We are here today to talk about a universal background check that would help make our nation we are here today to talk about a universal background check that would help make our nation safer and limit highcapacity magazines. They are used in crimes and violence across america. Even though far more people die each year from handgun inflicted injury than assault weaponinflicted injuries. We believe the limit on high capacity magazines, even in handguns, is necessary. No more than 10. Thank you. First i want to acknowledge of the family members out here who have lost loved ones in shootings. I especially want to acknowledge you, maya, who lost her father. I was also listening to all of the statistics here which was important. I am a former prosecutor, i believe in evidence. The statistic i will never forget is the one from newtown, conn. Shared with me by a relative of one of the young victims. Charlotte bacon loved her girls got troop. Her girl scout troop once had 10 girls and now there are only five left. We have to remember what this is all about as we look at solutions. As a former prosecutor, i have always believed in enforcing the laws on the books. Mr. Lapierre, i made it a major focus of our office to prosecute the possession of guns. It is clearly part of the solution. You can not lessen the importance of that as we go forward. There are other things as well, including the recommendations that have been made by Vice President biden and the task force. It is very important that we explore those in addition to enforcing the laws on the books. I have heard from republican sheriffs from all over the state that there are major issues with background checks. I would turn to that first, chief johnson. We had a guy in minnesota that just came out in the papers. He killed his parents, he got out, somehow got a permit, was able to obtain guns. When they found him, he had 13 guns in his house, and he had a note that he had written to the gunman in newtown and said, i think about killing all the time. He was able to get a permit and get those guns. This just came out in our local paper. What do you see as some of the biggest loopholes . We talk about gun shows, internet, private sales, and how you think that could help . And then how do you think you can get background checks done quickly . I am from a hunting estate. The last thing i want to do is hurt my uncle and his hunting. There has been great improvement in the nation. It is good but it is not good enough. We are failing miserably, nationally, entering that data. Statistics i have read indicate nearly 18 states across the nation submit less than 100 records to the nics system on a regular basis. We have to improve, maryland has to improve. We are not doing enough in maryland. Is it true that 40 of gun sales take place at gun shows . That is correct. And other nonlicensed dealer sale arrangements. 6. 6 million guns through that process a year. Are more people now using the internet to buy guns . I was with my squad before coming here today. They regularly use the internet, penny savers, classified ads. They will go outside the state in many cases. There are a variety of methods. Including straw purchasers. You talked about how quickly the background checks can be done, compared to issuing a ticket. The analysis we have conducted, information i have, i believe it is 92 of nics background checks comeback within a minute and half at a licensed dealer. Certainly, that is much quicker than i can write a citation. That should be universal. That is what were calling for. That will make our nation safer. Mr. Lapierre, would you like to respond on the timing of the checks . No. 1, the chief is talking about using the internet to do interstate sales. That is a federal crime and should be prosecuted. The only way you can do a sale is having to go through a dealer and then would have to be cleared through a check. The senator from rhode island talked about the prosecution data. I get that from the Syracuse University data, which is who tracks the prosecution of the federal gun laws where that is the initial charge. My project is what they started to do in richmond. They caught a drug dealer with a gun. They put signs of all over the city, if you have an illegal gun, you will be prosecuted. Drug dealers, gangs, felons stopped carrying guns. So this 62 number was for chicago alone. I know you want to discuss the statistics with senator whitehouse but i have my own questions. Gun shows right now, according to all the surveys, are not a source of crime guns. 1. 7 . Criminals are getting guns on the black market, stealing them, they are not getting them through gun shows. If you are talking about expanding a system that is already overloaded, where they are not doing basically any prosecutions it is like bonnie and clyde. They catch one but cannot do anything so they let them go. If you are thinking about expanding that thinking to every hunter, every relative all over the United States, when the system cannot handle what it has, you are creating enormous federal bureaucracy. It will only hit the law abiding people, not criminals. Honest people will be entrapped into committing crimes they had no intention of committing. It is an unworkable universal federal nightmare bureaucracy being imposed by the federal government. I do not think these lawabiding people it is my understanding that when people buy guns they undergo a background check. We are simply trying to close some of these loopholes. Chief, would you like to respond . Certainly, when a weapon is licensed to a dealer, they undergo a check. But 40 of these guns are being sold out of that process. This is not unreasonable. If i buy a gun next year, through a private seller, i will go to a licensed dealer to do it. Mr. Kelly, you said it best when you talked about your belief in the Second Amendment. With those rights comes responsibility. You talked about responsibility to make sure that these guns to not get into the hands of criminals, terrorists, those with Mental Illness. Do you see the