Transcripts For CSPAN2 Judiciary Hearing On Assault Weapons 20240714

[background noise] [gavel] committeese judiciary will come to order. Without objection the chair is authorized to declare recesses at any time. We welcome everyone to this mornings hearing on protecting america from assault weapons. I will now recognize myself with an Opening Statement. Assault weapons have been repeatedly used of weapons of deadly violence on our citizens. In just the last two years, las vegas, parkland, pittsburgh, poway, midland and odessa have seen Mass Shootings at the hands of a gunman with assault weapons. Last month we added el paso and dayton to the list of communities shattered by Mass Violence perpetrated by a gunman old with armed with assault weapons. Todays hearing is about whether america will tolerate weapons of war in our streets and in our neighborhood. Simply put civilian assault , weapons are just semi automatic versions of military weapons. Have passed bans on assault weapons, these have been proven too easy to evade. This is one reason i support a national ban on assault weapons. For example, despite californias ban on assault weapons, a man was able to drive across the border into nevada to buy an assault weapon. A 75 round high capacity magazine, plus five 40 round magazines and used this to kill three people and wound 17 others in a matter of minutes at the gilroy garden festival. A gunmans intent on killing whether the target is one person or many can hop over state lines and return to kill others. We must examine this dangerous problem and how to address it. In 1994 the assault weapons ban which expired in 2004 was a watershed event that offers a guide for today. Looking at the effectiveness of that law, they have shown mass shooting fatalities were 70 less likely to occur compared to the periods before and after the ban. Another study found that the assault weapons ban was associated with a 25 drop in gun massacres and a 40 drop in fatalities. The ban however was not without its shortcomings. During the ban, the gun industry, as usual putting profits over morality, boosted boasted of its ability to modify assault weapons that were technically legal. Lighting one ak47 clone, in gun magazine wrote in spite of the assault weapons bans im sorry in spite of Assault Rifle bans, bans of high capacity magazines, the ranting s of the antigun media and the rifles of apolitical incorrectness, the kalashnikov has flourished. Today theres probably more models and accessories to choose from than ever before. Closed quote. Thus boasting about how to evade the law, a law intended to protect human lives. As we consider how best to address the problem of assault weapons, we must examine the loopholes in the 1994 law that weakened its effectiveness. Although the lethal impact of assault weapons is highly evident in shootings, they present a far broader problems. These weapons pose a daily threat to our communities. Whether or not they are used in particular times to cause mass casualties or make national news. They hold a particular appeal to criminals who can wield terror without them even without causing loss of life on a wide scale. For too long, the response in congress to the daily toll of gun violence in our streets and our schools and in places of worship has been moments of silence. Thats changed. Earlier this year, this committed reported committee reported and the house passed legislation to expand and improve our background checks system. This committee recently approved bills to establish systems for extreme Risk Protection orders, ban large capacity magazines, and prohibit individuals convicted of hate crime misdemeanor from possessing firearms. You will soon discover whether Republican Leadership in the senate is still in abject fealty to the gun manufacturers why not when they consider this legislation. Todays hearing continues the important task of addressing our Shameful National problem of gun violence. Today, well discuss assault weapons and examine options for dealing with these particularly dangerous weapons of war. And tomorrow, our subcommittee on crime terrorism and Homeland Security will conduct a hearing concerning Community Responses to gun violence in our cities. We must take a comprehensive approach to solving the National Crisis of gun violence. An issue that for too long has been ignored by national leaders. We know the American People want us to examine the facts and to find solutions. And this hearing is an important step towards that goal. I would like to recognize the survivors and advocates here today, including those from newton, parkland, march for our lives, and moms demand action. I thank you for your tireless advocacy. You inspire us all. I thank our witnesses for appearing today, and i look forward to their testimony. I understand that the Ranking Member is on his way. Well proceed to witness testimony at this time, and i will recognize the Ranking Member for his Opening Statement when he arrives. Without objection, all other Opening Statements will be included in the record. I will now introduce todays witnesses. The honorable nan whaley is the mayor of dayton, ohio. Since the mass shooting mayor , whaley has been a leading advocate for gun safety legislation. Before joining city government, mayor whaley served on the montgomery board of elections and as a deputy to the Montgomery County auditor. She received our b. A. From the university of dayton and mpa from wright state university. O tovaris is a surgeon at el paso. After the mass shooting at a walmart in el paso, the doctor treated victims of the shooting. He received his md from the university of texas school of medicine at san antonio. Dr. Rochelle bractney is the chief of police in charlottesville, virginia. Previously she served for 30 years with the Pittsburgh Bureau of police. She was the first africanamerican woman to oversee a special operations division. She received her b. A. And m. A. From Carnegie Mellon university and phd from Robert Morris university. She is a graduate of the stillal fbi come now national fbi academy in virginia. This next guest, served with the consumers union. Mrs. Randall received a b. A. From university of Southern California and jd from George Washington university. Amy swearer is a senior legal policy analyst in the center for judicial studies at the heritage foundation. Previously she held positions with the Charles Koch Institute and the lancaster nebraska public defenders office. She received or bachelor of science in criminal justice and her jd from the university of nebraska. Diana muller is the founder of the Grass Roots Initiative to bring one woman from every state to washington, dc to meet with legislators on behalf of gun owners. She is also the cohost of shooting gallery on the outdoor channel. Previously she served for 22 years in the tulsa police department. She received a bachelor of science in criminal justice and psychology from the university of central missouri. David chipman is a senior policy advisor at gibbons law center and is a member of the Firearms Committee of the International Association of chiefs of police. Prior to assuming his current positions he served for 25 years , as a special agent for the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives. Mr. Chipman received his b. A. From American University and his masters in management from Johns Hopkins university. We welcome all our distinguished witnesses, and we thank them for participating in todays hearing. Now if youd please rise, ill begin by swearing you in. Raise your right hand. What happened . [laughter] do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony youre about to give is true and correct to the best of your knowledge, information and belief, so help you god . You may a seated and thank you. Let the record show the witnesses answered in the affirmative. Please note that each of your written statements will be entered into the record in its entirety. Accordingly i ask that you summarize your testimony in five minutes. To help you stay within that time, there is a timing light on your table. When the light switches from green to yellow, you have one minute to conclude your testimony. When the light turns red, your five minutes have expired. People hopped between bars and restaurants as last call approached. Others waited in line at a popular taco truck for a late night snack. But that all changed in an instant. A. M. , a young man armed with an ar15 pistol variant walked down an alley between two bars and began spraying high velocity rounds into the crowd. He then turned down a crowded street as people tried to run for safety. Friends pulled each other into doorways to try to escape falling bullets. One man threw his girlfriend to the ground and covered her body with his own. People literally ran out of their shoes. Less than a minute later, nine people were dead, and 17 others had been shot. Dozens more were injured in the commotion. 32 seconds. In just 32 seconds, 26 people had been shot, nine families had lost loved ones, and dozens more will never be the same. The entire incident was over in half as much time as ive been speaking to you so far today. In those 32 seconds, the shooters weapon did exactly what it was designed to do, kill or injure as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. It was a weapon designed to inflict maximum damage to human beings. It left a trail of destruction not on some foreign battlefield, but down a Historic Brick street in dayton, ohio. I visited the crime scene the morning after the shooting. The thing i remember most clearly is the smell of bleach. A street sweeper was being used to try to clean the road, and men in hazmat suits were scrubbing the sidewalks. The meat still sat on the grill of the taco truck. Little yellow placards showing where all it casings were found bullet casings were found looked like they had been scattered without thought. I was in a place that was both completely familiar and completely foreign. The shooting occurred nearly two months ago, but our sidewalks are still stained after numerous power washes. Many buildings and street signs still have bullet holes in them. And these are just the physical scars left by the shooting. Young people who were in the district that night talk about their new fear of crowds. The bartenders in the neighborhood are consumed with anxiety at the sound of sirens. Neighbors dread the sound of fireworks after being awakened by gunfire. Our whole city is hurting. All because a young man with a history of violent ideas could get his hands on a weapon capable of such destruction. And yet, we are lucky. Just 32 seconds after the shooting began, Dayton Police neutralized the gunman. He was killed as he attempted to enter a bar where hundreds of people were hiding. If he shot 26 people on the street in 32 seconds, what could he have done in that bar . We are so lucky that seven Dayton Police officers were less than a block away when the shooting began. Were so lucky that these officers relied on their training and their courage, and ran directly into the gunfire. I have thought a lot about the bravery of the Dayton Police and the impossible situation that confronted them. Why do we ask our First Responders to face down weapons that can do so much damage in so little time . Our city has honored these heroes. The white house has honored these heroes. But if were serious about honoring and thanking our brave First Responders, the best thing we can do is make sure they are never put in this situation again. Police should not have to confront a weapon that can kill nine people in 32 seconds. No one should. The evening after the shooting, thousands of people gathered for a vigil on the same street where nine of their neighbors had died only hours earlier. When the governor took the stage, hundreds of people shouted in frustration, do something. Do something. The massacre that happened in dayton and has happened in too many communities across this country demands a response. We must insure that no american neither a young person on a casual night out, nor a Police Officer on patrol has to face down weapons capable of so much destruction. Im here today on behalf of the citizens of dayton and mayors across the country to ask you to keep weapons like this off our streets. Im here to ask you to do something. Thank you, chairman. Rep. Nadler thank you. Dr. Tovar . Dr. Tovar chairman nadler, vice chair scanlan, Ranking Member collins and distinguished members of the house Judiciary Committee, thank you for the opportunity to come before you today and to participate in this hearing. Ive been a trauma surgeon and the associate trauma medical director at the Medical Center at el paso for several years. On saturday morning, august 3, i just finished a typical 30 hour shift at the hospital with the usual gallbladder surgery. I picked up mcdonalds on the way home looking forward to eating, getting sleep until sunday morning when i had to do it all over again. Just after i got home at 10 55 a. M. , i received a text message from my chairman of surgery who was out of town. Active shooter, walmart, unknown number of victims. Honestly i didnt think much of it. I have an active shooter alert a month earlier, and the swat team only brought in one person at a time. Dr. Susan, my mentor, could surely handle this. A text was sent to minutes later to all surgeons in our group. If anybody is in el paso, go to the hospital. Theres an active shooter and well get at least four or five victims. By the time the text was sent, i would learn later the shooting was over in just about 20 minutes. And more than 20 people were killed, more than 20 were injured, and countless lives would be changed. I ran red lights and sped to the hospital. I knew that most of these patients would require immediate surgery, and i was trying to coordinate who would be there to help operate. By the time i arrived, each of our six trauma bays had patients, each needed surgery. A doctor was already in the operating room with one of them. The one that drew my attention was a patient with cpr in progress. She had been talking just a few minutes before, and now from a shoulder wound she was lifeless. My resident and i quickly and methodically cut open her chest to begin manual cardiac compressions. Three liters of blood immediately spilled to the floor. And after working for several minutes, i knew our efforts were futile and i had to pronounce time of death. Just 10 minutes after i arrived to the hospital. The look of disappointment in my residents eyes ate at me. I could not process that now. We had more to do. Im not a military surgeon. But what i saw looked like a war zone. Small gunshot wounds in the legs amounted to huge areas of cavitation and exit wounds larger than a grapefruit. I had never seen anything like this before. How could a firearm create this type of destruction . The next woman had a third of her pelvis shattered, multiple holes in her large intestine were too extensive to be repaired. In damage control surgery, decisions have to be made to remove parts of the intestines when there are more pressing issues to be addressed. In this case, it was clear none of these, none of this intestine could be salvaged. We packed with temporary dressing. When she was stabilized and could return to surgery in a day or two to assess for any missed injuries. I have treated countless patients with gunshot wounds from small firearms. In those cases, sometimes its even difficult to find the holes because of how small they are, and the clean cut appearance that looks like a pencil made them. Here, it was not so. We had 14 patients come in the span of 34 minutes. The other main hospital in town received 11 patients. Seven of our patients went straight to the o. R. For surgery in a single hour. And most had to return to the operating room several more times. And their journey is still not done. In the next few months, temporary colostomies, multiple orthopedic types of procedures will have to be reperformed and reversed and closed. In the aftermath, 22 people lost their lives that day. We did save 13 out of the 14 patients that arrived to us. But that first patient haunts me every night. I wish i could have done more. And i blame myself for her death. I saw her autopsy recently to try and get some closure. She was protecting her child, and so she was actually shot in the back and through her shoulder. She had a hole the size of a baseball at the top of her lung. Her subclavian vessels were essentially nonexistent. If this injury had been caused by a smaller firearm, she might have had a chance of survival. But there was absolutely nothing i could do to fix that type of devastating injury. I hope that she died knowing she protected her child from the same fate. Thank you, chairman. Rep. Nadler thank you. Chief bradley. Committeekney chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the u. S. House of representatives, committee on the judiciary, i bring you greetings on behalf of the executive board and members of the National Organization of black Law Enforcement executives, noble. As you know, my name is dr. Michelle brackney. Im the chief of police in charlottesville, virginia and all that that brings with it. Its an honor for noble to provide written testimony on the topic of protecting america from assault weapons. Noble is very concerned about the level of gun violence in the United States and specifically the correlation between violence and the proliferation of assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines. Its our organizations opinion that violence, particularly gun violence, is a Public Health issue. And as with all Public Health issues, it demands a comprehensive, nonjudgmental, pragmatic, evidencebased approach to saving lives and reducing injury. Noble, along with other organizations such as the national Law Enforcement partnership to prevent gun violence, of which were a member, is committed to addressing the pervasive nature of gun violence and its terrific impact on communities across america. Specifically, firearm related injuries and deaths to include homicides, suicides, and accidental shootings, involving assault weapons, is unacceptable and demands immediate action. To be clear noble defines assault weapons as semiautomatic guns with a high capacity ammunition magazine designed for military use. We advocate for limiting high capacity ammunition magazines to 10 rounds, and the regulation of new semiautomatic assault weapons. In 2016, assault weapons accounted for one in four Police Officers killed in the line of duty through gun violence. Noble supported the Public Safety and recreational firearms use protection act or the federal assault weapons ban of 1994, and the federal assault weapons ban reauthorization act of 2004. We currently support hr8, which is a bipartisan background check act of 2019. As does 90 of all americans. Assault weapons have been used in many Mass Shootings such as Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in parkland, florida, the tree of life synagogue shooting, the las vegas Music Festival shooting and in el paso. We believe the level and the lethality of gun violence directed at Police Officers and our communities requires an organized and aggressive response from policy makers at the