Newsgroups: talk.politics.guns From: [l v c] at [cbvox1.att.com] Subject: GunTalk -- Marion Hammer Testimony on Semi-Auto Ban Date: Fri, 28 Jan 1994 04:51:56 GMT Summary of TESTIMONY OF MARION P. HAMMER to the House Criminal Justice Committee - REPRESENTING THE NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION & UNIFIED SPORTSMEN OF FLORIDA (includes paraphrasing of extemporaneous comments addressing the testimony of others.) I am really surprised by all of this emotional testimony from Attorney General Butterworth and FDLE Commissioner Tim Moore. They gave you nothing but emotion -- no facts, no statistics, no data and no comprehensive information. You just saw General Butterworth hold up a gun off the table, raise it over his head and say, "I guarantee you this is the weapon of choice of criminals." You heard the same claim on the video tape from Handgun Control, Inc. What they told you is politically motivated emotionalism -- NOT FACT. One week ago today, USA TODAY published a full page graphic of the most popular CRIME GUNS as reported by the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. Only one of these so-called assault weapons is on the list and it is number 9. The weapons of choice as reported are: 1. Smith & Wesson .38 Special Revolver 2. Raven Arms .25 caliber 3. Davis P-380 4. Smith & Wesson .357 Revolver 5. Ruger .22 caliber (commonly used for target shooting) 6. Lorcin L-380 7. Smith & Wesson semiautomatic handgun 8. Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun 9. Tech DC-9 10. Remington 12 gauge shotgun You just heard FDLE Commissioner Tim Moore testify that statistics on crime guns and "assault weapons" in Florida are not available. Yet in 1989 FDLE told the Florida Assault Weapons Commission, formed by the Legislature, that they would immediately begin accumulating that data. They told legislators on the Commission that it was NOT NECESSARY to file legislation requiring information on the kinds of guns used in crime be kept and available to future inquires. They said they had heard the Commissions criticism of their record keeping and would correct it without the necessity of legislative mandate. Yet here we are almost 4 years later and he gives you EMOTIONAL testimony and provides you with absolutely no data, no statistics no evidence, and no proof at all that so-called assault weapons are a problem. (Legislators on the Commission were: Senator Bill Bankhead, Senator Howard Forman, Representative "Spud" Clements [now deceased] and Representative Ron Glickman.) Rep. Couch asked Commissioner Moore for the percentage of crime guns that are "assault weapons". Tim told him FDLE had taken 60 "assault weapons" into custody during the last year, but said he didn't know how many other kinds of guns had come in to FDLE -- I find it strange that they would know precisely how many so-called "assault weapons" but not how many other guns had come into their labs. Further, he said he did not have any state wide statistics. Then Mr. Moore told you that it is AGAINST THE LAW for them collect that information because of the "Instant Check" law. Folks that is PATENTLY UNTRUE. He's trying to claim that the law that prevents him from keeping computer registration lists of law- abiding people purchasing firearms through legitimate sources keeps him from keeping records on guns used in crime. He knows that is not true. There's a big difference between keeping records of guns purchased by law-abiding people and guns confiscated from criminals. Every law enforcement agency in this state knows how many crime guns they have taken in and they know what percentage of them are "assault weapons". He could have gotten that information. I suspect that the reason he hasn't given it to you is because the facts don't support his political and emotional claims. I looked at the "findings" in this bill that talks about the proliferation of use of assault weapons. I figured that if any law enforcement jurisdiction in the state had a proliferation it would be Dade County. So I made a phone call this morning. I personally talked to Metro Dade Firearms ID Department. I asked: What percentage of Metro Dade's crime guns are assault weapons? I was told: Less than 4% of their crime guns are "assault weapons" and that number includes suicides, lost property, ATF inventory confiscations from gun shops for records violations and guns that come in for any reason. I asked: Whether or not there has been a proliferation of assault weapons in Metro Dade? I was told: There has actually been a steady DECLINE in assault weapons coming into Metro Dade Firearms ID since 1981. I asked: Are assault weapons the problem in Metro Dade? I was told: Metro Dade has a lot of problems, but assault weapons are not the problem. The media is just blowing the occasional assault weapon use all out of proportion. Their biggest problem is getting violent criminals off the streets and keeping them off the streets. I GOT THE INFORMATION AND SO COULD FDLE. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THESE SO-CALLED "ASSAULT WEAPONS" ARE NOTHING MORE THAN SEMIAUTOMATIC FIREARMS THAT ARE FUNCTIONALLY IDENTICAL TO EVERY OTHER SEMIAUTOMATIC FIREARM - THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEM IS HOW THEY LOOK. Fully automatic and selective fire assault rifles have been banned by federal law since 1934 -- 60 years. They have also been banned under Florida for 25 years - yet criminals still get them. Nothing in this bill will stop crime or criminals. Nothing in this bill will keep guns out of the hands of criminals. Instead, it creates a new crime. The crime of possession of firearms that were legally purchased, legally possessed and lawfully used for decades. In short, it seeks to make criminals out of a whole class of people simply because they own semiautomatic firearms. We have just had sentencing reform. Almost all of the minimum mandatory penalties have been repealed - except the firearms penalties - in order to relieve prison overcrowding and make room for murderers, rapists, and violent offenders. This legislature is struggling to find funding to build more prisons and juvenile detention facilities to house violent criminals who are terrorizing our communities. Yet this bill proscribes 2nd degree felony penalties - 15 years in prison - for merely possessing something that you have every right to possess. Is that what you want to do with new prison beds? [amended down to 3rd degree felony] In 1989 the legislature passed an 8 year minimum mandatory penalty for possession of ANY SEMIAUTOMATIC FIREARM with a HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINE during the commission or attempted commission of a crime. That is, after all, what we should be doing. However, if you check with the State Court Administrators Statistical section, as I asked the Tallahassee Democrat to do, you will find as they did, that practically no one has been sentenced under that provision. That says one of two things - either semiautomatics are not the problem that some would have you believe, or they're simply refusing to send the really bad guys to prison for 8 years. Why then send good guys to jail for 15 years because they own a semiautomatic? That being said, I want you to take a real look at what this bill will do: LANGUAGE ON PAGE 2, LINES 20 - 22 would ban possession of the listed "semiautomatics" and any replica or SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR COPY. REMEMBER that all semiautomatics are FUNCTIONALLY IDENTICAL. It doesn't take much to see that it would ban all semiautomatics regardless of all the scare language about bayonet mounts, grenade launchers, etc. That is nothing more than an emotional screen. LANGUAGE ON PAGE 5, Lines 19 - 21 creates yet another definition of semiautomatic. This one says "Semiautomatic means capable of firing a series of rounds by successive depression of the trigger without additional slide, bolt, or other manual action." This definition in addition to all semiautomatics, has managed to cover every double action revolver made. LANGUAGE ON PAGE 6, LINES 17 & 18 exempts you if you have a federal "assault weapons" license. NO SUCH LICENSE EXISTS. The federal government only licenses fully automatic and selective fire machine guns. LANGUAGE ON PAGE 7, LINES 6 - 28 the language dealing with forfeiture is clearly unconstitutional. It violates due process. IT PUTS FDLE IN THE CAT BIRD SEAT TO TAKE AND KEEP YOUR GUNS. It places the burden of proof on the owner - not the state -- even after being acquitted in court -- and FDLE can just sit back and watch a 10 day clock run out on you. Further it removes any obligation of FDLE to even attempt to return lost or stolen property. They can just let a 30 day clock run out on you and keep your gun. All of this without forfeiture proceedings or any due process. Let me give you an example: Your gun is stolen. You report it stolen. 3 months later police recover it. From the time police recover it you have 30 days to reclaim it or FDLE gets to keep it. How can you reclaim it when you don't even know it's been recovered. Nothing requires them to notify you it has been recovered even though you reported it stolen. Now that's a slick way to confiscate property. The bill lists a series of options to any person who lawfully possessed a semiautomatic on July 1, 1994. The first option is to transfer it out of state. Now folks, the 1968 Gun Control Act makes it a federal felony for an individual to transfer a gun across state lines. One of the listed options this bill gives law-abiding people is to commit a FELONY crime. Another option is to render it permanently inoperable. A third option is to surrender it to FDLE without compensation. The only other option is to throw themselves on the mercy of FDLE by first registering it and asking for a license to continue possessing it. PAGE 10 lines 1 - 30 the bill says that if you are over 25 YEARS OF AGE, and if you want to keep your lawfully owned property you would be required to send a written request to FDLE asking for a license. It requires a person to include the model and serial number of the gun along with name, address, , A NON-REFUNDABLE FEE OF $200 per gun, fingerprints, drivers license number or social security number, color photograph, date of birth, RACE, GENDER, and documentation of Competence with an assault weapon by proof that you have completed a safety and training course by a certified instructor. Folks - THERE ARE NO ASSAULT WEAPONS TRAINING COURSES and no course that will give you documentation of competence with a so-called "assault weapon". These so called "assault weapons" function like every other semiautomatic and courses don't differentiate. Further it says that FDLE shall conduct a criminal history check and shall EITHER issue the license OR DEMAND SURRENDER OF THE FIREARM within 90 days after they receive the application. No where in the bill does it say that FDLE has to EVER issue a license. So FDLE gets to take your money and then can arbitrarily take your gun. Purely at their whim. It simply says they MAY issue the license only if that person HAS NO INDICATION OF PRIOR OR CURRENT CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR, INCLUDING ARREST. EXCUSE ME! what on earth is criminal behavior -- who decides what is criminal behavior? And arrest - What about CONVICTION! Spitting on the street is against the law in some areas - is that criminal behavior? Is wrongfully arrested or having charges dismissed or being acquitted considered criminal behavior? What about being innocent until PROVEN quilty? This bill gives FDLE authority to arbitrarily decide who they like and don't like, who can own a gun and who can't own a gun without due process. Folks that's unconstitutional and that's just plain wrong. Not only is this a bad bill but it's a bad idea. Locking up people because they failed to surrender property that they have legally purchased with hard earned money and have legally owned and lawfully used for years is not the answer to our crime problems. Punishing people who commit violent crimes with guns is the answer. You can't keep guns out of the hands of criminals unless they're behind bars. AND WE HAVE LAWS ALREADY ON THE BOOKS TO DO THAT. I URGE YOU TO VOTE AGAINST THIS BILL Downloaded from GUN-TALK (703-719-6406) A service of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action Washington, DC 20036 -- Larry Cipriani, [l v cipriani] at [att.com] or attmail!lcipriani