Transcripts For CSPAN3 Rules Committee Considers Concealed Carry Legislation 20171205

Their Second Amendment rights if they have different rules and regulations. Conceal carry reciprocity act ebb sures that Second Amendment rights do not end when they cross state lines. The fact show that citizens who carry conceal handgun are not only better prepared to act in selfdefense, but also in defense of others. Legislation under consideration today also includes the fix nix act, a bipartisan bill to ensure that federal and state authorities comply with existing law and support records that the National Instant criminal background checks system. Legislation penalizes agencies that fail to report relevant criminal records through the fbi and incentivizes states to improve their reporting and federal funding to make sure Domestic Violence records are actually reported through the federal bureau of investigation. The bill contains a study on bump stocks that requires the bureau of justice to report with congress within 180 days on the number of times a bump stock has been used in commission of a crime in the United States. That objection id like to welcome the two gentlemjgentlem today, the chairman and the gentlewoman from texas, congresswoman Sheila Jackson lee, who i have not seen yet, but we will include her on this first panel. Before we come to each of you, were going to defer for an Opening Statement the gentlewoman. I would like thank you very much. As we mark the holiday season, i dont think the American People have a lot to be celebrating today. Particularly this bill today. Under the leadership of the majority of the congress is is unable to fulfill its most basic task. Funding for the government expires in three days, but there are no guarantees youll be able to keep the lights on despite unified control of the house, senate and white house. This committee was scheduled to consider a twoweek continuing resolution today theres never been a time the Government Shutdown with all the leaders of power in washington, but it looks like we could make history for all the the wrong reasons. Programs, National Flood insurance program, perkins loans have all expired. We cant get a vote on the dream act. Due to expire at the end of the month. With so many issues before us, i think its particularly galling that the majority is handed the gun lobby to write a bill we are considering today that would make our communities even less safe from gun violence. A month ago tomorrow a man went into a church with a gun and killed 26 people including an 8 18monthold baby. Think of that. Those killed in the attack equalled about 7 of the small towns entire population. This is not the time for congress to allow dangerous people to carry a gun across the country without regard to state laws. Yet under the bill, we are considering today violent offenders and people with no Firearm Safety training would be able to carry hidden, loaded handguns even if they could not otherwise legally purchase a gun in that state. Lets be honest with the American People. If this bill passes, violent offenders with loaded handguns could be coming into a Community Near you even if you reside in a state with tough gun laws. Groups like the major cities, police foundation, Police Executive Research Form all oppose concealed to carry legislation. It goes even further than a bill in the senate, hear this, because it exposes members of Law Enforcement to personal litigation if by mistake they question someones ability under the law to have a gun. Dont you think thats going a little far . Does the majority want to make the members of Law Enforcement afraid to do their jobs . It is appalling that this nra bill is being combined with separate bipartisan bill to improve background checks in response to the shooting in texas. This is sabotage. The bill to improve the National Instant criminal background check system would pass overwhelm iingly. Not only in the house, but also in the senate. But it combined conceal carry bill may not have the 60 votes it needs to pass on the other side of the aisle. Every day in america 93 people on average are killed with a gun. 1,000 Mass Shootings with sandy hook where three or more people have lost their lives. Our communities are being torn apart whether its a church, movie theater, concert, school, or the threat of gun violence is there with us. And recent ly with the massacre in las vegas. There are no sanctuaries from gun violence in america. 16 of americas top retired military commanders, including general mccrystal, just this week are leading with congress to do something about gun violence. They dont want military weapons being used on americas e streets. Those are the people that we represent are being ignored because of the nra. Thank you and i yield back. Thank you very much for your remarks. I will tell you that i called you before this hearing today and asked her for her help in making sure we were precise in doing what we wanted to do and i assured her it would be a fair fight today. Its a fair fight every day. It is when youre involved. And you as well. I told you i was going to talk about guns. And i do d. Were delighted that youre here. The young chairman is recogni recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for the opportunity to appear pfr you today in support of hr 38, the concealed carry act of 2017. Hr 38 was introduced by mr. Hudson of North Carolina and cosponsored by 213 members from both sides of the aisle. It allows gun owners with valid stateissued conceal permits or those who live in socalled constitutional carry