federal, state and local levels. Elected officials must commit to closing gaps in the current regulatory system, including those that enable felons, minors and other prohibited persons to access firearms and those that allow the trafficking of illegal guns. Law enforcement plays a central and Critical Role in preventing gun violence and solving crime. Effective strategies for the strict enforcement of laws concerning the illegal possession, trafficking, and criminal use of firearms are vital. And we need to be supported by data, research, technology, training, and best practices. Because the Publics Health and safety depend on the efforts of Law Enforcement, agencies must have resources sufficient to prioritize the protection of officers and communities against guns and firearm violence. The crisis of gun violence in our country necessitates a sustained, coordinated and collaborative effort involving the citizens, elected officials, Law Enforcement and the entire criminal justice system. On behalf of the Law Enforcement leaders of noble, we thank you for supporting Law Enforcement ability to maintain Public Safety while continuing to address the health issue of gun violence. Our members stand ready to meet the needs of our communities and the nation. And we thank you for the opportunity for you to do the same. Rep. Nadler thank you very much. Ms. Rand . Ms. Rand thank you mr. Chairman , and members of the committee for hearing the views of the Violence Policy Center. Were a National Educational organization working to reduce gun violence. Generally semiautomatic assault weapons are civilian versions of military assault weapons. Semiautomatic assault weapons look the same as their military counterparts because theyre virtually identical save for one feature. Military assault weapons are machine guns capable of fully automatic fire. Assault weapons did not just happen. They were developed to be welldefined combat needs. The most significant assault weapon functional design feature is the ability to accept a detachable ammunition magazine. The gun industry introduced semiautomatic versions of military assault weapons in order to create and exploit new civilian markets for these Deadly Weapons. The gun industry began to aggressively market assault weapons in the 1980s. The industry and gun magazines enthusiastically describe these versions as military assault weapons to boost civilian sales throughout the 1980s. The industrys marketing of assault weapons has intensified as the market for traditional firearms has waned. The gun industrys Marketing Campaigns stress that semi automatic assault weapons available to civilians are the equivalent of those used by the military. The industrys marketing materials are replete with military images and language. I will give you one example. Our Tactical Firearms are the stuff of legend. Every innovation is born in the battlefront built the home front. The rise of public Mass Shootings directly coincides with the increasing availability of assault weapons and highcapacity magazines. Prior to the 1980s, the United States very rarely experienced the trauma of a public mass shooting. 1984. Egan to change in wielded an oozy carbine uz carbine. Now they are coming with increasing frequency. The impact of the focus on military style firearms and be seen in the weapons chosen by todays mass shooters. The shooter who killed nine and wounded 27 in dayton chose an ar type assault pistol equipped with a stabilizing brace, a relatively new trend in industry innovation. A major point i would like to make given this opportunity is that assault weapons are not just about Mass Shootings. The threat posed by these weapons is much broader than that. In fact, they pose a significant risk to Law Enforcement. The Violence Policy Center performed an analysis of unpublished information from the fbi and determined that one out of five Law Enforcement officers slain in the line of duty in 2016 and 2017 were killed with assault weapons. Weapons are assault the clear weapons of choice a crossborder gun traffickers supplying criminal organizations in mexico and other latin american countries. We have an ongoing project looking at the firearms seized in the context of these types of trafficking prosecutions and of the 60005 firearms named in trafficking prosecutions were assault weapons. Finally, assault weapons are used in street crime, which i am sure you will hear more from Law Enforcement today. I quickly want to address some items with respect to must bethe definition very clear and something industry cannot evade and we must find a way to grapple with the grandfathered weapons. Those are the two major flaws of the 1994 law. Thank you for considering my views. Rep. Nadler thank you very much. My name is amy swearer and i i am theanalyst policy analyst at the heritage foundation. Policy analyst and policy makers must have an accurate understanding of the societal problems they are seeking to combat. Appeary policymakers completely uninformed about basic factual realities related to guns and and violence. We all want safer communities. The characteristics distinguishing socalled assault weapons from nonassault weapons are not factors. Proposals to ban scary looking areures like pistol grips proposals to force lawabiding citizens to own guns that are harder for them to handle, harder to fire accurately, and more likely to cause them injuries even when they are being used for lawful purposes. Rifles are not a meaningful driving factor behind rates of gun violence are two thirds of gun deaths are suicides with the type of firearm is irrelevant. With respect to gun crimes, over 90 are committed with handguns. Rifles of any kind are used in only three to 4 of gun homicides every year. Despite frequent claims that semi automatic rifles or the weapon of choice for mass public shooters, in the last decade, over half of the shootings have been carried out with handguns alone. On the other hand, semi automatic rifles like the ar15 are so well suited defensive action against threats in civilian context that the department of Homeland Security literally designates them as personal defense weapons for Law Enforcement officers. It is Little Wonder that lawabiding citizens in this country choose these types of semi automatic rifles as their own personal defense weapons. Benefiting americans when they are allowed to defend themselves with them. Situations where they are outnumbered. Ironically, the rifle deemed an assault weapon by many in this room was used defensively to protect innocent people against assault and the perpetrators used a nonassault weapon to commit actual assault. Some of the most famous examples of the defense of use of assault weapons civilians come from scenarios where the government has been either unable or unwilling to defend entire communities from largescale civil unrest. During the 1992 l. A. Riots, Law Enforcement was nowhere to be found as hundreds of looters ransacked koreatown. Ordinary door owners took upon it ordinary store owners took it upon themselves to defend from lawlessness. In ferguson, missouri, in 2014. There are some who do not understand why or how anyone would need such scary looking rifles. Up withr did not grow firearms and they will never be her favorite thing in the world. She has never handled a firearm until i took her to the range for the first time several years ago. I love my mother but like every other novice with a handgun, she was quite bad. She struggled to hit a stationary target from six yards out under ideal conditions. And then she picked up in ar15 i watch my mother put that is why lawabiding citizens by millions of these firearms. When accuracy matters, they are simply better. Americans use firearms to defend themselves between 500,000 and 2 million times every year part god for bed that my mother were faced 2 million times every year. I hope politicians protected by professional arm security to not strip her of the right to use the firearm she can handle most competently. I hope she has in her hand the scariest looking assault weapon she can find so that we can both be confident in her ability to end the threat. Thank you. Rep. Nadler thank you. Thank you, chairman. Is Diana Moeller and im an ordinary american, one who has had different Life Experiences that bring me here today as a dissenter of any new gun control laws, including the assault weapons ban. After 22 years as a police , i retired to focus on a second career as a professional shooter. I came to this town as a tourist and during a meeting with my congressman i asked if there was anything i should be doing to dispel the information about guns and gun owners that is running rampant on capitol hill. And. Project was born was born, educational and nonpartisan effort from 50 women leading their legislators as gun owners and Second Amendment supporters right we are as diverse of any crosssection of america. Many of these women have been endured unspeakable violence themselves or lost loved ones. Their stories are similar to kate nixons. It was reported that kate knew her coworker wasnt unstable and felt that she would he would shoot up the place. Her husband encouraged her to take a pistol to work but she did not want to break the rules. She followed the policy that was supposed to keep her safe and she was murdered the next way in the Virginia Beach tragedy. These laws and policies are taking away a womans right to choose. Then rights are womens rights gun rights are womens rights. That is why i am honored to be here today. As a woman, i am likely smaller, less equipped for violence than attacker. Equalizer is a great and levels the playing field. I married late in life. I spent the majority of my adult life sleeping by myself. There were so many nights there were bumps in the night but i eace because i have a firearm by my side. I am worth protecting. I family is worth protecting. My family is worth protecting. Why does anybody need an ar 15 . You would not run a marathon in dress shoes. Each of my firearms have a specific purpose. Gets called on it is my go to for home defense and vehicle gun. I have turned a hobby into a living. The ar 15 platform is the most popular generalpurpose rifle because it is the most versatile and customizable. Freedom does not ask why the need. Necessity is the plea for every infringement on human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. It is the creed of slaves. I enforce the laws you created and ida front row seat to the justice system. It is frustrating to see the revolving door where judges give minimal sentencing. I find it ironic in todays effort of criminal Justice Reform that you are taking steps to be lenient on people who have committed crimes against laws you have already created while at the same time proposing more laws that turn ordinary lawabiding citizens into criminals. How about holding the people accountable for the laws that are already on the books before we pass any further legislation that would only be a burden on the lawabiding . If these laws were the answer, chicago, baltimore, l. A. , and this city be the safest city in america. The Firearms Community is doingsomething. You, work with us instead of demonizing us. Lawabiding american gun owners are not the enemy. Help our community promote programs like project child safe and the Kids Safe Foundation that teaches kids about firearm safety. Walk the talk america is a Suicide Prevention program. These are initiatives that are being driven by the firearms industry. If you really want to make a difference, to behind these programs and find them. And fund them. We believe one life unjustifiably taken is one life to many. Kids start protecting our like we protect the people in this building. Thank you for the opportunity and thank you for your time and service. Rep. Nadler thank you. Good morning, chairman, members of the committee. Chipman and iid am the senior policy advisor at the gun Violence Prevention Organization founded by debbie giffords. I am a gun owner and i served as a special agent for the bureau of alcohol tobacco firearms and explosives for 25 years. I served on the front lines of our governments efforts to prevent Violent Crime and effectively regulate the firearms industry. I worked to disrupt firearms trafficking conspiracies along the iron pipeline, served on atf swat team and later was the special agent into hard into the firearms programs. Although all weapons can be dangerous in the wrong hands, some weapons are lethal and should be more strictly regulated. Nations current violence gun violence crisis has made two things clear. It is far too easy for violent people to get their hands on Deadly Weapons and the American People overwhelmingly Want Congress to act now, to make their community safer. Assault weapons or class of semi automatic firearms intended for military use designed to kill people quickly and efficiently. These weapons are often the weapon of choice for mass shooters. 15,ult weapons, like the ar are considered are configured so that a shooter can fire accurately and rapidly. They can accept attachable magazines. There is no limit to the possible size of a magazine. This enables the shooter to continue firing as many as 100 rounds without having to stop and reload, maximizing the casualties. Identical to are those used by the military. The public and many lawmakers have called for a renewal of the 9 of the assault weapons ban. That say with confidence there were benefits and limitations. The 1994 act had a positive effect on Public Safety. Period it wasyear in effect, Mass Shootings fatalities were 70 like leslie 70 less likely to occur. It suffered from notable limitations. The law did not regulate the transfer or possession of assault weapons manufactured before the laws effective date. Any fractures took of took advantage of this loophole. While the consequently, while the law was in place assault weapons were regularly resold for transactions undermining its effectiveness but we rarely saw the kind of Mass Shootings we are seeing today. The assault weapons ban expired in 2004, the gun industry continue to design and fell more dangerous weapons. During the 1990s, assault missile fired 9 mm handgun rounds. Modern ar and ak pistol like a weapon used in dayton and earlier this year to kill a milwaukee Police Officer file rifle rounds. We currently do not have a reliable estimate of how many are in circulation. Estimates are in the tens of millions. If our goal is to balance the rights of responsible lawabiding gun owners and the urgent need to keep particularly dangerous weapons out of the hands of criminals reinstating the 90s era ban on Assault Rifles is not enough. One option would be to require registration of all existing assault weapons in civilian hands under the National Firearms act while banning future manufacture and sale of these firearms. The nfa was and acted in response to violent gun crimes and the deaths of Law Enforcement officers. The nfa imposes an excise tax and registration requirement for said weapons including silencers, sawed off shotguns, short barreled rifles, machine guns and other dangerous firearms in order to possess one of these weapons they must pass a background check, provide fingerprints and a photo, pay a 200 transfer tax and register their weapon with atf. Using the nfa to address assault weapons would use an existing and effective regulatory structure that allows lawful ownership while also addressing the Public Safety concerns. More than 80 years this regulatory system has worked effectively. We believe legally owned weapons are really used to commit crime. It is possible to balance rights and responsibilities. I said in the face of danger for Public Safety during an assault weapon, it is an acceptable that military style weapons are readily available to civilians today and increasingly lead to loss of innocent lives. We should take action to make the community safer. Thank you for considering my testimony and i look forward to your questions. Thank you very much. Ranking member from georgia has arrived. We begin questioning under the 5 minute rule. Thanks for holding this hearing on the assault weapons. Lets hope you have a better understanding, using committee crimes and hope we have an open and honest dialogue. And only when equipped with facts that we mobilize silent crimes, lets look at the term assault weapon. When the term enters the american mexican many attribute the invention of the term to josh sugarman. In 1988 he stated assault weapons like armor piercing bullets and plastic arms a new topic, coupled with the publics confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus automatic assault weapons, anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun, only increase public support for restrictions on these weapons and few people can envision practical uses for them. Assault weapons are not Assault Rifles. A full rifles are rapidfire machine magazines designed for military use. Shoulder fired weapons allow a shooter, semi automatic require the operator to pull the trigger for fully automatic and allowed the operator to hold the trigger as the gunfire continuously orients free shots first. The statement indicates assault weapons are semi automatic and cant be used as a fully automatic Assault Rifle. Semi automatic firearms require you to pull the trigger he time for each shot as a pistol requires a further pool for shot. Many in the American Public and media and this body do not understand the difference. We must understand what different firearms do and how they function if we want effective laws to prevent gun violence which i cant imagine anyone who would advocate legislation that does not make families safer but that is what i fear we are headed for. One member of this committee, Assault Rifle and assault weapon multiple times, i understand support for a bill banning assault weapons as we dive into these conversations, another popular misconception, the ar in ar 15 does not stand for Assault Rifle. It stands for armor light rifle model 15. The ar 15s are not Assault Rifles, they are semiautomatic firearms that function similarly where the operator pulled the trigger to fire each shot. Differences between these guns are largely automatic. This information comes from many sources. The senator from california when speaking about assault weapons stated the ability of 30, a 30 caliber clip to be a magazine to disperse 30 bullets in half a second, 30 magazines to disperse in a half second. Either that is the blatant misrepresentation or indication of shocking examines. Even a fully automatic military issue cannot do that. Another member of the committee stated i held in ar 15 in my hands, which i hasnt, a bullet that utilized 50 caliber. These kinds of bullets need to be licensed and not need to be on the street, and manages to make several basic factual errors. It weighs 6 to 7 pounds, fires a 220 pound of ammunition, does not fire 50 caliber ammunition. Anyone who knows or discusses this about firearms with no it is absurd to suggest it. I hope we can clear these misconception in todays hearings but my hopes are not high. We have when we have a democratic president ial candidate say we are going to take your ar 15, that has prevailed here today. Lets review how these were used in crime. Some