[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 17]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 25355]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



        THE FIREARMS RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT SAFETY ACT OF 2000

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. BOB BARR

                               of georgia

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, October 26, 2000

  Mr. BARR of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to discuss legislation 
I introduced just before the August recess, H.R. 5012, the Firearms 
Research and Development Safety Act of 2000. This legislation would 
enhance the research and development tax credits permitted to firearms 
businesses to accelerate and explore further what has been termed as 
Smart Gun Technology, or as some prefer to call it, ``Firearm 
Personalization Technology.'' In fact, at a later date, I intend to 
amend the legislation in committee to reflect that terminology.
  My proposal increases the research and development tax credit, 
determined under the applicable rules of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 (which is usually 20%), to 30% for smart gun technology research 
and development. It also quantifies this benefit is only available to 
federal firearms licensees, and it is not available for use on monies 
received in the form of a grant. Additionally, the base used to 
determine allowable expenses for the credit is at 100% of a firm's, 
corporation's, or individual's expenditures for the years 2001, 2002, 
and 2003, instead of the incremental increase as under current 
procedure.
  These enhancements are intended to do exactly what ought to be done 
in terms of encouraging innovation and development in safety technology 
for firearms. That is, the marketplace ought to determine these 
innovations, and ultimately their acceptance by consumers, law 
enforcement, and, indeed, even the military in some cases.
  The role of the government ought not be to mandate the use of this 
technology, but rather to encourage and foster its development. 
Regrettably, much has been said about ``Smart Gun,'' or ``Firearm 
Personalization,'' technology, and the panacea some claim it to be in 
preventing unauthorized access to firearms by felons, violent 
individuals, or other persons who should not have access to a firearm. 
The truth is, there are many different approaches to safe gun storage, 
any of which may be valid depending on the particular circumstances 
faced by the owner or authorized user.
  Mandating the integration of an internal locking system in a firearm 
is simply not going to prevent determined individuals from gaining 
access to a gun and misusing it. As in other approaches to safe gun 
use, training and education are paramount, so each individual owner can 
develop a strategy for the safe storage and use of their firearm. 
``Firearm Personalization Technology'' assists in doing just this, and 
if the marketplace responds favorably to these innovations, gun 
technology will change.
  My bill simply allows the gun industry an enhanced opportunity to 
accelerate work in this field, and to explore whether or not consumers 
will respond favorably to safe, reliable and practical innovations in 
gun technology.
  Naturally this type of innovation research is not inexpensive. As 
Members are aware, the industry has been under enormous economic 
stress, due largely to the anti-gun policies of the current 
Administration and to frivolous law suits being filed against the 
industry by anti-gun interests. Precious resources the industry could 
be devoting to technological innovation have been used to defend its 
lawful and responsible businesses. Perhaps this credit will help the 
industry get back into the business of developing better products, 
instead of having to devote its resources to defending the lawful 
manufacture, sale, and use of its products.
  In order to encourage this technology, my legislation has an 
additional provision which exempts that part of the firearm which is 
enhanced or added and devoted solely to the addition of Firearm 
Personalization Technology, from the federal excise tax on firearms. 
For example, if a firearm normally costs $500, and $500 worth of 
electronic components are added to the firearm for Firearm 
Personalization Technology, the $500 enhancement would be exempt from 
the federal excise tax. A $50 savings on a $1,000 gun may not seem much 
at first glance, but as many in the industry will tell you, guns are 
very price-sensitive commodities, for which consumers make a decision 
to buy or not to buy, based on surprisingly small price differences.
  In closing, let me say, Mr. Speaker, while there are certainly 
obvious sharp divisions in this Chamber on private firearms ownership 
in our country, I believe my colleagues on both sides of the aisle 
should be able to support improvements in gun technology which are 
voluntarily pursued by the manufacturing community, with little rather 
than more government involvement. Allowing market forces to determine 
innovation in the field, is the natural and correct way progress ought 
to occur.

                          ____________________