    [Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: WILLIAM J. CLINTON (2000, Book I)]
    [March 15, 2000]
    [Pages 463-466]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office www.gpo.gov]

    [[Page 463]]

    Remarks at a Rally for Gun Safety Legislation
    March 15, 2000

        The President. Thank you very much. Please be seated. Good morning,
    and welcome to the White House. I want to thank all the Members of the
    House who are here. We have a large contingent, as you can see, and a
    bipartisan one, for which I am very grateful. In a moment we will hear
    from Representatives McCarthy,
    Morella, and Lofgren, speaking on behalf of all the Democrats and Republicans
    who are here with me today.
        I want to thank Attorney General Reno and
    Secretary Summers for being here and for
    their support of our endeavors. I thank Deputy Attorney General Eric
    Holder. The Chief of Police of the
    District of Columbia, Charles Ramsey, is
    here, and other representatives of law enforcement.
        I want to thank Michael Barnes from
    Handgun Control, and former Member of the House, for his leadership. And
    I want to say a special word of welcome to my friend Suzann
    Wilson, who lost her daughter in the
    Jonesboro, Arkansas, school shooting, who has bravely carried on the
    struggle for a safer future for the children of this country ever since.
    And I want to welcome all the young people who are here today.
        Six years ago, at the White House, I signed the Brady law. I was
    especially pleased that day to be standing beside two very brave
    fighters against gun violence, Attorney General Reno and Sarah Brady. Today, as I
    stand with Congresswomen McCarthy,
    Morella, and Lofgren, I am reminded again that women from both parties have
    been and remain at the forefront of this fight. And I know I speak for
    the other people who are here today to say I am glad they allowed some
    of their male counterparts in the House--[laughter]--to join them.
        When I signed the Brady bill, I said that our efforts proved once
    again that democracy can work. The American people, in their grassroots
    demand for commonsense action against gun violence, prevailed over a
    very powerful Washington gun lobby. Today, America is a safer place
    thanks to the Brady bill and other measures that many here in this room
    championed, from banning assault weapons to cop-killer bullets, to
    putting 100,000 police on the street. The overall crime rate has fallen
    7 years in a row, homicide to the lowest rate in 30 years. But time and
    time again we see still, from Columbine to Buell Elementary School, it
    is still far too easy for guns to fall into the hands of criminals and
    children.
        We have been trying for some time now, as all of you know, to
    further strengthen our gun laws, by passing a strong juvenile justice
    bill that closes the gun show loophole, requires child safety locks with
    all new handguns, and bans the importation of large capacity ammunition
    clips, which unbelievably is still legal and threatens to make a mockery
    of our assault weapons ban.
        Once again, the gun lobby and their allies in the leadership of the
    Congress are standing in the way of real progress. And once again, we
    battle not just for the safety of our families but for the soundness of
    our democracy. For over 8 months, the majority leadership, under
    pressure from the gun lobby, has refused to allow the House and the
    Senate conferees to meet and have a substantive debate on the juvenile
    justice bill.
        Representative Conyers has negotiated
    in good faith with Representative Hyde. I had
    the conference leaders here last week, and it was clear to me, from the
    discussion between them and with the rest of us, that they were much
    closer together, even though still considerably apart, than the position
    that the NRA has taken against our legislation. But we still haven't
    been able to get the committee to meet.
        Now Representative Zoe Lofgren from
    California has offered a simple motion. It simply says, one version of
    this bill passed the Senate; one version of this bill passed the House 8
    months ago; the conferees should meet. That's all it says. It says the
    Congress ought to do the job it was hired to do.
        Again, I want to thank the Republican Members who have shown up here
    to stand here today. I don't even know, because we haven't talked about
    it, whether they would agree with me on every provision of this bill.
    But they want a bill, and they want the conferees to

    [[Page 464]]

