[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.
____________________