states to carry a concealed firearm in any other state that also allows concealed carry. Studies show that carrying concealed weapons reduces Violent Crime rates by deterring wouldbe assailants and by allowing citizens to defend themselves. The 1997 study publish ed by jon lot and david mustard regarding the effect of concealed carry laws on crime rates estimate when laws went into effect, murders fell by more than 7 and rapes and aggravated assaults fell by similar percentages. This bill simply allows americans who travel in interstate kmerk to take their Second Amendment right with them, which is what the founders intended. I am also pleased this bill is is being paired with hr 4477, the fix nix act of 2017. This bipartisan bill was introduced by two of the now absent chairmans colleagues. The fix that is state and federal agencies enter all records into the fbis National Instant background check system. This bill will help ensure people who are legally prohibit tropical depression having guns do not get them. The Church Shootings in South Carolina and sutherland springs, texas, are tragic are mind es of what can happen when records are not entered into the system. Our system is only as good as the information within it. This important piece of legislation will ensure that the information is complete and up to date. They can together preserve and protect the right gauaranteed t us by the Second Amendment and ensure that those prohibited by law from receiving a firearm are prevented from doing so. These are principles that every member should support. I thank you for your time and look forward to your questions. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The gentleman from new york is now recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman, i i appear in opposition to the conceal carry act because this bill would not protect us from gun violence but would make us less safe. Each state makes its own determination about who may carry a concealed firearm in public. Including which other states permits to recognize. This bill would e eviscerate the safety determinations that each state makes concerning the concealed carry guns in public. In fact, the standards and requirements adopted in the states are dramatic. 31 states and the district of columbia require gun Safety Training to carry cob sealed guns in public. 27 states and d. C. Prohibit individuals convicted of misdemeanor crimes of violence from concealed carry. 28 states and d. C. Prohibit convicted stalkers from carrying concealed weapons. 34 states and d. C. Prohibit those under 21 years of age from carrying concealed guns. Many states prohibit gun possession by abusive dating partners, exceeding protections that extend only to abusive spouses. All of these states would have their carefully considered laws governing concealed carry over by this amendment. The obvious solution to the various state laws is to continue to do what is currently done by many states to choose which other permits they will recognize. Some states including my state of new york have chosen not to recognize permits issued by any other state. Most states have chosen to recognize permits from some other states basing the choice on the strength of the standards employ ed by the other states. We should not disregard these determinations, which is what this bill would do. I would also point out one other thick. There are bills that we see every session, sol of which make sebs, some of which dont, to override states in a given area. This bill is a very unusual kind of bill in that it would use federal power to import the laws of one state into the laws of another state. It wouldnt impose a uniform federal law. It would simply say that new jersey is governed by the law of whichever other state it may be. I dont know of any other laws that import the law that use federal power of one state into another state. Although i can think of a bill that did. I oppose the concealed carry reciprocity provisions of this bill, i submit an amendment to address one of the concerns i just mentioned. More than half the states recognized that individuals guilty of violent misdemeanors. Have a greater propensity of future criminal activity and will not allow such persons to carry concealed guns. My amendment would prevent the bill from forcing these states to recognize the permits of states that do not have prohibitions with respect to people who have been convicted of violent misdemeanors. I do not believe we should consider without consideration of this it amendment and allowing floor debate on the others we have submitted of similar flaws with the bill. In addition i am deeply disappointed the version of the bill today includes the bipartisan fix nix act measure that should be enacted as a stand alone bill without delay. That bill would address shortcomings of the criminal background check system or what we call the nix. As the recent mass shooting, we should do more to ensure all relevant prohibiting records are submitted to the databases. No one should pass the firearms background check that he should have failed because the record or some other prohibition was not include d in the system. Theres broad bipartisan support for the fix nix bill in the house and senate. That proposal, which actually would save lives, should not be death tethered to the reciprocity provisions, to serve to ebb danger our citizens. The harms of the concealed reciprocity portion being considered taken to the floor outweigh the benefits of the nix improvements. Therefore, i oppose the combined bill and urge the committee to reject