    meet. And I will say again, I know the conventional wisdom is in
    election years we're not supposed to do anything. I think that's wrong.
    We all still draw a check in election years, just like we do in
    nonelection years, and we're all here. And these kids, they keep dying
    every day. They don't know it's an election year. So I thank Zoe
    Lofgren and all these people who are here, for
    saying that we ought to get on with the business of the Nation.
        Now unbelievably enough, the gun lobby--who would do well in this
    conference, I think; I don't like it very much, but I think they'd do
    pretty well--they don't want this conference to meet. And they're
    actually threatening retribution against lawmakers if they vote for Zoe
    Lofgren's resolution to meet. Why is that?
    Because they know the people aren't with them, that's why. Because they
    know that the people who have experience out there in the country,
    whether they're Republicans or Democrats or independents, once they
    understand what the issue is and that nobody's trying to take any
    hunter's gun away or burden anybody's legal rights, we're just trying to
    keep children alive--once they understand that, they know that they
    cannot win the public debate.
        I got a little tickled over the weekend when they got a little rough
    with me. I mean--[laughter]--you know, I have so much scar tissue now, I
    can't even feel it. [Laughter] So it's totally immaterial to me what
    they say. And that should not be an issue for any of you.
        You know, none of us--any of us get these elected jobs, we ask for
    them; nobody makes us take these jobs. So that's completely irrelevant.
    The only thing that should matter--the only thing that should matter--is
    what is the best course in our country to make America the safest big
    country in the world and to save the lives of these dozen kids that are
    getting killed every day from gun violence. That should be the only
    thing that matters.
        And there are legitimate, practical issues that have to be worked
    through in these areas. But believe me, I've been there. I'm one of the
    few Presidents that's ever been to any of these gun shows. I've actually
    been to them. And I've been to them way out in the country, where all of
    the practical problems allegedly arise. And in all candor, I think that
    taking a little time and a little inconvenience to save a lot of lives
    is a good deal for America.
        I also believe that we cannot make this the only area of our
    national life where our only response is punishment and no prevention.
    Suppose I gave a speech to you today. Suppose I called you here to say,
    ``My fellow Americans, I am incredibly burdened by the fact that these
    airport metal detectors are a pain for a lot of people. And 99.9 percent
    of all the people who walk into airports are good, law-abiding citizens
    and would never do anything wrong, and a lot of them have money clips in
    their pockets and have to go through those metal detectors 2 or 3 times,
    and I just think it's terrible. And so we're going to take the metal
    detectors out of the airport, and the next time somebody blows up an
    airplane we're going to put 10 years on their sentence.'' [Laughter]
    Anybody want to support that policy? [Laughter]
        Suppose I said to you, ``My fellow Americans, I brought you here
    because I'm getting older and a little heavier and those seatbelts are
    really uncomfortable for me--[laughter]--and because the overwhelming
    majority of automobile drivers in America are good, law-abiding people
    and safe people, I want to abolish the speed limits and rip the
    seatbelts out of all our cars--[laughter]--and if somebody does
    something wrong, I want to add 5 years to their sentence.'' Now, that's
    the logic here.
        Why should this be the only area of our national life where we say
    no prevention, only punishment? Attorney General Reno has increased gun crime prosecutions. Why do we fight
    for 100,000 police? Why are all these police groups here fighting for
    100,000 police? Not primarily to catch criminals quicker but because
    they knew if they were on the street in the neighborhoods, they would
    prevent crime in the first place. That's what this is about.
        So, again, there's an old proverb that says, he who throws the first
    blow admits he has run out of arguments. [Laughter] In 1993, they said
    the Brady bill would violate the second amendment. But the right to keep
    and bear arms in deer season is still alive and well in Arkansas, but
    500,000 felons, fugitives, and stalkers weren't able to get handguns. It
    was the right thing to do.
        Gun crimes have fallen by 35 percent-plus since 1993. Today I'm
    honored to announce the results of the Justice Department's first annual
    review of the instant criminal background check system put in place in
    November of 1988 under the Brady law. In the first year, the insta-check

    [[Page 465]]

