[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 36, Number 11 (Monday, March 20, 2000)]
[Pages 550-554]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Remarks at a Rally for Gun Control 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

[[Page 551]]

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 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.

[[Page 552]]

    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 
system, in one year, stopped 179,000 illegal gun sales, over two-

[[Page 553]]

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.

[[Page 554]]

    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.
    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 her husband, former White 
House Press Secretary James S. Brady, who was wounded in the 1981 
assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan.