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