calculate the number of assault weapons, there were 403 murders. Not those deemed to be assault weapons. And 990 murders, in 967. The national highway Traffic Safety administration, 917,000 people but i do not see any of my colleagues advocating prohibition of the purchase or position of a vehicle traveling 70 miles an hour. We are going to have this debate and we should we must be honest with each other and take the time to learn basic facts about the items we are looking to ban and also the result of what that might incur. Thats not much to ask and hopefully we can do that. I yield back. We will proceed under the 5 minute rule with questions by recognizing myself for five minutes. There are certain features that establish assault weapons from hunting rifles. Earlier this month there was a bill that would ban large capacity magazines. During the 1994 been, people got around the ban by various means. How should we define an Assault Rifle that we might want to ban to get around the easy adaptability of such weapons by putting on various parts of other weapons . Thank you for your question. I think the major problem with the 94 law is it defined an Assault Rifle by the ability to take detachable ammunition magazine which is the most deadly feature and require two additional Assault Rifle features such as a bayonet logo, what the industry did was take off one of the more sir proof lewis fact is like a bayonet lug, it would allow the shooter to have better control during rapidfire. If you go to what is known as one characteristic and clearly defined those characteristics, define an assault weapon, an assault weapon, and assault shotgun they will be on much firmer footing. It would eliminate these weapons we commonly referred to as assault weapons that cause mass casualties. Yes. I believe a good definition coupled with an effective magazine band, you cant overstate the magazine than, to ban small weapons. Assault weapons have become a favored weapon for many mass murders and also by individuals who commit crimes in communities. What impacted the assault weapons ban on Public Safety in general . There are two things involved. When looking at Mass Shootings, 70 less likely to be killed in a mass shooting during that period. What i did see was an impact on the availability of assault pistols which we were seen as a threat to every day gun violence on the streets. I think what we would expect to see in the future is similar declines over time. It enhanced Public Safety, certainly didnt make the streets more dangerous which is often the claim if we didnt have those weapons available to the public. Thank you very much. What does a gunshot wound from an assault weapon look like compared to a wound from a handgun . Additional challenges after the el paso attack . These large caliber bullets, and what does that mean . Not just a bullet, and a blast affect. And gunshot wounds at a lower velocity, and readily fixed. Havent seen anything like this before the mass shooting or anything since. Because of the greater velocity. I commend you for your leadership in the dayton shooting. Beyond physical injury or death what affected the mass shooting have . The effect has been longterm particularly for the trauma the community is dealing with even today and other mayors experienced in their communities as well like the mayor of pittsburgh and parkland. Anytime another shooting happens the whole Community Goes through the shooting again. We have seen that with some midland and odessa shootings and the Mental Health work we have to do will take years for us to make sure people have the services they need. This is an area of town where young people and people of great Diverse Community come together. We are concerned they dont have medical access to criminal Health Services are trying to provide those even today. My time is expired. I recognize the Ranking Member from georgia. Thank you. I have a question. In general what you are already, we frequently hear what we call assault weapons i will get this down before the end. Some of the things i have heard here today that we are talking about, cosmetic things. I disagree with what i heard here today because 22 rifle everybody may have seen, something your father may have given you. We can turn that into an ar platform and it looks like in ar platform and you would think this is a weapon of war. These are cosmetic differences and they dont make it different. Is it not true historically all weapons come out of war . Continuing to say this is a weapon of war, all weapons come out of war. My point is any firearm is legal. Our community is all about safety and trying to educate people into being responsible gun owners. We are not flint, muzzleloader, these were all started from protection and enforcement in law or war. The idea they jump from war to the streets, when they came home from world war i they wanted to use with the used in world war i. Do Assault Rifles shoot any faster than a semi automatic . Know. One of the issues, during the time of the previous assault weapon man didnt have any impact on the safety of Law Enforcement officers . Now, before, during and after the previous assault weapons ban and i thought 0 effect personally and i believe the fbi statistics stated that it was ineffective and you let it sunset. Last week the committee put a red flag law. Do you have any concerns with this committee reported . Thank you for your question. I have written extensively on red flag laws and there may be a place for targeted intervention for people who are objectively dangerous due to Mental Illness or another reason there are serious concerns with policies that have come out of this body. Part of that is complete lack of due process. We are talking about taking away even temporarily a constitutional right. There need to be hybrid and of proof, objective, narrow measures what is constituted dangerous, there need to be with regard to ex parte orders with follow up, not allowing people to wait 30 days before they have a hearing infringing on their Constitutional Rights. We need to ensure provisions for restoration of those rights and things like that are vitally important and not measures ive seen adequately imposed. We took two bills and do what we do a lot which created a lot of problems. What issue was jurisdictional. Is that Something Else what was passed out here . My understanding is it had certain grants. Until we added on the federal side of it. When looking at federal red flag laws, one of the big things is followup in terms of Mental Health, treatment, that people have a root to do that. Part of the problem is jurisdictional. You dont have that in a federal level like you do the state level and it is not jurisdictional. I appreciate that. It is augmented as quickly as anything else. I appreciate what you do for your community. Someone who is part of the response in iraq from everything else. The testimony is very compelling. Isnt it true that a 357 magnum with one bullet or 44 would also cause catastrophic damage . It is my understanding from those weapons as well. From your testimony on how bad this is you need to get involved in this. Im not advocating for that. But they are similar from different guns which nobody is talking about. They are very similar. I yield back. Thank you, mister chairman. On july 28th, a shooter in gilroy used a semi automatic rifle, the end of an ak47, 75 round drum magazine, 540 round magazines carried out the attack. Sale of this firearm, highcapacity band in california but he went to nevada and brought them back to gilroy. He killed stephen romero, age 6, and salazar lived in my district and trevor hervey injured 17 others in under 60 seconds. The Gilroy Police who are outgunned actually ran up to him and they shot him and then shot and killed himself. I am grateful to the gilroy Police Officers, they need to take action, they dont have a weapon that can do so much damage in 60 seconds and kill innocent people who have a right to go to a familyfriendly festival and not be in fear of their lives. I heard your testimony about the impact on the community. It is very real for the people who were there, for neighbors, parishioners and friends, the whole community. The weekend there were familyfriendly festivals because people were afraid to go out. We have created a situation where the kind of thing that i had growing up where i could go to a park, a Grocery Store or walk down the street and not be afraid is not the case anymore. We have an obligation to make sure americans have that same level of freedom they had when i was young. We have failed in that and that is why we are having this hearing. I was interested in your long experience in the whole Law Enforcement weapons area. Have assault weapons become more lethal since the expiration of the 94 ban . I have seen a big leap in assault pistols. As i said in my opening testimony, we were facing handgun rounds and now a blatant attempt to work around the intentions of the National Firearms act and regulation of short barreled rifles can get a k and they are pistols which werent used in war. They were developed domestically. I dont think i know any gunowners who see that is a selfdefense weapon but they fire rounds that leave devastating wounds and we saw that in dayton. They are outside the norm and i legal. I am wondering when you think about how california and the actions taken by state legislature, do you think state laws are sufficient given as in gilroy the shooter can cross the state line and get something . We need a National Comprehensive approach in denver and we were talking to people about the issue of gun violence. Half of their crime guns come from other states. Many of the crime guns in chicago we heard talked about earlier come from states like indiana and that firearms trafficking. If we have comprehensive and universal laws approaches to regulation at the national level, there would not be this interstate travel to work around the law. It is no different from different drinking age, kids would go to another state to get by underage. Thats why it is important for us as federal authorities making decisions. Thank you for that but there is a difference because 19yearold going to new york is different from a 19yearold going to nevada. The gentleman yields back. I wasnt yet a member of this body when the gun ban was passed. A strong supporter of the Second Amendment i would not have voted for that at the time. I would note when the socalled assault weapons ban in 942004, that is when the columbine shooting takes place in 99. I think contrary to the majoritys belief there is no conclusive evidence that the weapons ban had any appreciable effect on Mass Shootings or Violent Crime. Would you comment on that . Is that your understanding as well . That is my understanding and it was the understanding of those who released the official report after the ban expired. What they found was should it be renewed it would be unlikely to have meaningful or measurable effect in part because of as noted previously these firearms are rarely used to commit crimes in the first place. Handguns and nonassault weapons that to this day most often used to commit crimes. You served as Law Enforcement officer in salsa, oklahoma, correct . Yes, sir. Thank you for your service. When you were a Law Enforcement officer, that was during the assault weapons ban that was in place. Before, during, and after. Given your experience would you agree whether there is any evidence we were any safer as a society or community when that was in place, what are your thoughts about that . I would agree personally, professionally, had 0 impact, i saw no difference before, during or after the beginning or end of the assault weapons ban from 942004. Could you describe the misconceptions you frequently here when it comes to the discussion surrounding assault weapons . When we talk about weapons of war, anything can be used as a weapon in battle i suppose but the ar 15 specifically i have friends served in combat roles and they told me that is not a desirable round. They dont like the 223 or 556. This is their personal opinion but they would prefer to carry a 308 with greater stopping power. The guns we are discussing this morning, do people use these 2 and or for self defense . Are they suitable for both . We use them in my family for both. I will be the lawabiding citizen who has a fiscal ar. It is more compact and does give me the greater capacity and the more defense of firearm fits better in my car, my vehicle im traveling in. It is a little bit easier to move around but i get the same advantages of the ar. Back to you, what do you believe are the major motivations behind the Mass Shootings we have seen. Is it your opinion, as opposed to what we are focused on . It is my opinion and clear when you look at asked public shooters, you see higher rates of serious Mental Illness. One fourth of public shooters have been diagnosed with serious Mental Illness or as 2 thirds, what you are seeing is people who are not in a mentally stable place even if they havent been officially diagnosed with any Mental Illness but these are by and large individuals who are not in a good mental place are showing clear signs of being a danger to themselves or others where there is room for intervention with them and thats one of the avenues we have to look at how to treat those underlying problems and intervene in an effective way for dangerous individuals. My time is expired. Mister cowan is recognized. Let me ask, a Legal Advisor a long time ago. These weapons were made in lots of exclusive manufacturer, ar 15s. We have a variety of ways to accomplish ar 15 model, they are imported. You decided not to. They describe the market is flooded and it is my belief it is flooded by foreignmade ars and the ability to make one of your own. Some of those are coming from russia . The russian model i am familiar with would be more and ak47. I they sold here . Not only sold here but manufactured, talking about how long have they been manufactured here . I am not certain. A few years ago, i was in russia and there was an effort by the russian government to change our policies, you know what they have been trying to do. This is before the election of donald trump. I was there through obamas term. Companies Like Coalition a cough found it advantageous to build the guns in america to not have to deal with some of the important issues. Was there a restriction on them . I am not aware. Anything happen in the Trump Administration that would verify that . Im not. What is the position of the ia cp on assault weapons . For many years they opposed and supported a ban on assault weapons. Why is that . As a Law Enforcement, as responding to these scenes, offduty officers in los angeles being shot at. We have families too. It comes from a place police or members of communities want to do a good job and keep our streets safe and these are particularly lethal in the wrong hands. How can you say that with a straight face when you realize one good man with a gun could take out i was trained to be that person. The first thing i learned when i was trained with secret service is you dont have time to pull your gun. You need to get in the way of the bullet and get shot. That is what we see, the reality that any time you are responding to a shooting a lot has happened very badly and we cant have National Policy on winning gunfights. We need to focus on preventing them. Appreciate you recognizing the sarcasm. You agree with your group that assault weapons should not be sold in this country . Absolutely. What is disingenuous is we arguing about terminology. When looking at a high velocity weapon, when you ask an ak, one trigger at a time or semi automatic or something more when talking about arguing, pushing back against the person with a gun what stops a bad person with a gun is keeping the gun out of their hands to start with. Ask that for many Law Enforcement officer who ever had to look down the face of the barrel, tell them to their families, their widows, widowers, children until they to the community and persons from all these Mass Shootings the we are going to argue about definition versus the impact it is having on the community. This hearing is about assault weapons which is important but there is also armor piercing bullets. Do you agree that armor piercing bullets have no place in our society . Actually, they are dubbed cop killers is how they were put on the streets because they could pierce through our bulletproof protective gear. Personal protective equipment so absolutely. The organizations i represent and am a part of, we stand firmly behind no place in society for the type of weapons that can do the type of damage to not only Law Enforcement but the community at large. Do you agree with that . Absolutely. Ammo to defeat armor like military armor and rifle rounds that defeat elastic vests that are typically rated to defend against handgun rounds. Thank you for your service. I stand with the police and sheriffs department, not the nra. The gentleman yields back. Mister sensenbrenner is recognized. I would disagree with what has been said here. One of the problems we had last time, i was here when this was passed, was making proper definitions. If we want to achieve this goal, we have to have those definitions done correctly. I have heard a lot of arguments on this and a lot of it revolves around what the firearm looks like rather than how the firearm works and it seems to me the problem is how the firearm works. Fully automatic military style rifles have been illegal since the 30s except for very hard to get permit from the aca. Rifles that are semi automatic are legal for hunting and most, if not all states. I havent gotten the substantive debate yet but there are a lot of semi automatic hunting rifles. The nrs our fish and game regulators supporting rifles. I dont think we have any business taking away hunting rifles from people who are not disqualified, people who think hunting is a good sport. A hunter, i dont want to call for agencies but lets define this correctly. I would like to ask some of the people who support banning, quote, Assault Rifles to tell me do you think hunting rifles got to be band if they are semi automatic. My point today is to reiterate Constitutional Rights require responsibility and balance and the people of dayton have the right to be safe. Yes or no answer on whether hunting rifles ought to be band if we dont define this correctly . I think this body will do fine this correctly. You are asking what our opinion is. We have no answer from mayor whaley on whether hunting rifles ought to be band. Let the record state that. The question is should hunting rifles be band . I agree there should be a definition of socalled Assault Rifle, socalled answer the question. If you have this definition of a semi automatic firearm that looks bad because it has a shoulder thing and something i dont own any firearm so i am not defining this correctly but that was not i was not elected to sit here and tell people who like to hunt that all of a sudden the firearm they have been using legally according to state and are regulations now ends of being banned because we in congress think it should be. A definition that is so broad that hunting rifles would be band . A definition should be made