background check as a way to get at this problem . Gabby and i are both responsible gun owners. I bought a hunting rifle from walmart a couple of months ago. I went through a background check, did not take long. They were able to clearly determine that i was a responsible person. In tucson and in many of these cases, there are people that would have failed a background check if the right data was in the system, like in the case of Jared Loughner. In that case, he would have had the option to go to a gun show or private seller. I imagine he would have gotten a weapon. He was a pretty marginalized person, and mentally ill. He did not have much of a Community Around him. I imagine, in that case, if he would have not been able to pass a background check, if there was a universal background check, i do not see him going on the black market to get a gun. Maybe if he did, maybe it would have taken him a long time to do that, to find the right place to go. Maybe in the period of time just maybe his parents would have got him on treatment, medication. If they did, from what his attorneys and prosecutors have told me, he would have never done what he did on that day. So you might not be able to prevent every single criminal from getting a weapon, but a universal background check is a commonsense thing to do. If we do them for federal, licensed dealers, why cant we do it at the gun shows and for private sale . Thank you. As i was listening, i was thinking about all those people in the room who have those maybes. We have to do better with background checks, the number of proposals out there provided by the vicepresident commission. We can do better. Thank you. I welcome one of the three new members of the committee, senator cruz of texas. You have the floor. I apologize. The allergies have caused my voice to be so bad. It is a pleasure to serve with you and members of this committee. I want to begin by thanking the members of the panel who have come here today. Thank you for the time. In particular, capt. Kelly, thank you for your service to this country and for your wifes extraordinary journey. Congresswoman giffords has been lifted in prayer by millions of americans. Please know that your family will continue to be in our prayers for years to come. My wife and i have two little girls. They are four and two. No parent in particular, no parent of Young Children could watch what happened in newtown without being utterly horrified utterly horrified at the depravity of a deranged criminal who would senselessly murder 20 Young Children at an elementary school. Unfortunately, in washington, emotion often leads to bad policies. When a tragedy occurs, often, this body rushes to act. At times, it seems the consideration of this body operates in a factfree zone. I will suggest a philosophy that i think should guide this body in assessing gun violence, and then i would like to highlight and ask you questions on a few points that are salient to addressing this issue. The philosophy i would suggest makes sense is that we should be vigorous and unrelenting in working to prevent, deter, and punish violent criminals. I have spent a substantial portion of my professional life in lawenforcement. The tragedyies inflicted on innocent americans every day by criminals are heartbreaking and we need to do more to prevent them. At the same time, i think we should remain vigilant in protecting the Constitutional Rights of lawabiding citizens. Far too often, the approaches that have been suggested by this congress to the issue of gun violence restricts the liberties of lawabiding citizens, rather than targeting a violent criminals we should be targeting. I would point out, i hope some of the passion we have seen from members of this committee, with respect to the need to prevent Violent Crimes, will be reflected equally should we find ourselves in a judicial confirmation hearing with a judicial nominee who has a record of abusing the exclusionary rule to exclude evidence that results in a violent criminal walking free and being able to commit yet another crime. I hope we see exactly the same passion devoted to assessing whether judicial nominees will enforce our criminal laws and not frustrate the administration of justice. Three points i think are particularly salient. The first is, in my judgment, the proposed assault weapons ban is a singularly ineffective piece of legislation. I was having a conversation recently with a loved one in my family who asked a very reasonable question. She said, why do regular people in the machine guns . One of the things that happened in this debate the phrase assault weapons ban gets people concerned. Much like the phrase military style weapons. We are talking about Citizens Walking around with m16s and fully automatic machine guns. Fully automatic machine guns are already functionally illegal. Ordinary citizens cannot own them, absent very heavy regulation. This entire discussion does not concern machine guns, and yet, i would venture to say a large percentage of americans do not understand that. I want to begin by talking about the assault weapons ban as it was enforced before. I would ask for slide 1. The assault weapons ban that used to be in effect, according to the department of justice, fails to reduce average number of victims per gun murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims. That is the assessment of the United States department of justice. That is 1994. That was beginning in the department of justice under president clinton who said the assault weapons ban was singularly ineffective. Second slide. The department of justice, likewise, concluded the assault weapons ban under it, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence. So the reaction of this tragedy in newtown is, for a lot of the elected officials, to rush to reenact a law that according to the department of justice did absolutely nothing to reduce gun violence. Now, why is that . That is not accidental. The assault weapons ban, if it does not ban machine guns, what does it ban . What it does