this opportunity to certainly 
stand in support of our Second Amendment.
  This is an issue that has obviously been around for some time. With 
the recent very violent events that have stricken various communities 
around our country, I think that the way the President has chosen to 
respond is ineffective. I think it is inappropriate, certainly an 
overreach by the President himself.
  I believe that, as the President has chosen to operate without going 
to Congress or even attempting to work with Congress on many issues, 
but especially this one, it is disappointing.
  We already have laws on the books that need enforcing. Those laws 
that we have I think can be effective.
  Certainly, I don't think anyone will say that someone can just 
automatically go buy a gun without any effort whatsoever.
  But, disappointingly, none of the President's recent unilateral 
actions targeting law-abiding citizens and restricting gun ownership 
would have prevented the tragedies that the President himself has 
referenced.
  I would like to highlight one area of the executive order which falls 
under the jurisdiction of the committee on which I serve, the Ways and 
Means

[[Page H98]]

Committee, which is the President's proposal to have Social Security 
beneficiaries with representative payees included in the National 
Instant Criminal Background Check System.
  Now, let me say that the mismanagement of one's finances alone should 
not mean that an individual would lose their Second Amendment rights. I 
am concerned not only that this targets law-abiding citizens, but that 
it would also discourage some beneficiaries from seeking needed 
assistance for fear of losing their constitutional rights. Many similar 
views have been shared here earlier this evening.
  Also, when the Los Angeles Times first reported consideration of the 
representative payee issue last summer, I joined the majority of the 
Ways and Means Committee members in writing to the President opposing 
this proposal.
  Despite the administration's unwillingness so far to change its 
stance on representative payees, I remain hopeful we can scale back 
these orders.

  Early last year, when the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and 
Explosives proposed banning M855 ammunition, I was one of the 238 House 
Members who wrote the former ATF Director opposing the proposal, as did 
more than 80,000 Americans. Now, in response to massive public and 
congressional opposition, the ATF actually withdrew the proposal.
  President Obama has repeatedly disregarded our legislative branch and 
the American people. The President's job is to respect all 
constitutional rights, not just the ones he chooses. His executive 
order sets an incredibly dangerous precedent.
  I will continue to stand against this overreach and protect 
Nebraskans' and, quite frankly, all Americans' constitutional right to 
bear arms.
  I thank the gentleman from Indiana for yielding me the time.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Indiana has 8 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas 
(Mr. Westerman).
  Mr. WESTERMAN. Mr. Speaker, I would also like to thank the gentleman 
from Indiana for leading this Special Order tonight.
  Mr. Speaker, the Second Amendment is crystal clear. It ensures that 
the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. 
The founders rebelled against the largest empire in the world. They 
knew it was crucial to guarantee individuals the right to protect their 
life, liberty and property. That is the entire point of the Second 
Amendment.
  Unfortunately, we have a President more obsessed with the politics of 
gun control than living by the oath he twice took to preserve, protect 
and defend the Constitution of the United States.
  The President should work with Congress to solve the problems facing 
this country, not try to take on the legislative duties of Congress.
  Americans have a history of confronting those who wish to take away 
their rights, and they have said: ``No. You can't do that.
  The best way to fight against the gross overreach by the Federal 
Government is for citizens to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
  The good news is the people of this country, the responsible people 
who will exercise their constitutional rights and follow the law, are 
already doing this. They are flocking to purchase guns and ammunition 
despite President Obama's best efforts.
  Since President Obama was sworn into office, 106 million background 
checks for gun purchases have been conducted by Federal or State 
authorities. Only 96 million were conducted in the previous 11 years. 
Gun makers have doubled their manufacturing output since 2009 as well.
  Meanwhile, according to the ATF, the number of privately owned 
firearms in the U.S. has increased from about 250 million twenty years 
ago to roughly 350 million today.
  President Obama's obsession with killing the Second Amendment has 
unintentionally become the catalyst for gun ownership in America. The 
firearms industry's $43 billion nationwide economic impact has more 
than doubled since 2009 and is also one of the few bright spots in the 
Obama economic record.
  But there is more good news in all of this. Despite the White House's 
misleading rhetoric, violent crime rates are consistently down over the 
last 20 years. According to the FBI's Uniform Crime Report, the number 
of violent crimes has decreased 35.5 percent over the last 20 years.
  There are more guns than people in the United States; yet, the 
violent crime rate continues to tumble because a criminal knows a well-
armed gun owner is a direct threat to a criminal's safety.
  And despite President Obama's obsession with undermining the Second 
Amendment, Federal weapons convictions have dropped 35 percent compared 
to 2005.
  The Obama Department of Justice should focus on enforcing current 
Federal weapons laws instead of issuing ideological edicts from the 
executive branch.
  Once again, I would like to thank my colleague from Indiana, Mr. 
Stutzman, for his leadership on this issue.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. 
Palmer).
  Mr. PALMER. Mr. Speaker, the President's executive orders relating to 
gun control are a major distraction from the real national security 
issues.
  Frankly, I think dealing with ISIS and confronting Iran over their 
violations of this administration's agreement with them and securing 
our borders are of greater importance than pushing gun control measures 
that will do little to protect us.
  Apparently, this administration is more concerned about 4 million 
senior citizens on Social Security owning a gun than they are about a 
nuclear-armed Iran or terrorists crossing our unsecured borders.
  The fact that millions of Americans have purchased firearms over the 
weeks following the shootings in San Bernardino is indicative that they 
have lost confidence in this administration's ability to protect them. 
They are literally taking personal responsibility for their own safety. 
It could be argued that these Americans are creating their own homeland 
security.
  Pushing executive orders for more gun control that exceed the 
President's constitutional authority will not only do little to improve 
our national security, it will do little to increase the public's 
confidence in this administration's policies for protecting our 
homeland.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to 
oppose this latest abuse and overreach of executive authority and 
reassert the lawmaking authority of Congress.
  I urge all my colleagues in the House to focus our attention on 
defeating ISIS, on restraining Iran, and on securing our borders in 
order to protect American citizens right here in our homeland.
  Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from Indiana for leading this 
Special Order for this critical discussion.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, if I could inquire as to the balance of my 
time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Indiana has 2 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. STUTZMAN. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate each Member coming down 
tonight to talk about this. This is a very important issue. I am 
hearing from my constituents back in northeast Indiana every day on the 
concern that they have about the President's actions.
  I would like to share just a statistic, that we know that national 
crime rates, violent crime and gun crime, have both dropped over the 
last 2\1/2\ decades. I think that is a positive sign that we should all 
be encouraged about and that we continue to work together to make sure 
that violent crime and gun crime is eliminated in this country.
  In 2013, the national crime rate was about half of what it was at its 
height in 1991. Violent crime had fallen by 51 percent since 1991 and 
property crime by 43 percent.
  In 2013, the violent crime rate was the lowest since 1970. Compared 
with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate 
was 49 percent lower in 2010 and there were fewer deaths, even though 
the Nation's population grew.

[[Page H99]]

  The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm, 
assault, robberies, and sex crimes, was 75 percent lower in 2011 than 
in 1993.
  Violent, nonfatal crime victimization overall, with or without a 
firearm, also is down markedly, 72 percent over the past two decades.
  As one of the former Members mentioned, if you look at the city of 
Chicago, which has some of the strictest gun laws in the country, it 
has a huge problem with gun violence in that city.
  I would like to just read, in closing, again, what I think is really 
important for all of us, the Second Amendment: ``A well regulated 
militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of 
the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.''
  I ask that all of us, as Members of this great body, continue to 
remember that the Second Amendment is there to protect liberty and 
freedom.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________