    system, in one year, stopped 179,000 illegal gun sales, over two-thirds
    to people who were indicted or convicted of felony crimes. Most of the
    rest were fugitives or domestic or drug abusers. All told now, as I
    said, half a million guns have been stopped from falling into the wrong
    hands since 1993, proof positive that those who opposed the Brady bill
    in 1993 were wrong.
        This is not an argument--we're having the same old argument. We have
    evidence now. And when it comes to the gun show, I would just remind you
    that back in 1993 the same crowd that's fighting closing the gun show
    loophole said, ``You don't need the Brady bill because no bad actors
    ever buy guns at gun stores. They get them all at gun shows and urban
    flea markets and out of the backs of pickups and trunks of cars.'' So
    now we say, ``Well, we did get a lot of them, but you're right, there
    still are a lot of those bad''--now they say, ``Oh, well, we can't do
    that. It's too much of a burden.''
        Now, I don't believe that we can't reach agreement here. But the
    leadership of the Congress continues to resist and to cling to arguments
    that won't stand up in honest debate. And I'll bet, in their heart of
    hearts, they're pretty embarrassed by some of the things that their
    allies have said in the last few days.
        They say gun shows would be put out of business if unlicensed
    dealers who sell guns have to comply with the background checks, which
    can take up to 3 business days to complete. But licensed gun dealers at
    gun shows already have to do background checks, if they're licensed, and
    they're still doing a very brisk business. Nearly three-quarters--now,
    listen to this--nearly three-quarters of all the Brady background checks
    are completed within a few seconds under the insta-check system; 95
    percent now completed in 2 hours or less. Less than 5--here's the rub,
    and I want everybody to focus on this--this is the rub of this
    legislation. Less than 5 percent of the Brady checks take longer than 24
    hours. So if we put this in, most of this will be over in 2 hours; 95
    percent will be over in 24 hours. But of the 5 percent that take more
    than 24 hours, they are 20 times more likely to be rejected for a
    problem. So this whole big old fight here is, in large measure, about
    those 5 percent.
        Now, why in the wide world any organized group would be in the
    business of worrying about the inconvenience of those 5 percent is
    beyond me. Ninety-five percent of the people are going to be out of
    here; 75 percent of them are going to be out of here in an hour or less.
    Representative Conyers here has offered an agreement that would have the
    whole thing done in 24 hours, except for those that can't be done.
        So again I say, I've heard all this--if you read the press on it,
    because so much of it is--and this is not a criticism of the press, it's
    the rhetoric of the fight--you would think this is about will there be
    background checks or not. Why in the world would we not want to have an
    adequate check of these 5 percent that are 20 times more likely to be
    problem people and hurt innocent children and other people? That is the
    issue here.
        And I'm telling you, I don't care what anybody says about people
    traveling from one town to the next to another gun show and being out in
    the rural areas and how much trouble it is. It's not that much trouble.
    They deposit the guns at the local police department or the sheriff's
    office. There's 50 different ways to solve this problem.
        This is all just a smokescreen. Every last issue is turned into some
    major battle over the Constitution, when all we're trying to do is save
    lives.
        So again, I want to say again, I'm grateful to the people who are
    here. I'm grateful that we have bipartisan representation. I hope the
    Republicans who are here don't get too much grief when they go back to
    Congress.
        But I would like it if this were not a political issue. I would like
    it if it were not a partisan issue. I would like it if not a single vote
    could be made on this in the November election. I would like it if no
    one ever had to vote for any candidate on this ever again. I would like
    it if we had a national consensus to protect our children.
        And it would not in any way, shape, or form interfere with Americans
    to go about their business in the ways that Americans in my part of the
    country have from the beginning, in the hunting season, in the skeet
    shooting, in the sport shooting, and all that. It doesn't have anything
    to do with this.
        But we're making a grave mistake when we continue to put up excuses
    for that for which there is no excuse and to pretend that this is the
    only area of our national life where only punishment and not prevention
    is the answer.

    [[Page 466]]

        So I thank the folks who are here. I wish Representative
    Lofgren well, and I particularly appreciate the
    leadership of the women Members of the Congress in this issue that
    affects all of us.
        I would like to now call on someone who, of all the people on this
    stage, has paid the highest price for our failure to do the right thing
    by our country, Representative Carolyn McCarthy.

    [At this point, Representatives Carolyn McCarthy, Constance A. Morella, and Zoe Lofgren made brief
    remarks.]

        The President. I want to leave you with two thoughts. First of all,
    not many people who pay the price Carolyn McCarthy did wind up having the personal strength to run for
    Congress. One of the biggest problems here is most of the people out
    there whose kids get killed in crimes or by accident, it's all they can
    do to put their own lives back together, take care of the rest of their
    kids, and go on with their lives. I can't believe that Suzann
    Wilson is still doing this after all these
    years. There is only a--it was just kind of a God's grace that
    Jim and Sarah Brady
    happened to be nationally prominent people and in a situation where they
    could go on. Mike Barnes is trying to organize
    people that don't have anything like the natural inclination or ability
    to come up with the kind of money and power and then employ the kind of
    tactics that the typical lobby group does. But they're everywhere.
        Yesterday I was contacted by a man that I've known for many years,
    to remind me of the incredible damage done to his family when his son
    and his son's friend were playing with a gun that killed the friend. His
    son doesn't have a mark on him, but it took him years to get over it,
    watching his best friend die there. There are people like this
    everywhere. And they shouldn't be denied and disenfranchised just
    because they're not organized. You have to speak for them.
        The second thing I want to say is Congressman John Lewis is here. The Sunday before last, I joined him in the
    35th anniversary of marching over the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, a
    march that led to the passage of the Voting Rights Act. People in our
    lifetime, those of us that are old enough, over 35, actually died so all
    Americans could vote. I don't think they marched and died so that their
    votes would vanish in a howl of special interest politics in Washington.
    That's not what the Constitution or the Bill of Rights or the civil
    rights revolution was all about.
        This is about more than guns. This is about whether democracy works.
    So I ask you, don't just go out and talk about how well these women did
    today and how moved you are. Do something. Mobilize your friends to do
    something. We can win this battle with your help.
        Thank you very much.

     Note: The President spoke at 11:40 a.m. in the East Room at the White
    House. In his remarks, he referred to Michael D. Barnes, president, and
    Sarah Brady, chair, Handgun Control, Inc., and former White House Press
    Secretary James S. Brady, who was wounded in the 1981 assassination
    attempt on President Ronald Reagan.