it. That does not mean the many thoughtful amendments that my colleagues and i have submitted to address the provision should not be considered on the floor. I ask if the bill is made in order, those amendments be made in order so we may debate this critical policy issue in a comprehensive manner. I yield back. Thank you very much. I want to thank both of you not only for taking your time to be here today, but for your comments. I will tell you that im a lifetime member of the National Rifle association. I have prized to Pay Attention very carefully to the attributes of crime in this country. As you though, i have some background of my family being in Law Enforcement. And have believed that where you have a Police Officer or an a armed citizen is you stand a chance to stop perpetrators who would commit crimes. When they do, you have a chance to protect yourself, your family and loved ones. I believe that this bill in its r very essence is to make sure lawabiding citizens who believe the United States of america and the constitution would not find themselves in trouble as long as they are following the law. I appreciate you bringing this bill forward today and i want to thank you very much. I want to associate myself. Thats well said. Our sentiments are similar on that. I want to thank the chairman for working on legislation. I do have one question though real quickly. On the bump stock issue. We clearly have a technology that makes a legal product illegal. All of us were surprised to find that out. That was a decision made by the alcohol tobacco and firearms people during president obamas administration. Kind of surprised at the decisi decision. Is our aim to get them to rethink that decision . Because this clearly ought to be something thats outlawed. Absolutely. I share your concern about the misuse of these devices that can turn a semiautomatic weapon into something that is like an automatic weapon. We view this as the stirs first step and its used in crimes. It appears to have been used in the very serious crime in las vegas. Are there other instances and we continue to work with the atf on what is the best way to go about preventing that from happening and the study thats called for as part of this legislation is directive at that. But i share your concern we may need to do more. The gentleman from new york. I agree that the sole function of the bump stock is is to make a semiautomatic weapon operate like an automatic. We have banned automatics since the 1930s. I dont think we need a study. This bill provides for study. As far as im concerned, thats just delaying. We ought to be banning the use of these bump stocks immediately because they have no function other than to get around the law. I dont think anybody roebl not too many people who advocate legalizing machine guns and automatic weapons. Thats what this does, nesk in effect. I just want to comment on one thing mr. Sessions says. Its the underlying problems with this bill. One is the baitics problem were talking about. This bill, as i said before, doesnt make a standard. What it does, and it doesnt make a judgment. What it does is to import the federal power to import the law of any state into a different state. And to deprive the people of the the state of the ability to make that judgment. Thats simply wrong as a matter of federalism, not to mention a matter of prudence. The second thing with respect to what mr. Sessions said is that guns, we have run this experiment now for 40 or 50 years. And you look at the statistics. I dont know exactly, but more or less the United Kingdom is is 146 People Killed by guns each year. The United States 30,000. We are not thousands of times more mentally ill than the germans or the british or the japanese. That would be a slander on the American People. The frequency of death by guns is direct liquorlated by the availability of guns in society. And you can say that someone has a gun, lawabiding citizens will stop a person without a gun and on occasion that will be true. On occasion, the good guy will shoot the wrong person. I would hate to see a shootout of people in the subway in new york city. But speaking as a whole, theres no question that you can correlate the presence of guns in society, the availability of guns if society direct ly with the homicide rate by guns. And again, how do you explain no other country in the world has a homicide rate by gun exceeding 200, 250. We deal with 30,000 a year. Two points. With regard to your point in regards to bump stock, were already having an effect because the department of justice just today put out a press release announcing they are reopening the rule making process with regard to devices like bump stocks to determine whether they are prohibited. So that is a positive development. I think its directly related to the legislation that we have before us. Secondly with regard to the comments from my friend from new york, the fact of the matter is that the Second Amendment is a constitutional right that extends to all americans. The Supreme Court has held that it extends to them for the purpose of selfdefense and that it extends to their right to exercise that in all of the states. So i would hate to see states make it more difficult for people to exercise that right and it is the federal government that has a responsibility of determining how one can transport a firearm across state lin lines. So i think thats an appropriate thing. The people who are allowed to do this, the successes are very, very strong that these are very lawabiding people. I agree with chairman sessions that their