in terms of what should be you are not answering the question. Yes or no . I believe any weapon that can be used to hunt individuals should be band. [applause] that is not what the virginia dnr says. We think you can clearly distinguish Assault Rifles from sporting, hunting rifles. Just because you can hunt with an ar 15 does not make it a hunting rifle. Having said that we do not support a ban on true hunting rifles. We will put that down as a questionmark. Of the question is whether hunting rifle should be banned because they are semi automatic the answer is no and i would point out when we are talking about functional difference between hunting rifles and assault weapons we are not talking lisa allen your caliber but things like pistol grips and perils but dont change functional mechanics. We shouldnt be banning hunting rifles. My time will be up. Know. The gentlemans time is expired but i would like to address a member of the audience, we respect your right to be here and also ask your respect to proceed with the committee and it is the intention of the committee to proceed with this hearing without disruptions. Thank you for holding the first hearing on assault weapons in 20 years. Theres a reason assault weapons are the weapon of choice for mass killers. Weapons of for designed to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. On august 4th a shooter used a legally purchased the fall rifle to take the lives of nine people and injured 27 more people in less then a minute in dayton, ohio. A gunman legally purchased an ak47 Assault Rifle and within minutes killed 22 people and injured 27 in a walmart in el paso. On july 28, 2019, a gunman legally purchased assault weapon weeks before killing three people and wounding 12 people at the gilroy festival in california. With police on the scene in under a minute. In each of these shootings despite Quick Response times, 34 people were killed within a weeks time and 60 people injured. This does not begin to account for the Mental Health consequences they have. I want to welcome the wonderful advocates who are here, Family Member to lost loved ones to gun violence, thank you for being here and being such a powerful voice in this debate. I think mayor whaley for her leadership. I reintroduced hr 1296, the assault weapons ban to address the harm Mass Shootings have on our communities and to keep the American People safe from senseless acts of violence. The Bipartisan Legislation with 211 cosponsors prohibits the sale interpretation of semi automatic weapons and ammunition capable of accepting more than 10 rounds while protecting hunting at sporting rifles and assault weapons used by members of the military and Law Enforcement. There are 215 weapons exempted in the bill, this notion we are going to ban hunting is false. Had legislation been passed and signed into law it would have prevented tragedies and 8, el paso and gil way. If you listen to my republican colleagues you think the assault weapons ban is a radical idea, never been done before. The truth is it was the law for ten years, 19942004. It past the house with 38 republican votes. It worked. Now lawabiding american lost their gun. And Mass Shootings 63 more people were killed when shooters used assault weapons or highcapacity weapons rather than other types of firearms. During the tenure period of the 1994 assault weapons ban mass shooting fatalities were 70 less likely with and when the ban was in place. When the ban is less likely americans will be killed, at their favorite concert are hanging out with friends are praying at places of worship are simple going to school. Instead of attacking the problem of Mass Shootings head on or building schools with curved always to minimize casualties we are sending kids to school with bulletproof backpacks. This is sickening. We have an opportunity to do something, one that worked and made a difference. If you look at the 2016 study from the university of massachusetts in boston, analyzed data on every gun massacre where 6 more people were shot and killed to analyze the ban on assault weapons had any effect on gun massacres. When the ban lapsed into the for the numbers of gun massacres shot up, 182 increase in massacres, 34 massacres, 239 increase in massacre deaths. Does that establish the effectiveness of the assault weapons ban . I think the 94 ban definitely had a Chilling Effect on the industry. It was able to evade the law in certain ways and your bill addresses all of those things the industry does. Your bill would be more effective, we know from the statistics there clearly was a reduction of Mass Shootings and since the ban lapsed, industry has only become more and more aggressive. One point i would like to make about increasingly salary, the huge increase in the capacity of magazines. We seldom saw 75 rounds, we see those all the time. That is legislation i propose, one characteristic. On august 14th of this year, offices in philadelphia shot during an 8 hour standoff with a gun using ar 15. According to the Violence Policy Center in 2016, when in four Police Officers killed in line of duty were killed by an assault weapon attacks on Law Enforcement resulted in paula multiple Police Fatalities killing 75 of those officers. What an assault weapons ban have protected themselves in communities from gun violence . Is really. We want to consider open carry states, it is much easier to identify a person with an illegal weapon if they are not allowed to have one to start. I wouldnt have to make that stinky whether it is a good person with a gun or a bad person with a gun. Several unanimous consents, the first is a letter of support for the assault weapons ban signed by 150 organizations including the Newtown Action alliance and brady campaign. Ask unanimous consent to have a report by the Violence Policy Center showing one in 4 Law Enforcement officers slain in the line of duty by assault weapon. I ask unanimous consent is reported 2008 study by the journal of trauma and acute care surgery found mass fatalities were 7 less likely to occur during the assault weapons ban period. An article reflecting a poll showing 70 of americans including majority of republicans support and assault weapons ban. And a fox news poll shows 62 of americans support and assault weapons ban. I yield back. Gentlemen. Ar 15 and other rifles. Gentlemen. The Supreme Court. We will not comply with any we will not comply with any effort to ban, confiscate legally owned property. Will not give them up. We will not comply with radical leftist plan. Completely improper. Another reminder for the audience, appreciate your being here, refrain from making noise and disrupting the proceedings like the last gentleman or Capital Police will remove you from the audience we can return to order. You mentioned in your Opening Statement the shooter in dayton was neutralized by the police. Was the shooter killed by police . Yes. What he killed with a gun or several guns . Several guns. Okay. Mister chipman, would you agree that most gun violence most violence is caused by handguns . Most criminal gun violence a handgun is used in at violence. Would you agree, let me thank you for your 25 years of experience, i spent 15 years as a federal prosecutor, 10 years as district attorney, worked with atf and appreciate their hard work. Would you agree with me gaining and gaining members are responsible for 90 of violence in this country and nationwide 80 of all gangrelated gun related homicides in the us are caused by gang members . That conflicts with all the information i have. Ever use a gang database when you were with the atf . Sure. Did you find a gang database reliable . It depends what i was looking for. Gang affiliation . Gang affiliation is a very loose term that Law Enforcement can use to label people. My hesitancy is there was nothing in my 25 Year Experience that suggests 90 of gun crime is tied to gangs. I asked about gang affiliation but let me ask about the next database. Are you familiar with it . Have you ever run across a false positive in a database meaning someone who has been identified as a prohibited person because of prior felony or other reason and yet the database indicated this person who attempted to purchase a gun was prohibited and they were not prohibited . Yes, very warily. But it happens. It has happened. Can we put a picture up please . My question to you, approximately how many ar 15s are owned in america . There is no precise estimate but if we are talking ar 15 semi automatic general rifle platform of that nature estimates are at least several million upwards of 18 million. Upwards of 18 million. Approximate the how many have been used in Mass Shootings in the last decade for example . Probably several does. Several dozen minus the 18 million my Democrat Friends are suggesting those lawabiding citizens, have those weapons taken away. Is that correct . That is my understanding. Do you see the ar 15 i am holding with a former member of the Judiciary Committee from South Carolina . I do. Can you tell by looking at that gun if it has ever killed anybody . I cannot. Why is that . Because frankly i dont know who is holding it or its history but if i had to guess, on statistics alone there is a high chance it has never been used to kill anybody. Along with the 1618 million guns in circulation in america right now. The vast majority will never be used in collection. Are those individuals, from my experience in my district in eastern colorado and ar 15 is used to kill raccoons or foxes or other animals that are predators, trying to disturb individuals, trying to kill chickens or disturbing agriculture in some way. Is that your understanding of how some, not a majority but some of those guns are used . Yes. It is not suitable for a lot of hunting for larger game because it is more suitable, more varmint hunting and small critter hunting. What would the effect of this particular law we are discussing have on lawabiding citizens in terms of either using weapons to protect Domestic Animals or farm animals or self defense . What would the effect be cute you it would criminalize us having the firearms we choose to use. Her mother was able to use accurately. I dont understand the conversation we are having about making it more difficult for the 100 Million People that may have these weapons, make it more difficult for them to control or use properly. Time is expired. You are recognized. I dont profess to be an expert in hunting varmint but my general census is if you hit them with a k 50 you are not hunting them, youre killing them and that is the only purpose of doing it. But let me get two things straight. Both of you mentioned the purpose you see is accuracy. When you describe characteristics of self defense you want stockpile accuracy is a primary objective. Yes. If i have a threat i wanted to stop. Let me go to the f and 57 which has 0 power but its bullets will go through your shield if you have an armor shield and your vest. If it has 0 stopping power, what selfdefense purpose does that gun have . It would not. When you think about stopping power and the risks of being on the receiving end of those high velocity highcapacity rounds and things that can go through them you want to think about accuracy. I appreciate the story about a mom having the ability to be accurate, a tight capacity in putting rounds in a place. Think of the damages my mom who is 78 decided she wanted to be extremely accurate, what about the person who is wellintentioned, how accurate can they be . How quickly could they be and the damage they could do, very wellintentioned . Let me also ask because i know our Law Enforcement every day has people who are citizens of the United States but also answer to another calling and cause called sovereign citizen and if we just take my district i have lost 5 officers who were overpowered by perpetrators because they were better armed than my Police Officers one of which was in baton rouge, louisiana. We can argue over Assault Rifle, how we determine it but for purpose of the hearing calling them weapons of mass distraction because there are three officers in baton rouge whose families will never see them again in two in paris will never see them again because in the st. John parish it was a traffic stop that initiated. Sovereign citizen does not recognize Law Enforcements ability to stop them. They exited the car, the trailer, with an assault weapon. Ambushed the officers and they never had a chance. If we go to baton rouge the officers responded to the call, new the perpetrator was dangerous but they had handguns. He had a long gun wearing body armor and they never stood a chance. In the sense of patrolling im trying to make a balance between the need for a weapon of mass destruction and the need for self defense because i think of my family not necessarily being the best in marksmanship, i thought about having a shotgun which has a wide spray and then the judge fires 357 bullet, it is a revolver or a shotgun shell which is great for self defense but the question becomes why such large capacity magazines on these assault weapons and Assault Rifles talking about hunting. When you hunt, you miss, you load up again and you try again but if your goal is mass carnage, you keep pooling your trigger, install a bump stock and create multiple carnage. From a Law Enforcement standpoint im trying to figure out for the home, self defense, are we talking self defense when talking about weapons of mass destruction or god for bid if you lived in an apartment complex or community with attached home how the bullets will go through the walls and travel apartment after apartment after apartment, if you are Law Enforcement estimate, does the self defense argument hold water when talking about weapons shoot such high velocity project tools and have such large capacity magazines . Thank you. In 2009 in pittsburgh, pennsylvania, april 4th, a domestic case, an individual had a weapon for protection in their home, three officers responded because the dog urinated on the floor. When they arrived immediately opened fire, ambushed, i lived three homes down from that killing. The perpetrator shot the officers in the faces soon as they opened the door, went through their vest. He proceeded with a highpowered weapon to shoot the second officer who he thought was playing possum, shot him in the face leaving that officer a widow and two small children. And off duty officer was responding from around the corner. He got out of his car, unloaded 30 rounds into that officer who lay dying in the street, exchanged 600 rounds. We were outgunned can out fired at that time. That weapon is supposed to be for his protection of his home. It was used as an assault weapons murder three officers in the city of pittsburgh. That he has been traumatized. The time of the gentleman has expired, the gentleman from texas. Thank you, mister chairman. I was curious. You indicating your testimony, u. S. Customs do something. What bill would you like to be passed to effectively in your words do something . There are a number of bills before you. What is your favorite . The assault weapons ban bill is put forward is very thoughtful and should move forward. That bill would affect the dayton shooting frankly and it would make a great difference other wont be cities like dayton that experienced this kind of trauma. When you hear people especially in this Community Say even if it is wrong we need to do something and that is not the way you maintain a constitutional republic. Maintain freedom if it is not very doubtful. You were mentioning the horrific wounds you were dealing with and you mentioned that normally you are dealing with entries that are sometimes hard to find. Those pencil hold entries are normally made by the 223 caliber, barely ahead bigger than a 22. Isnt that right . You are looking at more like a 308. Than a. 22. Isnt that right . You were looking at more like a. 308 because it was more similar to an ak47 wound, correct . I dont know the types of weapons. Nomenclature. To my understanding basically, the manufacturer of an ak47 that is much, much bigger than the ar15, which is a. 223 round. Just barely bigger than a. 22, whereas the aka, the nomenclature in the army those can be devastating damage. Minus ten is somebody privatelyy made that and so that. Apart from shotguns which are also devastating, the large impact. Ive seen anything like this in my history as a trauma surgeon, and since been as well. Appreciate the help that you provided. You talked about the use of guns between 500,000, 2 million times a year, is that correct . Yes, sir. Rather amazing that many times people would need to use guns to defend themselves. Rather shocking. But i certainly appreciate your comments about your mom. Its is easier to fire one of those. I have to disagree with you when you say m it has a maximum stopping power. After vietnam we were taught that in the army we went to the m16, now the m4, same nomenclature. Same two to three size round, that it was faster 223 brown. Might be more likely to wound but not, doesnt have the stopping power of a three 08 speedy to be clear i would not disagree with you. My intent was to show it has more stopping power than handguns but you can use more accurately and more effectively i would have to disagree with you there. Ninemillimeter, 45, 38, theyve a lot more stopping power than ar15, 223 round, correct . I would disagree with you. In some cases a bullet hole from a ninemillimeter would do more damage than a two to three rep . I would much rather have ninm but generally speaking its the combination of speedy but dont you acknowledge your mother was more comfortable with a two to three because it doesnt have the kick, its not as intimidating, you can retire it more easily . The part of that is just the pet set up a rifle. We seeing the gun stats go back and forth, or crime by the go back and forth over the years and it seemed to me it was related to putting criminals in jail, being tough on crime, the pendulum swings back. But that looks like the pendulum is swinging against lawabiding citizens for the first time, and there really is a concern. I yield back. Gentleman yield back. From georgia. Thank you, mr. Chairman. 