ban, i would suggest, are scarylooking guns. This is a photograph of a remington 750, one of the most popular hunting rifles in america. This rifle would be entirely legal under this socalled assault weapons ban. I have a question for you, mr. Lapierre. Functionally, in terms of the operations of this fire arm, semiautomatic, you pull the trigger, one bullet comes out. Is the firing mechanism in this fire arm materially different from the socalled assault weapons ban that this bill is targeted at . No, it is not. Instead what it does target are cosmetic features. For example, i am holding in my hand a pistol grip. Under this proposed legislation, if this piece of plastic were attached to this rifle, it would suddenly become a banned assault weapon. I would ask you, mr. Lapierre, are you aware of any evidence to suggest that attaching a piece of plastic to this rifle would make it in any way slightly more dangerous . The problem with the whole bill that senator feinstein introduced, it is based on falsehoods to people that do not understand firearms. To convince them that the performance characteristics of guns they are trying to ban through that bill are different than the performance characteristics that they are not trying to ban. They make bigger holes, rapid fire, they spray bullets, they are more powerful, they are heavy armor. All of that is simply not true. The ar15 uses a 223. I hear all the time people say, no deer hunter would use something that powerful. There are dozens of other calibers that are used in hunting that are more powerful. So this rifle, which is entirely legal and is used by millions of americans, is sold in the identical caliber as the socalled assault weapons ban, although those looks different, because they have a piece of plastic attached to them . The one that senator feinstein uses in her bill, it has the handle on the bottom, which was prohibited, also uses the exact same. I am out of time and i want to make one final point. There has been much attention drawn to gun shows. The statistic of 40 has been bandied about. That is unfortunately based on a study that occurred before the background check went into effect, so it is highly dubious. I do want to point out what the department of justice has said. The department of justice has said that firearms used in crimes, 1. 9 of those firearms come from gun shows. In response to this crime, this body does not act to enact anticrime legislation to prevent Violent Crimes. Instead, it targets 1. 9 of the guns, and a substantial portion of those guns were sold by licensed firearm dealers who already conducted a background check. Even that 1. 9 , a substantial portion, are already subject to a background check. I would ask, if we have a second round, to get into the effectiveness or lack thereof of this. I will leave the record open for questions here. Because of the schedule this afternoon, we may not have a second round, but i will leave the record open. I have questions, but we probably will not have time. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you to all the witnesses, especially you, captain kelly. Thanks to your beautiful wife, and i mean that in every way. My wife, frannie, and i were heartbroken for the families in newtown, tucson, for those of you listening or watching this hearing in newtown, i want you to know that minnesotans have you in our thoughts and prayers, and we share in your grief. We shared it when we lost lives at a sign factory. Maya is here. She lost her father. We share it every time we bury one of our sons or daughters. I know that a group of students from redlake reservation in minnesota, students who lost their classmates to gun violence, made the 1500mile trip to newtown just a few days before christmas just to let them know that they are not alone. We are all in this together. Over the past month or so, i have been talking to my constituents this together. I have talked to my constituents how to make our communities safer. I traveled safely with hunters and school officials, with Law Enforcement officers, with Mental Health experts. I have convened roundtable discussions and i have had many, many conversations. I have learned is that there is a balance to be struck here. We can honor the second man and we can honor the menace of a the Second Amendment and we can honor the minnesota culture of responsible gun ownership while taking basic measures that will make our kids and our communities safer. So i have cosponsored a bill to limit the number of rounds and magazine. I cosponsored a bill to require background checks at gun shows. I have cosponsored senator feinsteins bill to ban assault weapons. I am reviewing legislation to address gun trafficking. I have supported funding for Law Enforcement programs and i work every day to carry out the work pauol wallstone does to repair our Mental Health system. Tomorrow i will introduce the Mental Health and school act which will improve access to Mental Health care for kids. Catching these issues at an early age is really important. I want to be careful here that we dont stigmatize Mental Illness. The vast majority of people with Mental Illness are no more violent than the rest of the population. In fact, they are more likely to be the victims of violence. These recent events have caused us as a nation to scrutinize our failed mental healt and system and im glad were talking about this and a serious way. Police chief johnson, i met with some mothers from the Mountain ViewSchool District in minnesota whose childrens lives and their own lives were changed for the better because their kids got access to Mental Health care that they needed at an early age. They got treatment. Their lives are improving and their moms lives are improving. As a Community Leader and Law Enforcement official, do you think it will benefit our communities if we are able to use schools to improve access to Mental Health care . I applaud your initiatives and your work, senator. The answer is absolutely. The father with a child that has Mental Health issues i thin