presentation will help to prevent crime and be very unlikely that its going to create additional crime. I think just the opposite is going to be the case. We have a telling glimpse of what will be an eloquent debate. Thank you very much. I notice d that ms. Jackson lee has had an opportunity to come here. We got started a little under that you would be allowed to provide testimony. They have provided things in writing would be entered in the record. Without objection, well continue that. Thank you, and i thank the rules committee for its courtesy. I think my colleagues have spoken. Let me speak to the issue of where we are. I think we have done a lot together on the Judiciary Committee, though we are sometimes charged without having a clab ra ty effort. But last week these bills were separated. And the bill was a bipartisan bill that it could have rolled to the house. And had a bipartisan vote of support even though its legislation i would want to be stronger, it does provide fund ing to improve that background check system, which can save lives. In a matter of overnight magic, the conceal weapons bill reciprocity was merge d with ni. And i think in a all honesty that is trickery and unfair. And it is well known that democrats and have an opposition to an unwield iing unrestrained use of guns and therefore, the reciprocity bill was going to be a real problem. We spent most of the day amend ing it and so im baffled as to how all of a sudden it was so urgent to merge the two bills. We have a holiday party, i understand. But this could have been done in the days to come. So im very unhappy about this. This is an important act. It can stand on its own two feet. It aims to improve information by federal and state agencies and serves a z a response to the recent sutherland, texas, massacre where it was revealed that the air force failed to submit the record of the shooter. So i have an amendment that would go to this legislation and i will not take a long time, but this is amendment number 229. It would be amending the nix bill and it would go through requiring the secretary of defense conduct a kpcomprehensi review of the procedures used by each branch of the armed forces to submit records chrks are relevant to a determination of whether peshs disqualified. It would have an extensive review from possessing or receiving a firearm, which did not. Happen with the perpetrator who kill killed 20 people plus in sutherland, texas. Emp was appalled at the violence. But here he is armed to the tee and here he is at a church worshipping. But that amendment that deals with the Armed Services and id ask for a waiver if its proven to be nongermane, i ask for a waiver because its important enough just as we must have sought some kind of trickery to merge the two bills. As it relates to the reciprocity bill, let me be clear. I work with a lot of Law Enforcement. Having been on the Judiciary Committee for a long time, i have engaged with all of my chiefs of police and all the federal offices in my district. There are a lot of them, a as there are in others. But from the fbi, we have done projects together dealing with trying to ensure the safety of my community. I work extense ily with almost every single chief that has been the chief during the time i have served, including former mayor and chief lee brown, who was a father of police iing, but they have all been members of the Major Chiefs Association and the Major Chiefs Association are unique because they are responsible for their men and women. They are responsible for those who patrol the streets and they are absolutely appalled. I will later submit in the record a letter from the chiefs of police. But i have two amendments to the concealed weapons reciprocity act. Both of them are very simple and one is this section does not apply in the case of any person of Domestic Violence or stalking under the law of state or indian trooib and i can imagine e we would not want an amendment that addresses Domestic Violence. The perpetrator in sutherland was a Domestic Violence abuser. Here we was with a gun and that information was not sent to nix. We know the perpetrator in charlottesville was able to get guns because they sold the guns before his actual review was complete d. If that wasnt a person who was spewing hate, all of his websites showed it. And he was able to sit amongst prayer warriors, if if you will, people on a wednesday Night Prayer Service in their church seek iing the comfort of god an he had his hateful perspective u had a weapon to kill all nine of them. Lastly i would say this. The chiefs have concern about their men and women who patrol. The one element of this reciprocity bill is is the stocks. We have seen tragic circumstances that have countered what most of them want. For them to come home safely. Id like to add Police Relations as well. They are concerned as to how these Officers Determined the credibility of the permit thats been given to them that they may have gotten from any places not the state in which that saufrs is in. You will now burden that officer in stops to try to visually whole up and get a microscope and be able to determine what is this . Is this one that tracks or falls along my particular state. I think this bill is dangerous and there are many other ways to provide protection for individuals traveling, but more importantly Law Enforcement and i really think this is an excessive bill. I ask the rules committee to consider my amendments and make them in order and to waive any germaneness to make my amendments in order. With that, i would yield back. Thank you very