25 years ago and passed a law that would benefit the manufacture or sale of assault weapons for ordinary americans and it made a difference. Mass tooting the penalties dropped 70 between 19942004. But 15 years later, congress failed the American People by allowing the assault weapons ban to sunset. That was in 2004. Since then we have had repeatedly failures. We had repeated failures to make even modest reforms to unfettered gun access in the United States. Because o our 15 years of in action are now living a tragedy. A tragedy of repeated, horrific events interspersed with the locals where american ideals of freedom and safety and justice crumble before our very eyes. And for what . Because folks are afraid of the nra . Theres a time for moderation, for cautious restraint debate here but that ended when sandy hook happen, when parkland, pulse nightclub, el paso, then dayton happen. Now is a time for justice to reassert itself as the guiding american principle and its time for congress to do the right thing. According to recent polls, seven out of ten people are in favor of a ban on the manufacture and sale of assault weapons. There is broad consensus on this issue because it makes sense. We done it before and we can do it again and i look forward hearing from our panel of esteemed witnesses on this important topic. Now, the protection of lawful commerce and arms act was passed 2005, the year after Congress Allowed the assault weapons ban to expire. In the protection of local commerce in arms act prohibits people from filing wrongful death lawsuits against gun manufacturers and endusers. When the familiesn of the sandy hook victims took Remington Outdoor company to court for massmarketing assault weapons to civilians, specifically for Mass Shootings, it took the o case fe years just tong overcome a challenge under the plc eight. And that was one of the success stories. What we dont see are all of the assault weapons cases that are not brought into civillc court because of plc aa. Mr. Chipman, how does the existence of the protection of local commerce in arms act prevent victims and families from seeking justice . It locks them from holding an industry accountable before a courtof of law like every other business in america is held accountable. Civil suits often act as a regulator to prevent negligent acts by companies that otherwise have noac regulatory incentive o act in the best interest of consumers. Not just negligent acts but intentional acts and fraudulent acts to cover it up. Do you believe that assault Weapons Companies are taking steps to avoid negligence when they manufactured these devices and sell them to civilians . I think certainly they are marketing these days theirrk marketing these days is suspect. I think even the markings on a our receivers thatma the company that is sold in dayton that you can get sayings on them, like not made in my shole country are things that are marketing to a certain type of extreme and violent part of this country. We seem to balance this with cigarettes, while people lawfully smoke but protect our nation for marketing thatf woud put people at all. So also the other thing that has been an effective in keeping data out is just the restrictions placed on we at atf, that dated that wouldnt hurt my criminal investigations but might be useful to this panel to decide what crime guns of the most popular amongst get inls, how did he criminals hands. You dont have access to that data. Its blocked. I think theres ags whole host f things that make it very difficult to hold this industry accountable, like we hold accountable other industries. Thank you. Inin if plcaa were overturned or rescinded, what difference you think think you could make and how Companies Sell and manufacture assault weapons . Wed have to see if things played outut in court, and i hae faith in our judicial system that is victims had an opportunity to be heard in court, courts would do the right thing to protectha our nation. Thank you. My time is expired and i yield back. Gentleman yield back. The gentleman from arizona. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Fewer than one in 50 of all prisoners that were incarcerated for a Violent Crime obtained a firearm from a local retail source and possessed, carried, or use it during the offense for which they were in prison. Among the 287,400 prisoners who had possessed a a firearm durig their offense, more than half either stole it, founded at the scene of the crime, obtained it off the street, or from the underground market. Thats the reality of where people get guns who use them to commit crimes. 1. 3 of people get guns from retail source. 1. 3 . Thats the reality of what people get guns, regardless of what kind of gun they have. Studies have indicated very clearly high rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of Violent Crime. Switzerland and israel have much higher gun ownership rates than the United States but experienced far fewer homicides and that much more Violent Crime rates than many european nations with strict guncontrol laws. Candidate is ranked 12th in work for the number of civilian owned guns per capita and reports one of the world lowest homicide ratesit but even then some provinces have higherr homicide rate and the United States states with less restrictive laws and higher rates of gunun ownership. Gun freedom states that score poorly have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, gun control states that received high scores like maryland and illinois experienced some of the nations highest homicide rates. Legally owned firearms used for lawful purposes much more often be than used to create crimes or suicide. In 2013, president barack obama ordered cdc to assess existing research on gun violence. This is what they found. According to the cdc, selfdefense can be an important crime deterrent. Semiautomatic rifles such as the ar15 are commonly used in selfdefense, especially in homes of lawabiding citizens because theyre easier to control than handguns. More versatile than handguns and often the advantage of up to 30 rounds of protection. Here are some examples of when an ar15 has been used to save laws. Save lives. Illinois, 2018, a man with an ar15 stopped a mans knife attack. Intimidation is why the man dropped the knife and ended the attack, saving the victim. North carolina, 2018, a 17yearold successfully fought off three armed attackers his ar15, saving his own life. Houston, texas, 2017, a homeowner survived a driveby shooting by defending himself with his ar15. Broken arrow, oklahoma, 2017, a homeowners son killed three wouldbe burglars with an ar15. It was found to be justifiable selfdefense. Texas, 2013, a 15yearold boy used an ar15 during a Home Invasion to save his own life and his 12yearold sister from a violent armed intruder. Rochester, new york, homeowners fled after facing an ar15. You served as a Law Enforcement officer when the previous weapons ban was in place. Did you see any impact anecdote etally . Anecdot i have previously testified i did not see any before, during, or after. I am listening to these numbers and i would like to followup on the 70 less likely to occur during assault weapons ban. I dont understand that. Well, it was contested. Cdc did thed, the study and did not come up with the same conclusions. Is there anything else you heard today that you would like to respond to . There is a lot. Press on. Is that 26 seconds . Yes. Congressman richmond as a ready gun has already gone. Recoil. An, it is less i love this little gun. A 57. Not a. 57, it is it holds three rounds for a pistol that is good. It has kind of a weird grip, but that allows me to protect myself better. And it does have knockdown power, yes. My goal here is to educate people. We are lawabiding, responsible gun owners. Please dont legislate the 150 Million People just like me into being criminals. It has happened. You have already done it. The legislation on bump stocks, i was a bump stock owner, and i had to make a decision, do i become a felon or comply . Like that gentleman that was just escorted out, i will not comply. Will not comply with the assault weapons ban. The gentlemans time has expired. The gentleman from florida. Lling thisou for carlink important hearing. Welcome to all the advocates. I would especially like to welcome all of my constituents. I ask unanimous consent to include statements from them into the record. I see no objection. I will move on. Jen is the mother of jamie, a vibrant, beautiful freshman at Marjorie Stoneman douglas when she was killed. Shesaid that on that day lost her best friend and now must live with the image of her child running down the hallway away from an ar15. Ryan was a freshman and survivor of the shooting. He and others went on to found the march for our lives movement. In his testimony, ryan says i am not just asking for change, i am begging for it, because i dont want to live in a country where every other day i have to read about innocent lives ripped away. Here is my response to what i have heard today. We have heard over and over about the people who needed to have these guns need to have these guns because they are easy to hunt critters, because they can be used for selfdefense. These guns can also be used to hunt people. I have been carrying around this februarypaper since 15th, 2018. Im going to read whats on it. Scott, 35, martin, 14, nick, 17, aaron, 37, jimmy got berg, 14, chris hixon, 49, carol, 14, alayna, 14, 15. , 14, peter, every one of those at Stoneman Douglas will never be older than that age on the day they were killed. I understand the importance of the Second Amendment, but how it is that we can have a hearing where one of the witnesses topares these weapons shoes is just beyond me. Ive got another list. Dagan, nine killed, 17 injured dayton, nine killed, 17 injured. Orlando, 49 killed, 53 injured. Including, 27 killed,. 6 sevenyearold babies el paso, 22 killed, 24 injured. Pittsburgh tree of life, 11 killed, six injured. At Stoneman Douglas, there were also 17 who were injured. I understand that this is not easy for everyone, but i want everyone to understand how for the lives who have been wrecked from the face of this earth ripped from the face of this families, itir will never be the same. When welooking are looking, what we are trying to do here, why this hearing is so important is because we know there are things we can do to keep us safe. We heard some of them today. When you talked about how we can identify people who pose a threat, you are right, we can. Thats why we need to pass a red flag lot to keep dangerous guns out of their hands red flag keep dangerous guns out of their hands. You are right about that. We are here today to talk about something that can prevent these types of attacks. You talked about the National Firearms act regulations as a way to get assault weapons out of dangerous hands. You walked us through the process that it takes for someone to purchase a weapon regulated under that system, t ration with atf, registration with atf, background checks, fingerprints. After aassed valentines day massacre in 1929. We had a valentines day massacre in 2018 in my community. Have there been efforts, are there people clamoring for us to repeal the National Firearms act . The industry is working very hard to work around it. It is a law that has been in effect have we seen at sawedoff shotguns used as much as we have seen these other weapons in Mass Shootings . No, it is a law that works. We should treat these assault weapons the same way we treat machine guns and sawedoff shotguns. I am immensely grateful you are holding this hearing today and i yield back the balance of my time. [applause] thee should be no rules of the house provided there should be no demonstrations of approval or disapproval from the audience. Documentsjection, presented by the gentleman from florida will be entered into the record. I now recognize the gentleman from ohio. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Define the type of guns the democrats want to ban. Make commentsto automatic firearms that just happen to have certain features like pistol grips and barrel trouts. So my automatic weapons what they magazine capacity of 10 rounds or more with scary a magazine with capacity of 10 rounds or more with scary features. Is that right . Yes. I think in your opening remarks, you talked about scary features, but they are just features. Other than the look, they dont change the way the weapon the impact the weapon may have on a bad guy trying to do someone harm, right . They dont change the function. Some of them protected lawful users from things like serious burns. The Second Amendment does not say the right to bear arms should not be infringed unless the gun has scary features. It does not say that. It does not. Do you think bad guys will follow this law . They have already failed to follow other laws. Only good guys come out love biting people will follow this guys,ight only good lawabiding people will follow , right . Yes. You will see millions of lawabiding citizens become felons overnight for nothing more than having scary looking features on firearms. Do you think if a criminal suspects that a person they are thinking about targeting for a crime, if they suspected that individual may have a firearm, you think there is less chance they target them for a crime . We actually know this to be the case. When you look at studies that have come out during the 1990s into burglary rates when individuals are home during a Home Invasion, they are lower in the United States than United Kingdom the United Kingdom. In the United States, there is a fear amongst people who commit burglaries and Home Invasions that there might be someone home who could do something. Bad guy is walking down the street, hes trying to figure out which home he is going to rub. In one driveway, there is a pickup truck with a gun rack, and the next driveway, there is a volkswagen with a Bumper Sticker that says orrick for orourke for president. Bad guys are not stupid, they are just bad, they are just people. They are not going to follow the law. What this legislation would do is make it more difficult for lawabiding people like you, like all kinds of folks, to protect themselves when some bad guy is bent on doing something wrong. Generally speaking, yes. It happens now between 500000 per year. 0 times do you want to add anything . Anybody in here who has endured any kind of unspeakable violence or lost loved ones, i want to say thank you, or, im sorry. I want somebody there immediately. I want you to be your own First Responder and i will be glad to talk to you about how to keep your family safe. I am sorry this has happened to you. Immediately. I want you tomy community is tho make sure that everybody is safe with a firearm. ,hese gun free zones, over 90 what we are talking about, these mass murders, are happening in gun free zones. Every time you guys legislate against the gun owners, you are counterproductive. It breaks my heart to hear these stories of these kids and their ages, and that you have to put people back together in the hospital. Sorry to interrupt. Let me ask you one question. On sale of this type of weapon as defined under legislation, but do you think this is just the first step . Do you take beto orourke at his word when he says we are going to take these types of weapons . Do think this is just step one there proposing . Yes they are proposing . Yes. Millions of gun owners are fearful in allowing this death by 1000 cuts. Every firearm is capable of being lethal. Didnt orourke probably expose a plan that they have been denying for so long did probably expose a plan that they have been denying for so long. The time of the gentleman has expired. The gentleman from california. I want to thank the gentleman from rhode island for bringing this legislation forward. , thank you for your work in the community. To hear the story of the first patient that came to you that day, but was it a scary looking feature that caused the death of that patient . I dont know what that gun looked like. I just know what the Bullet Wounds looked like and i know that when you have a highcapacity magazine, whether riflea semi automatic that you are reloading multiple times, you have the capability tohave devastating injuries multiple casualties. Would you agree when you put a pistol grip on a longer rifle where the round already has high velocity, highenergy, you can take the least skilled shooter and they can indiscriminately spray a crowd and the wound like the one you had to attend to can occur . I can assume so. It reminds me of a gunshot victim whose case i prosecuted in oakland where the victim was shot in the back of the thigh and he succumbed to the ones. His mom asked me, she said, i dont get it. You would think if you are shot in the leg or arm, you would survive. The ballistics expert and autopsy doctor said it was a long rifle round and 40 rounds were fired at him and he was hit just wants. It leaves just once. It leaves very little chance for survival. Thank you for your service to our country. Testimony and it seems to me that you support a ban on the future sales and manufacturing of assault weapons. Is that right . Yes, similar to what we did in 1986 with machine guns. I hear you and i agree with you as far as the National Firearms act and making sure they are registered, but would you agree that we want to ban future sales and manufacturing because it is a dangerous weapon different than a long rifle used for hunting or a pistol used for sport or a shotgun used to protect someone in their house, that this is just a different weapon . They are particularly lethal. I guess my concern is, because i want this bill to pass, i will look for it to pass, but as you described earlier vote for it to pass, but as you described earlier, if this passes, we will still leave millions, the nra estimates 15 million Assault Rifles in our communities. If these weapons are dangerous in the future, wouldnt you agree that they are dangerous now and that there has to be some way to protect people now from ever having their kids shot in the school, their parent shot sister h, there there sister shot at a concert r sister shot at a concert from one of these weapons . Most have to address the lethal weapons and i believe the National Firearms act is the best way to approach that. My example my proposal is that if it is dangerous in the future, it is dangerous now. It would be very hard for us to pass this legislation and then god for bid, there would be a mass shooting and after there was a celebration on the house steps that a weapon that was grandfathered in was used to take dozens of lives. We would have to explain to victims that we allowed those weapons to stay in use. I think it would create confusion among the public. After was on assault a ban on assault weapons, why was this weapon used . They had the ban, it didnt work. My proposal would be to do what australia did, have a buyback period. They could be used at a hunting club or shooting range, but nowhere else possessed in our community. They would be paid at market rate for these weapons. Australia did this and they were able to get off the streets 700,000. We will not get off as cheaply but it is not as if this is something that never happens. This is a first important step all of the witnesses for participating and families for being here. We are at this moment because these families picked themselves up from absolute grief. And marching, keep caring, we will see action, and we will all be safer. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from california. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The arguments around these bills seem to have ignored that somehow they are going to keep these weapons out of the hands of criminals, and mad men, and terrorists. I dont share that faith. I look at how effective our drug laws have been in keeping drugs out of the hands of addicts and wonder if that faith is misplaced. Are the majority of the firearms already used in crimes already being arent the majority of the firearms already used in crimes already being obtained illegally . Yes. The majority of guns used in are obtained illegally. The other argument is that nobody has legitimate use for an ar15. These are not military weapons. The actual firing mechanism is the same as those used in a wide variety of legitimate hunting and target rifles and pistols. That said, i am a gun owner but i do not own an ar15 because i do not feel i need one. I might have a different opinion if i was in the third day in a hurricane disaster zone without power or Law Enforcement or if i was a late night clerk in a gang area or a Theater Owner who wanted to be able to protect my customers in a crisis, or if i was a border rancher where cartels are operating. Dont i have a right to make that decision for myself under the Second Amendment other than have one of my friends on the left make it for me . Yes, sir, especially with regard to commonly owned semi automatic firearms that have been commonly owned by lawabiding citizens for lawful purposes. We ought to be absolutely outraged by these growing incidents of Mass Shootings. We did not have problems like this, certainly not of this magnitude or frequency 50 years ago. What policies have changed in those 50 years that would explain this . It seems to me that there are three. 50 years ago, we used to execute murderers. We have largely stopped doing that. Could that have something to do with it . I am not familiar with whatever studies you may be referring to in regards to Capital Punishment and Mass Shootings, but i do know there are bigger factors underlying Mass Shootings. We used to put violent criminals in prison until they were old and feeble. Now we have sanctuary laws releasing dangerous criminals back into our communities. Could that have something to do with it . With regard to mass public shootings, that is not clear. A lot of gun crime is perpetrated by people with long histories of previously violent behavior. Most importantly, we use to the dangerously mentally ill when we identified them in a mental hospital, where we could keep them and prevent them from harming others. In 1958, my state of california, there were 37,000 mentally ill contained in mental hospitals. Many were dangerous to themselves or others. That would be over 100,000 today. Today, we only confine 7000. The rest of them are on the streets. Could that have something to do with it . Without meaning to come across as demonizing mentally some mentally ill people are dangerous. Those are the ones we can find. We have written on this specifically at the heritage foundation. There is a relationship between rates of violence, what we see in the mass deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill. 50 years ago, we had very few guncontrol laws. Today, we have a great many. If these laws were the answer to these massacres, shouldnt the problem be Getting Better by now . With regard to mass public shootings, yes, arguably. I would also say gun violence in general is more complex. I think that should be selfevident. When you go to a bank, you see an armed guard to protect our money. Why would anyone to object to an armed guard in a school to protect our children . I am not sure why anyone would object to protecting our nations children in the same way we protect other important places. We do not want to turn schools into some sort of prison function where people feel they are behind bars. Maybe we ought to have lethal force to protect our children. People go crazy over that, but they dont give a Second Thought to an armed guard in a bank. We know especially with regard to mass public shootings, one of the biggest factors is actually the quickness of the armed response to that shooting. That is one of the possible solutions, yes. The gentlelady from washington. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and thank you all so much for being here. Your testimony was very powerful. This argument by from the other side that if i heard it right, that criminals do not follow laws, and therefore, what . We shouldnt have laws . That statement has no relevance to the existing debate account around gun reform, because fundamentally, it is completely irrelevant. It is just as meaningless as saying the sky is blue or my microphone is black or the grass is green. Definitionally, criminals dont follow laws. Thats what criminals are. Here is the paradox that the other side is putting forward. I think it is important to dismiss this argument for what it is, which is bogus, in my opinion. The paradox is this, lawabiding citizens obey the law, number are number two, criminals lawbreakers, therefore, they dont obey the law. Brilliant. Laws impose, restrictions on the behavior of only those that follow them, and therefore, number four, laws therefore only hurts lawabiding citizens. That would mean we should not have any laws at all, because definitionally, we are making laws based on the kind of society that we imagine. We expect that the vast majority of people are going to follow those laws and the people that do not will then have accountability. I just think it is a ridiculous argument. I do not understand why the other side keeps putting it forward. The data shows that Mass Shootings are becoming far more frequent and they are getting deadlier. My colleague gave a powerful statement, talked about all of the shootings. Most deadly Mass Shootings in modern history occurred in the last 20 years and eight of them in the last five years. Look at the amount of time in each of these shootings. Shootinglas vegas claimed an unprecedented 58 lives and 850 injuries in 10 minutes. El paso shooting claimed 22 lives and 24 were injured in less than six minutes. Dayton shooting, thank you, major for being here mayor, for being here. The dayton shooting claimed nine lives and dozens of injuries in just seconds. All of these by a shooter who legally purchased automatic weapons and highcapacity magazines. The Giffords Law Center finds that a person with an assault weapon is able to hurt and kill twice the number of people compared to a shooter with a nonAssault Rifle or handgun. Why is that . Think about just average people out there trying to understand this issue. What are the specific features of an assault weapon that are most dangerous . Let me talk about rifles specifically. When you are firing a round at over 3000 feet per second, as compared to a handgun, which is usually under 1000 feet per second, when it hits, it just destroys the body. For instance, i worked for gabby giffords. She would not have survived had she been shot with a rifle. It is just an entirely different category. If you mix the speed of the round and then the ability to asily carry 100 rounds in magazine, or 50, and you can fire as quick as the finger can pull, you do battle like wounds. In las vegas, the thought 20 years ago that i could have even imagined a shooting were a single gunman could have inflicted where a single gunman could have inflicted 58 deaths and hundreds wounded, many of them offduty officers, it is hard to imagine. It has everything to do with. The capabilities of the weapon when you said it has everything to do with the capabilities of the weapon. Explain what happens when the rifle round actually strikes. I would need the help of my dad, the mathematician, to do physics. When a piece of lead is flying at 3000 feet per second and hits you, its a lot different than if its going at 800 feet per second. Its just math. Results are catastrophic. Let me turn to the surgeon who treated victims from the parking shooting. She wrote the c. T. Scan of one of the victims of an ar15 showed an organ that looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer. Can you tell us from your perspective as a doctor, what do experience treating these individuals with these kinds of moments . That is accurate from what i experience. Om my not an Orthopedic Surgeon but i had an intestine coming out of bone. I have never seen that before and will never see that again. Thank you so much for everything that you did and thank you for your service, all of you. The gentlelady yields back. The gentleman from virginia. Thank you. I want to thank our witnesses for being here today. The horrifying acts of Mass Violence that our country has witnessed in recent years is totally unacceptable. We cannot tolerate the spread of violence and hatred in our nation. Unfortunately, todays hearing seeks to fill eyes one of americas most popular firearms instead of looking at ro solutions to prevent acts of violence from occurring in our communities. The 1991 until 2017, nations total Violent Crime rate decreased 48 . Meanwhile, americans purchased more than 11 million ar15s during that. During that period. Democrats want to paint the ar15 as a weapon solely used for war, when in reality, millions of men and women on these firearms and use them lawfully everyday. Many have chosen this as their firearm of choice. Our families, neighbors, and and our communities will not become safer if we confiscate firearms from innocent lawabiding people. By restricting the fundamental freedom that allows people to defend themselves, democrats will endanger the lives of millions who will node longer be able to adequately protect their families. As members of congress itsbl or duty to ensure we are protecting the American People by defending this document. The constitution, and the freedoms that are enumerated in it. Our republic was founded on the principle that government will not impede on these rights and we must uphold that here in this committee. So ill ask ms. Swearer where s anything that was said today that you would like to respond to . Thank you, congressman. Theres been a lot that i wish with the time to respond to but ill take just a couple of these in order. I think theres this sort of misunderstanding that if we can just get rid of ar15s, that some of this is going to result in this massive reduction in gun violence. T it dramatically misunderstands the underlying factors of gun violence in this country. Twothirds of gun deaths are suicide. That doesnt matter frankly was given ar15 which is rarely used in suicide or a handgun or a shotgun. Its irrelevant if you just replace the firearm. When were talking that mass public shootings were talking about something that a think we all agree is devastating to a community is but it is a fraction of a percent of gun deaths every year. Were talking about switching out the same caliber rifle for something that is the same caliber in in a different riflt now just doesnt have a burial l shroud pistol grip andel say ths somehow is going to save this large number of lives every year. We are looking at the wrong problems and so were coming up with the wrong solutions. These are things that even if fully effective enough substituted with other types of firearms, were talking about a minimumar of actually impacting rates of gun violence. We have to be looking at more meaningful factors and things like pistol grips. Thats something we can work on together if we would stop looking at scary features. Ms. Muller, would you like respond to anything that was said . Yes, thank you. I understand everybody in this room once to make a difference and that we want to be safe. We want to be safe. Firearmst owners want to be sa, and hope you heard in my oral and my written testimony that we, the firearms industry, is driving solutions. If you are really interested in having that conversation, thats what i form the d. C. Project, is to come and make relationships and help you be a resource for, lets go to the range and lets really understand what those firearms are into that community is and how to use them. Those are your constituents as well. Ill say that again, eddie eagle, project child safe and kid safe foundation, those are teaching your kids how to responsibly look atsp firearms. Doesnt mean they have to shoot them had its just like a swimming pool. You teach your kids how to swim. You dont want them to go across a body of water at some point in the life and not know now to live. We want ow will with you. We want you to be with us. Thankto you. Chief brackney, he said something earlier that gave me pause. I wanted you a chance to amend your statement. When you said m any weapon that can be used, ms. Used to hunt a person, misused, that applies to all weapons. Is your contention all weapons should be banned . The time of the gentleman has expired. The witness may answer the question. Thank you. I think theres opportunities for quite a few bused to amend our statements, senator. But yes, weapons that are misused should be considered and garlic at percentages of individuals that are injured based on weapons. The fact we are willing to boil it down to simple numbers when its actual lives, to say its a percentage of our consideration of the percentage of. We actually should be shamed we are willing to sacrifice the lives of individuals for data points. I think we should all be able to speedy you dont want anyone to have a weapon . Had we been able to ban somebody weapons coming into ino show still i think we couldve had a better response from Law Enforcement Virginia Beach. Thank you. All weapons . The time of the gentleman has expired. The gentlelady from florida. Thank you so much, mr. Chairl of our witnesses for being here today. Im going to try to get my thoughts together because ive been pretty amazed at some of the things ive t heard, particularly from the other side of the aisle. Mayor whaley, thank you for being here on behalf of the people that you represent. You are doing exactly what we would expect you to do as a mayor. I note your chief this as well. Thank you, chief, from what you and the men and women that you represent you as well. I was the Law Enforcement officer. I spent 27 years. I gun owner, my father was a hunter. Im from orlando, where 49 people, we heard a lot about lawabiding citizens. Those 49 people who were in a nightcluba that night were lawabiding citizens, and they were not protected. 49 of them lost their lives. Three otherste were injured and will never be the same. That does not include those with invisible wounds. One of my biggest fears as a police chief was worrying about the men and women who do the job, going home at the end of the night. Becausegh if we cant protect them, if theyre at w risk, then we know the average citizen is at risk. I always knew theyre goingi to be outmanned, because Law Enforcementt always is. But i certainly worried about them being outgunned. Ive gone to more than my share of Law Enforcement officers funerals. Weve got to do something about the number of Mass Shootings that have occurred in in the country that we say is the greatest country in the world, i country where we say life first, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have offered nothing as a solution. Im interested in hearing more, ms. Muller, about your program. I wasnt for me with that. Chief brackney, and ms. Rand, you said that assault weapons account for one owe four, one in five officers killed in the line of duty. It appears that we love our Law Enforcement officers, and telecoms to banning weapons that can blow a hole in them the size of a grapefruit, or rounds that can penetrate their p ballistic vests. Chief brackney, i would just like you to talk a little bit about the men and women that you command, the burden of keeping them safe, and really, why are you here today . Thank you. And it actually i appreciate your service as well. For me personally, having experienced three officers died in pittsburgh by an assault weapon, knowing there was nothing we could do to protect them, knowing that one of our officers was lying there at that in time saying over the air that he loved his wife, to let herer know, that was his ony love. He loved his children, knowing he was going to die, and we could not get to him for hours as he lay there dying and bleeding out as a result of that tragedy. Im here because as we know charlottesville experienced tragedy at the hands of hate your when you have the type of weapon that can be brought into a community that can devastate an entire community, i actually would be a h shame of any former Law Enforcement officer said i will refuse to comply with the that they were a poll or swore to uphold themselves. I say to you and each and everyone of you, that that if you to go home every night thinking about where your team, with the people are out there, my life every day, if you have that burden to bear and you could see the secondary trauma that is in force upon families, just the initial, as you look at the door to see if their parents are coming home, whether the person is, whos willing to give their life for a stranger, we talk about what greater love is that. Amend or talk about that weve restricted youd First Amendment rights. You cant sayct anything at any time. And no right is absolute. Thatss right. Anything, anywhere, anytim. Thats exactly right. And if were willing to amend what you can say, why wouldnt we consider what you could amend the contact cause a type of devastation in each of our community. I thank you for the opportunity to be heard today. Thank you to all of you. I just back. The gentleman from florida. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed pickett says arms, plural, that certain types of arms. It says arms. I stand by the constitution at a standby the Second Amendment. Second amendment has absolutely nothing to do with hunting, although theres been a lot of talk today about hunting and hunting rifles. It is evident to you with your constitutional right to defend yourself, your familyit and others. This is stephehe number one ande democrats plan to take with your guns. Step one, and a certain type of firearm that no one can properly defined today. I stole that are proper definition of what it is were talking about danny. Step number two, now that weve taken your semiautomatic rifles away, nowak well take your semiautomatic handguns away. Step number three, now that weve taken all your guns and the government only hasf their guns, now weve turned into venezuela and cuba. Theres absolutely no difference in the functionality of an ar15 at thehe semiautomatic handgun, none, acylamino difference. We heardto the atf individual tk about ssas you to press the trigger is as fast as the rent comes out. As fast as you press the trigger on a semiautomatic handgun, assessed rent comes up. The weapon i was issued when i did serve in Armed Conflict was much different than what is available commercially today. The in four i was issued in the chinese army in service of operation active freedom and selective switch on it. That weapon of war which is the terminology the left likes to use is not available to the general public. The general public cannot go and buy weapon i was issued when i served in Operation Iraqi freedom. This term Assault Rifle is a fiction. It doesnt exist. A r stands for armor light which is a company that actually manufactured the original ar15. Theres ath such thing as an Assault Rifle just like if i threw my cup at somebody here and kill them that would be an assault cup. If i use my truck to run some it over i i guess that would be an assault truck so we are using a fiction to demonize a certain type of weapon. Soe chief brackney, i do question. Isnt it that an ar15 discharges a round every time you depressed the trigger . Is that correct. Was yes, thats correct. Is also great every time you, you depressed the trigger of your service revolver, that a round is dispersed, is that correct . Yes, based on the social contract and the social compact that i have with society to police a society, that is correct that when a discharge my weapon, that does occur. So it your testimony today the functionality of an ar15 in the functionality of a semiautomatic handgun is identical because the moment you depress the trigger, a round comes out of the weapon, is that correct . In the purest sense, yes, when youre pulling that absolutely in the purest sense. When were talking about the targets and the behaviors and impact of those, it is very different than thean functionality. That is correct. On talking functionality and thats what you all are talking about is the functionality of an ar15. Ar15. So thats what were talking about. You said, i was in it when you said this, and correct me if i miss dating and we can have reportedly back exactly what you said verbatim if you like. You said anything used to hunt people should be banned,ho is tt correct . Any weapon that canea be used to hunt individuals should be banned. Okay. You then stand for the proposition to ban any type of firearm because any type of firearm could be used to misuse and kill people. As i stated before, with Law Enforcement in particular, there is ale social contract that we have speedy im asking based on your statement you said anything used to hunt people should be banned. Thats what you stated. You just said, some clarify, your Statement Today is all firearms because they can be used to help people should be banned. That your statement before this committee . That is not my statement. You havent clarify my statement. Statement. You just added the statement foa me. So again speedy wideout you clarify exactly what we saidhy e can take a break and have the clerk read back exactly what you stated because i bow down you said anything used to hunt people should be banned. Its my understanding any firearm point of order. Gentleman will suspend. The gentle it will state a point of order. I was in hearing yesterday in the Judiciary Committee, subcommittee for immigration, where one of my colleagues from the Minority Side stated that it is not right to attack a witness, that comes forth in the manner that he has been incriminating and attacking our Law Enforcement officer here so if he could just please tone down his words. Point of order, mr. Chairman. With the gentleman controls the time. I had 32 seconds which as for point of order. I would ask that time to be put back on speedy if you want to be so strict, seven seconds back. Thank you, mr. Chairman. You support banning all firearms or anything used to be able to hunt people, is that correct for . Sir, you are conflating two nicu said support banning firearms or anything that can use to hide people. That wasas not my statement. What was your w statement . My statement was, please, i dont have it as verbatim as possibly that you do, that i do support weapons that is used to hunt people that they be banned. So any type of weapon i can be used on people should be banned . Go ahead, answer the question. Could you repeat that . A gavel was going off of exact same time. Any type of weapon, which is what you stated, any type of weapon that can be used to kill people should be banned . You are adding the word type. The time of the gentleman has expired. The gentlelady from texas. Thank you, mr. Chairman, thank you for having this very important hearing that many of us have been waiting for, and to all the families and those who were here that have lost loved ones, thank you for being here. I know that every time that you have to sit and listen through this kind of testimony in the backandforth, it brings back so many memories. Please know that we feel your pain and we are getting ready to do something about it. I know that earlier one of my colleagues said the democrats, even if its wrong, we have to do something. And im here to tell you that what we are doing is right. Its not only right for us to do it, and i think our country demands it. Everywhere i go, this issue comes up, whether its a town hall meeting with the veterans were terrible meeting with seniors, everybody is concerned about gun violence, not just with these types of weapons, but any weapon. For hunting and protecting our property. We dont need a weapon that kills nine to ten people in 30 seconds to go hunting to put food on the table. You dont need that either to protect your property. Assault weapons are frankly, in my view, just for killing people. Weapons are designed to effectively and efficiently kill as many as possible frankly are posing the greatest threat to us today. We in texas have suffered from this as many other states have and its time for all of us to act. I support the bill that is before us and frankly, sometimes i think it needs to be sometimes stronger. So, i want to start with you, in your written testimony that you say one other option may be to have the registration of all existing assault weapons under the nsa while banning the future manufacture of these firearms. Is that a position from you or your organization and are all the other gun violence groups in accordance with this position . Its the position of giffords, based on my yearses years of experience i dont want to speak to others. Its based on keeping the dangerous weapons out of criminal hands. Only three out of every crime guns traced by a. T. F. Is a machine gun. The laws work so if we want to focus on other types of weapons, i would suggest we have a time tested law thats been on our books since the 1930s, lets take that approach. And what is your position on the Buyback Program . I think that we should be looking to america, not australia for solutions and as i said, the nfa was passed at a time we have a similar problems. Very lethal weapons. So i would suggest its a balance that would honor the rights of people who have these guns to keep them if they were properly regulated and understood that theres so many of them out there, that like machine guns, you know, it would prevent them from being manufactured and sold in the future. And i think that strikes a reasonable balance between the rights of individuals and the rights of all of americans, a human right not to get shot. Well, i wanted to put another idea that came from a senior at a senior town hall meeting that i had in my district a couple of weeks ago. And although, it was about senior issues, social security, medicare, she approached me after the meeting with a list and frankly, she has about six or seven suggestions that one caught my eye and i wondered your reaction to it. She thinks we should place a chip, when you make them, in other words, the manufacturing, inside those giant guns, since she was referring to the assault weapons, so they can be tracked. That we know where they are, or if an incident to maybe stop an incident where it happens and do something proactively. Have you all ever looked at an idea like that. An idea like that, one of the challenges for Law Enforcement though is when you recover a firearm in a crime, its very useful to know who owners it and so the ability to trace the gun, the ability to take shell casings that are often left at a crime scene and be able to tie those back to a gun and the shooter are very useful. I think with a chip in all guns, the reality is, is most guns are lawfully owned so thats a lot of data we dont need. Id be more focused what can help cops solve gun crimes quickly and immediately. Thank you for your thoughts and i yield back, mr. Chairman. The gentleman from maryland. Mr. Chairman, thank you. Ive heard a number of my colleagues say theyre strong supporters of Second Amendments and i think a couple of the witnesses also articulated the same sentiment. Im a strong supporter of the sec amendment, too, as properly interpreted by the Supreme Court in haller versus district of columbia, the Second Amendment gives you a right to a handgun for selfdefense and hunting and recreation. Nowhere does it give you a right to weapons of war, machine guns or armored tanks or anything like that. Is there in i go on the panel who disagrees with that . And does anybody on the panel believe it gives you a right to a machine gun . Anyone that gives you the right to think that you own an armored tank, please . Yes, sir. You think it gives you a right to a tank . Does it give you rights to a Nuclear Weapon . You started with machine guns. If we go through the rich mans game of nfa. Youre for access to machine guns. Id look at taking them off the nfa. Do you think theres a constitutional right to owning a machine gun . I believe theres a constitutional right of equivalent of same sort of functions of a musket would be and weve included the First Amendment for technological raigtsment and the same things with the Second Amendment. I think the Supreme Court has the proper the proper phrasing there to say commonly owned for law abiding purposes. The function of is it useful for law abiding purposes and answer for a lot of these are yes. I want to be clear. So both of you say people should be allowed to purchase machine gunses sim way as ar15s and handguns. My distinction with fully automatic weapons might be different. Let me go on, i do have other questions. I appreciate that. Dr. Tovar, youre from el paso. Your testimony was stunning to me. Theres something you said that will haunt me for a long time and i just i want you to elaborate it. You were called back, you were supposed to be going home that night. You were called back after the massacre took place to try to save people and as i understand, you saved you helped save and your colleagues helped save more than a dozen people, is that right . Yes, theres a large team effort. But you lost one person who was, i guess, the first patient that you worked on and you said that you will always carry the guilt of that with you. And i remembered a passage i once read from russo, how often audacity and pride are on the side of the guilty and how often shame and guilt were on the side of the innocent. And i wonder why you would feel guilty for trying to save someones life, the victim of an assault weapon in the hands of a criminal. I wanted to do more, but the fact is, i had ten patients there, and reports of maybe up to 20, 40 patients, i had no idea and i couldnt spend as much time as i wanted to on one patient when i had 20 or 30 coming in. Are you still practicing now in el paso. Yes. How do you feel about the possibility of selling people some machines guns or heavier weaponry under their socalled Second Amendment rights . I would not agree with that, but the Second Amendment stands. Its been misrepresented, its been distorted, and you know, the National Rifle association used to be a moderate mainstream organization that supported gun safety regulation and it was taken over and hijacked for political purposes and the idea was to oppose all gun safety regulation, trying to drive a wedge between the rural parts of america and metropolitan parts of america. Its worked like a dream, congratulations, you guys. But we have casualties on the cities and streets of america. These are our people, american citizens who are being shot down by these weapons of war which you think the Second Amendment covers, but the Supreme Court doesnt. Ms. Mueller, you said something before how you had friends in the military who dont prefer the ar15, tell me if ive got it right, they want something with greater stopping power. Will you explain what that means . Yes, sir. They were saying that, i mean, its their job in war and combat to kill people and they were telling me relating that its not an effective round, and. What does it mean not to have enough what you said before i think was they preferred a weapon with greater stopping power. Correct. I dont know that phrase. Will you explain . The gentlemans time expired. The witness may answer the question. Stopping power is stopping a threat. If this person needed to be killed, that the tg 3 was not a good round to do that. In other words, the weapons that killed in el paso or dayton did not have enough explosive force, is that it . Correct. I yield back. The gentleman yields back and the gentle lady from georgia. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Id like to thank my colleague from colorado for yielding to me for a few moments to go first and i want to thank all of our witnesses that are here today. Most definitely i want to thank our survives, your families and all the activists taking their time to be here to discuss this important issue. I first want to underscore that the current prevalence of assault weapons was a result not of action, but of inaction. Congress did not end the assault weapons ban by lifting it, but by simply its cost lives. Tragically weve seen little action to address gun violence in the past several decades. Im pleased to be part of this present moment in which were finally having hearings like this to illuminate the multifaceted problem of gun violence. No single measure will end this epidemic. But we know that there are bills that will save lives. The house has already passed some of those. Universal background checks. Closing the charleston loophole and were continuing to explore other laws, too. The house has also passed an appropriation package that funds gun violence prevention research, but time and time again senate inaction is maintaining the status quo. This has been over 200 days since the house has passed hr8 to require universal background checks and in their 200 days the senate has done nothing. The house voted to provide a historic 50 billion excuse me 50 Million Dollars package to Fund Gun Violence research, but the Senate Proposal instead recommends nothing. Americans are paying for senate inaction with their lives. We lose another 100 people to gun violence every single day, every day 100 families face a new and terrible loss and inaction is absolutely unacceptable. And id like to say for anyone on this panel, unless you have experienced gun violence, you have no idea the burden of loved ones wronged and the burden that has on their families and their community. Doctor, how did the expiration of the assault weapons ban affect Law Enforcement . Thank you. I am in complete agreement with you. When we are too cowardly to face issues and instead let them to expire like we would milk in our refrigerator versus taking some sort of action, as we know in any other field, think of the medical field, theres often incremental steps we take in order to create medications to address kapz. We dont sayening we have the cure we do nothing and were doing something similar when it comes to Law Enforcement. The attacks on Law Enforcement, the ambushes on Law Enforcement having increased. People have been em boldened by the fact not only do they have the weapon and capacity to do that, but the prevalence which they can get these weapons. Theres now also the ghost weapons in which you buy pieces and parts of it so that you can get around, again, legislation when it comes to what you must be required to do in order to obtain a weapon legally. This is an absolute atrocity and ive attended those funerals of officers over the 35 years that ive been in Law Enforcement, the more than three decades plus that ive been in Law Enforcement. And it continues to hold a pit in your stomach for every person that you see that has been that has lost a life, but also, it moves concentrically outward. The last shootings that we can remember in dayton, it stopped the country and we held our breath for literally days and then weve forgotten about the shooting that occurred before it and probably forget about the next one as well. Thank you. And we know that assault weapons are the weapons of choice for mass shooters. What do we know about why they choose these weapons . I think that the fire power that assault weapons affords a shooter gives them more bravery. They feel like they can outgun Law Enforcement and i would go back to the example that was offered about columbine. Its a little known fact that there were armed guards at columbine who engaged in fire with harris and klebold, but were unable to stop them because they were outgunned by the assailants assault weapons so i think it provides them with a sense of bravery that they wouldnt otherwise have. They know they can confront Law Enforcement. They know they can kill a number of people very quickly and you know, i think also, if you look at the marketing of these weapons, theyre sold using militarized imagery and now were seeing assailants who copy that. They come with body armor. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and of course, thank you to my colleague, ms. Macbeth who speaks to power in an incredible way. And chief, you mentioned a minute ago, but i wanted to you to expound further. How long have you been in Law Enforcement. Thank you. A woman shouldnt tell her age, but 35 years and maybe they hired me when i was really young. How long have you been chief . So ive been the chief of charlottesville now for just about 15 months. I was a chief in George Washington university three years prior to that and 31, just short of 31 years with city of pittsburgh, commanding our s. W. A. T. Teams, major crimes, et cetera. Thank you for your service and the reason why i ask that, my colleague from florida on this side of the aisle i thought was right to point out during her inquiry or point of order request, i took umbrage at the way in which my colleague interacted with you in the prior exchange, as someone of your caliber, and someone who has served your community and your country, who is here today to testify on the importance of us taking common sense steps to prevent the pervasive gun violence thats rafrj ravaging across our country. I did not think that exchange is the way in which this committee and members ought to conduct itself. I thank you again for being here today and for your testimony. I also, you know, of course, would associate myself with the remarks of my esteemed colleague from georgia. Military style assault weapons have no place in hands, in schools, in theaters, and in communities and in colorado, we know this all too well. I happen to represent the great state of colorado and we lived through columbine 20 years ago where 13 individuals were killed in a matter of 16 minutes. We grieved after aurora, where 12 people were killed and 58 others injured. Military style assault weapons are designed to kill people quickly and efficiently, and large capacity magazines are often the choice for mass shooters because they allow them to fire large numbers of rounds and quickly reload. Inaction on this issue, so many of my colleagues have said and so many of the witnesses have attested to. It is putting our students, our children, and our community in harms way and i, for one, believe that we cannot allow it. When we see Mass Shootings in the news every single month, we know that it is time to act. We owe it to those we have lost and to the survivors, some of whom are here in the audience here, the survivors of columbine, of aurora, las vegas, new town, southerland springs and el paso. Im grateful to the chairman and my colleagues for holding this hearing so we can take action. I will say the difference between my home state and congress is that colorado had the courage to act. In colorado we passed a high capacity magazine ban in 2013, part of a broad attempt to reform gun laws following the aurora theater shooting the year before. Its past time for congress to take up these same reforms and so grateful to be able to support the proposal that weve talked about today in terms of banning assault welcomes. So my question, mr. Chipman, i first thank you for your service as a Law Enforcement officer, for putting your life on the line. I know, given your experience, that youve seen, youve used these weapons that we are speaking of today. Why do you believe its important that we have a conversation now about assault weapons . What about your experiences have led you to believe that we need reform . Because theyre getting more lethal and we should have this conversation decades ago. The firearms industry continues to make more lethal firearms and congress is not keeping up with technology. We see that and now smaller weaponry, like my panel member likes to have because its easy to carry around in our car, but it was used to kill a milwaukee Police Officer because it was able to defeat his bulletproof vest, so to me, we should not tip the scales on the side of just convenience, but of our right to live in a country absent the fear of getting shot and killed. In the line of duty or at a Movie Theater or just in your daily affairs. I see my time is set to expire, mr. Chairman. So i would say thank you to the chairman and to the Witnesses Today for appearing for your testimony. Appreciate it. Gentleman yields back and the gentle lady from pennsylvania sorry, the gentlelady from texas. Thank you so much, chairman, and thank you for switching with me. I want to thank everyone here, people who traveled to be here with us today at this very important hearing. People who stood in a long line for a long time in order to get in. I want to thank our panel. I want to especially thank the panelist who is my constituent, dr. Alex, thank you for being here. And thank you for everything you did to save so many lives. As we have heard today there are far too many people on this Judiciary Committee who represent communities that have been impacted by gun violence, and my community, el paso, texas is, unfortunately now part of that very sad and tragic club. On the day of the shooting, august 3rd, i received many calls from colleagues who knew only too well what we were going through in el paso, and the very next day dayton entered that awful club and days later odessa entered that awful club. Part of why i invited you, doctor, to come here, part of why i wanted the American People and the congress to hear your testimony is because too often we dont understand what happens, literally, to people who are shot up by these weapons of mass destruction. And i want to Say Something before i ask you the question im about to ask you. But that day on august 3rd, el paso was a victim, not just of the gun violence epidemic, but would he were also a victim to the hate epidemic of this country. And last week we passed legislation, we marked up legislation out of this committee that began to address that hate epidemic and it was shocking to me that some of the people who use the language that fuels that hate, the hate epidemic, were wondering why we needed to pass laws about the hate epidemic. But as long as we have people pushing that language, and that racism, we will need laws that protect communities like mine. And as long as we have people who say i deserve to have a weapon of mass destruction so i can shoot critters and weve heard today or so that i can have an accessory like shoes, as weve heard today, then we will continue to see massacres and bloodshed, but were here today to create change so that communities like mine will not have to endure what we endured because the consequence is long lasting. Dr. Tovar, you told us about what you witnessed that day, what you lived through that day. Can you share with us what you emotionally and mentally still live with today as a First Responder in health care . Thank you for that question. I im not embarrassed to say sunday, i bawled like a child for half an hour, and went through the Facebook Page of one of those victims and saw that their that baby is going to live without parents, an orphan now and that week once my patients were extubated, no longer on, and wake up with nightmares and heard from nurses the nightmares they would awaken from, i havent been able to sleep the past two months since that tragic event happened. And i encourage all those that are affected by a tragedy like this to go and seek counseling because its important to recognize that not just the victims and victims families, and those First Responders, ooh even those not present. A lot of guilt goes to those providers who were not available to respond because they feel they should have been there to help out as well. So, theres a lot of room for therapy and for counseling for the entire community and its very helpful. Dr. Rios tovar, thank you for all that you did to help those who survived and youre a hero and all of this pain is needless and we can change that today. Gentle lady from pennsylvania. Thank you, i thank the testifiers and advocates for being here and i thank the advocates and the testifiers for the minority because you proved how weak your argument is. Mr. Chairman, i wanted to look if i could have a slide brought up. A little of this history and conversation where this country stood. Take a look and i quote, we are writing to urge your support for a ban on the domestic manufacture of military style assault weapons. Statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns making them less accessible to criminals. We urge you to listen to the American Public and to Law Enforcement and support a ban on the further manufacture of these weapons, sincerely gerald r. Ford, jimmy carter, and ronald reagan. This should not be a political issue. In 2004 we had the opportunity to save even more lives by reauthorizing the ban. Even george w. Bush favored an extension of this life saving law. Would you play the clip . Im sorry, i guess we dont have it. Could you hold the clock, is that possible . Do we have the clip . Its a clip of president george w. Bush. Having problem with the volume. My view is clear, i just think we ought to extend the assault weapons ban. Unfortunately george w. Bush was not able to persuade enough of his colleagues and the ban expired through inaction. This should not be a political debate. Ill tell you what has changed and what has made it a political debate among politicians only and not americans. More than 500,000 americans have died from gun violence, america has suffered more than 300 Mass Shootings per year. The n. R. A. Ramped up its lobbying of republican members. Republican members on this very committee, 17 of who the n. R. A. Spent a record excuse me, spending a record 54 Million Dollars in 2016 elections alone and every Single Member of the republican side of this dias has accepted Campaign Contributions and other support to a total of 1. 2 million total. We know now that no atrocity convinces our republican colleagues to reject n. R. A. Funding. Not tree of life, not dayton, i could go on and on. One party made this a priority and its us. It shouldnt be us alone. Its a question of our common humanity. Im mother and grandmother and ask a couple of quick questions if i may. Start with mr. Chipman. How does a pistol grip and barrel shroud make it more likely a mass shooter could kill more people . As senator cruz demonstrated, the barrel can get hot and fry bacon on it. If youre a killer and fire hundreds of rounds, this would grip and ability to spray on kill more people. Hold onto to hot weapon and maximize the lethality. Mr. Chipman, can you provide us your thoughts on the threat to Law Enforcement since youve been on both sides . The single biggest threat is how common now rifle rounds are have been instituted in now handguns. Traditionally Law Enforcement were wearing vests to protect themselves from handguns that fired handgun ammunition that wasnt enough. The industry purposely has now created weaponry to defeat bulletproof vests and thats the biggest threat. Theres a bill that actually is presented that tries to address this and we saw it already this year in milwaukee. An officer executing a warrant has his vest on, but the shooter has an ak pistol and defeats it. Im a mother and grandmother to a second grader and two grandchildren coming this year and through that lens and would you please roll the tape. This is a question of our common humanity and weve crossed the threshold no one h h has this bass pack, these head phones are just what i need for studying. These new sneaks snookers are what i need for the new year. This is a musthave. My parents told me, its pretty cool. This really comes in handy. These new socks, they can be a life saver. My mom. [footsteps] mr. Chairman, i yield back, but. The gentle lady yields back. The gentle lady from florida is recognized. I apologize. Thank you, chairman. That video is very difficult to watch because im also a mother and i lost my father to gun violence and today this morning i answered the phone right when the hearing started and the school was conducting an active Shooter Drill and my daughter who just turned 11 years old tells me that if she gets locked out of her classroom, if shes going if she cant cant get into the classroom, she would try to talk to the shooter and tell him or her to remember his little brother or sister, to not shoot. This is what our children now have to live with. I wasnt planning on starting my testimony with that story, but i want to share a quote that i received from one of my constituents. Hes an e. R. Doctor. He works in the Homestead Baptist Health system, dr. Otonski. He told me, that, quote, assault weapons do a tremendous amount of damage to the human body. The tissue damage and disruption is exponentially worse than a conventional handgun. From the carnage that hes personally witnessed he said that assault weapons, quote, not defensive weapons, they are offensive weapons designed to inflict death, tissue damage, and devastation on the human body and thats what they do very effectively, end quote. That is clearly what military style weapons are designed for. Weve seen these weapons of war being used in places like iraq, in afghanistan, and they are now being used in our very own communities taking the lives of our children, our parents, our brothers, our sisters. It has to stop. And theres something that we can do here in congress today. And miss mueller, you said earlier, which really struck me, you said, you know, i just you were describing a gun and you said, i love this little gun. Its time to love our children more. We have to take action, that is why were having this hearing today. Because there is a way to protect our children and our communities. And its bypassing stricter gun laws. Im not done here. With me . No, no, im please. In florida the pain of losing our loved ones strikes home very close to home, close to my district. Weve had two recent Mass Shootings that resulted in 65 deaths. 65 people that lost their lives. In parkland last valentines day, on february 14th a shooter using an ar15 style rifle opened fire on High School Students that day. And in six minutes the shooter with his assault weapon killed 17 people, 17 kids, including a coach, injured 17 others. In 2016, at pulse nightclub in orlando, a shooter using another military style rifle fired into the crowd. With the assault weapon he killed 49 people and injured 53 others in a matter of minutes and in was jerry wright, the son of my very good friends fred and mj wright. He was a wonderful, loving caring son. He was there to have a good time to enjoy latin music that night and his life was cruelly taken. He was only 31 years old. And i know that mj and fred live with that pain every single day. Jerry didnt deserve this, his parent didnt deserve this, but because of this the shooter delivered that to the Wright Family that day. These are weapons of war, period, full stop. They dont belong in our communities. Now i want to ask dr. Ri rios tovar. Ive spoken to doctors in my district who elaborated on the injuries. Can you compare the rifle wound, what it looks like compared to that of a handgun . Like i said earlier, these types of injuries, you cant necessarily see on the outside that one victim that perished had a single gunshot to the back and the clavicular area. And it wasnt through and through, but it was a whole the size of my first fist at the lung and nothing you could do at that point. I thank the members and the witnesses can see, the deepness of the passion permeates so many of us. Ive been in the United States congress for 24 years and that means that i have a lot of personal wounds that do not in any way reflect the victims of gun violence who lost their lives. I was here for columbine when someone said we were going to do something. Let me read this into the record. Between september 25th and october 1st, the day of the shooting, he stock piled an arsenal of weapons and equipment that included 14 ar15 rifles all of which were equipped with bump stocks. 12 of which had magazines, bolt action rifle, a bump stock modifies a semi automatic weapon and then automatic fire. Thank you, youre on the ground. Tell us what might have happened if your officers had not ran into face of danger . I have a lot of questions and so i welcome you going right to it because we know it, i want the record to have it, to know how they save lives, but how they had to run directly in danger. Thank you, representative. The seven officers that ran to stop the shooter in 32 seconds saved countless lives because where they stopped the shooter was right outside an entryway to a war that hundreds had had already shoved in and had no one of getting out and if we did not have, as i like to say, six good guys with guns, that the amount of damage and death that would have happened could have been in the hundreds. You had a bad guy armed with an automatic weapon. Exactly, exactly. You know, and hes still in 32 seconds, even with those officers there, killed nine and injured dozens more. Thank you. Youre here supporting a ban on assault weapons . Yes, maam. Chief, you heard me describe what the shooter in las vegas had. Mounted on a post, almost like he was in war on a mountain hiding so that these who were making their way up would be in the range of danger. Tell me what in gods name with uncould imagine that any civilian needed those weapons which resulted in 58 dead and the danger and loss of life even of Law Enforcement who had to run toward that danger . Absolutely. What he had was the ability to literally inflict the most amount of damage and be stable doing it. Its kind of hard to hold a weapon indefinitely. The weight starts to get to you, but when you have the stabilizers and other things you can go for a long time. Five officers were shot as they ran into the tree of life attempting to disarm and neutralize the individual who then had killed 11 people at that point in time. And an automatic weapon . He had one of those as part of those, he used predominantly his handgun there. He was armed with such that he could continue . That is exactly correct. Hed done the type of damage that he had done, absolutely. Youre an m. D. As well . Oh, no, no. Thats the distinguished one ph. D. And were grateful for your knowledge, chief. And let me go to the doctor, and offer my sympathy. Im a texan. I came to el paso. I saw some of your mastery in those who were alive and i victimed victims in both the hospitals who had the heinous shots and i saw the personal wounds of their spirits, but as well the physical wounds. So let me pose this for my good friends, i welcome the opposition testimony, thats what it is. I respect them because theyre americans. I am adamantly against an assault weapon. I believe in a buyback, i have no shame in that. And i believe that we can do this as americans. I ask the natural Rifle Association to stand with america. Let me give you this picture. Sandy hook and the babies from six and seven years old were shot with an automatic weapon. Babies, first graders, im sorry to ask you this, what kind of wound would a childs body receive from an ar15, or an automatic weapon . You is a you adults, im not sure if you saw a child. I know a someone was wounded, but tell me about the size of the body, the mass of the body and that bullet going into a child. Its not something i would even want to think about imagining, but it would be devastating. Its just not something i can answer, im sorry. It would be worse than you could imagine . And what it would be is an adult having a cavity, you were trying to explain big holes in the body, isnt that right. Thats correct. So the mass after adult is one 0 are or two or three times that of a child. Im not a physician. So in the essence of a child, maybe the child physically would not be able to be contained . Trying to put it in as it would just be too horrific to describe. These are the adult weapons that we are here today trying to ban. To the witnesses, to mr. Chipman, let me thank you. I did not ask you, but im familiar with the National Firearm act and i think it can be a source of amendments for many of our legislative initiatives. I do believe in the enforcing of legislation in terms of gun trafficking which makes some of our cities like chicago and l. A. And others victims because the guns are trafficked. But i want to read this into the record as i thank the witnesses. Assault weapons account for 430 or 85 of the total 501 mass fatalities. This is a group of doctors, research. In a linear aggression model for yearly trend. A federal ban period was associated with statistically significant nine fewer mass shooting related per 10,000. Mass shooting fatalities were 70 less likely to occur during the federal ban on assault weapons. The science is clear, the murder of our fellow americans, loss of life. The victims in this audience that have to listen over and over and over again why were not acting. We owe them something. This committee is willing to pay the debt. I thank each and every one of you for staying this long and helping us to provide the testimony that will have us write as weve already done, and pass an assault weapons ban. This concludes todays hearing and thank the witnesses for parng. Without objection all members will have five legislative days to submit additional written questions for the witnesses or additional materials for the record. All of our thanks, without objection, this hearing is now adjourned. [inaudible conversations] naude nuked [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] the Student Experience is really, really valuable to me. It had a huge effect on our life and helped us grow and learn as people, going into our college years. For past winners of cspans student cam video documentary competition, the experience sparked their interest in documentary production. I currently attend Drake University in des moines, iowa. The fun part i get to be in the middle of caucus season and got to meet so many candidates and because of cspan ive had the experience in the equipment and knowledge to be able to film some of them. And this year were asking middle school and High School Students to create a short video documentary answering the question, what issue do you