much. I recently read that Wisconsin Department of justice is now required to issue license with that regard where that person has been convicted of Violent Crimes. I have also read that they have removed all age requirements for gun possession in wisconsin. And that over a thousand 10yearolds now have gun per t permits in the state of wisconsin. I would prefer them not coming to new york. Frankly the outcome of 10yearold children running around with guns the procespectf that gives me shivering fits. But id also like to understand. What was the impetus for exposing Law Enforcement, personal liability litigation if it they question somebodys ability to have a gun . It is not uncommon for false arrests to have that kind of liability in other matters in which you falsely imprison or detain somebody. So its simply included here as well. If you were brash enough to ask somebody if they had a gun permit . That would not. If you detain them from entering your state with a concealed carry permit. I would like to know how to do that. I know in new york it scares me to death. That amendment was added to the bill. We will add this to the litany of things youre doing. This is not the congress that i have known and loved so many years, but its the one weve got. So let me ask unanimous consent to put into the record letters and statements of opposition to hr 38 by the following. 17 attorneys general, the American Academy of pediatrics, the american bar association, the American Federation of teachers, Amnesty International usa, the association of prosecuting attorneys, faiths united to prevent gun violence, giffords Law Enforcement coalition, the International Association of chiefs of police, Law Enforcement partnership to prevent gun violence, major cities chiefs, the National Task force to end sexual and ghesic violence, third way, and United States conference of mayors. I imagine if we had time, we would have gotten great many more. Sdwl well add that to the record. Thank you very much. Let me say this is one of the saddest days in congress for me. I dont know what it takes. Hon lees honestly, i was naive enough that when kids were shot at Senior High School that that would pause. Two weeks before christmas. All those children, thinking about holidays and great things and a man walks in because hes allowed to have guns and he kills them. He kills them. The same thing that people went to church in texas. That beautiful lult place there. They all got killed going to church. Are we going to live in a country that every time our members of the family leave the house to go to anything that we may not ever see them again . Is is that why this Congress Really wants americans to live with . Because were getting there. I will tell you that it was 67 of americans surveyed thought that gun laws were far too lax. What are they going to think about this one . This bill will encourage greater enforcement of the law. I hope that what . It will have the opposite effect. The concealed carry and the nix fix. When do we expect a a law that says all of us have to be arm ed . I can remember when i first got here there was a place in georgia that wanted to do that and everybody laughed it out of town. Now its a serious issue today. I just point out that a law that allows i should say that mandates new york or pennsylvania to allow violent misdemeanors to carry guns, concealed weapons because some other state allows it and how about 10yearolds . The fact is this is not a permissive bill. This is a mandatory bill on states to say you cant enforce your laws as long as any other state has a law that is more permissive or laxative than yours. Because we keep hearing about the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment the Supreme Court Justice Scalia said the Second Amendment right was not unlimited in that a variety of gun regulations he wrote in particular that the majority of american courts to consider the question held at prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogies. So simply invoking the Second Amendment doesnt tell you that a given bill or right is mandatory under it or is prohibited under it. You have to make the analysis. They specifically said that carrying concealed weapons, the laws prohibiting were not prohibited by the Second Amendment. So put the Second Amendment aside. We understand an individual right was conferred by the Supreme Court understood the Second Amendment to confer an individual right. But that individual right is not unlimited anymore than other rights conferred by other amendments are unlimited. We have free speech. We have the first amendment. But you cant shout fire in it a crowded theater and do a lot of other things. You have to lock at the specifics. And laws by states limiting concealed weapons are without doubt constitutional to the Second Amendment and again, what you have here is a bill that doesnt even exercise the judgment of congress, which would be an obnoxious thing to do to say we judge that is a matter of federal law were going to impose this standard on states. It simply allows any states to oppose standards in every other state. Which is an even worse thing to do. I want it on the record that there was a well regulated militia in the revolutionary war. It had its own general. His name was general daniel morgan. It was used basically that i know of in pennsylvania. And farmers who lived around the pat l were allowed to come to the battle, bring their own musk musket, shoot three times and fade back into the woods and go home. Now thats pretty darn well regulate d. But that has been over the years so drastically change d. I remember thinking about the time in which the Second Amendment was passed. We had a recommendation from one man to say americans can have all the muskets they want. Guns, no. We have gone in such a dangerous trend and dangerous movement. If everybody isnt scared to death, you ought to be. Im really concerned about whats happening next. I never thought wed see this day. I yield back. The gentleman from georgia is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I appreciate the chairman bringing the bill before us. Truth is its happened so often. I dont know how you have any hearings in the Judiciary Committee at all because everything you deal with is is white hot. We dont send the easy issues, only the tough issues. I dont think they did it. They didnt have hearings. Im looking at the Committee Report here. I take the gentlemans point. Im thinking about the hearing were having. I understand her concern about 10yearolds in wisconsin. I dont know anything about t t that. I do know the age to have a concealed carry permit in wisconsin is 21. So if those wisconsinites are not 21, they are not going to carry a weapon whether this laws. Passes or not. Let me ask you this. Reciprocity issues are hard. We have concealed carry reciprocity in my home state. 32 dates already do. But they have chosen to do that. Absolutely. We have worked this out in a negotiated way. Take me back. I know if im a 16yearold new yorker, im not allowed to drive in new york city. But as a 16yearold oklahomaen, i can grab my car and drive through times square with it. We regularly have res prciproci rules. But the states have agreed to those. I dont think thats imposed by the federal government. You think the drivers license is agreed to by your attorney general. Probably by the legislature at some point in the past. I have Great Respect for the Second Amendment. So issues like this give me great pause. My friend from new york cited 17 attorneys general that opposed this measure, mr. Chairman id like to cite 23 state attorneys general. The highest Law Enforcement officer of the listened who support this measure. One of them from the great state of georgia. I have real qualms about the federal government telling states how to conduct their business. Particularly when states have been so successful at creating these reciprocity agreements. Let me just read from this letter signed by 23 state attorneys general. We write in support of the concealed carry reciprocity act of 2017. We share a strong interest in the protection of our citizens Second Amendment rights and we are committed to supporting federal and state policies to preserve these constitutional rights. These bills talking about s 446 and hr 38 if inacted would eliminate obstacles to the exercise of the right to keep and bare arms. Toub state laws. What they would eliminate are the rights of states to regulate those questions within their own borders. We all pay homage, i suppose, i cant think of a better word, to states rights to make decisions of their own. We all, on some occasions, say not here. Well impose a federal standard and other places we wont. But, again, and one could debate the wisdom of those particular decisions. We should enforce a federal standard or let states do what they want. But here were going worse. Were saying that one state, oklahoma lets say, oklahoma may find it prudent to allow people who have been convicted of violent misdemeanors to have a c concealed carry permit and maybe shom would disagree with that decision by the state government, but thats their decision. New york finds it not prudent. I dont know what the conditions are in oklahoma, but i certainly wouldnt want a violent misdemeanor carrying a concealed weapon on a subway or bus or other crowded conditions that you may have less of in oklahoma or some other states. And again, new york should make that decision. Here what youre doing is not only not having a federal government make that decision, youre having a state make the decision for itself, which then gets enforced in every other state. As i said, since the fugitive slave act, im not aware of too many instances where you use federal power to say that the law of state a must be entorsed to state b whether they like it or not. Thats an interrogation of thesoeverty of state b of the ability of that state to legislate itself. Now mr. Session ises, i think it was, who talked before about the ability and the utility of lawabiding citizens carrying concealed weapons. A violent misdemeanor is not a lawabiding citizen. You can disagree as to whether we should exempt from the general right to carry only felons or also violent misdemeanors or violent felons, but thats a decision for the state. Thats our general rule that states make those decisions. States enact their criminal laws. So were telling by this law were telling every state that doesnt want someone who committed a violent misdemeanor to carry concealed weapons. You must permit it if some other state permits it. The gentleman makes an important distinction. It would not be accurate to describe one that takes the laws of georgia and imposes them on new york. It does take a license of georgia and asks new york to recognize that license. No, it mandates that new york recognize that license. Thats absolutely correct. Im allowed to carry in georgia under the laws of the state of georgia with my concealed carry permit, this bill would honor it would mandate. But require me to follow the l laws of new york with respect to that permit. No, because the laws of new york do not assuming youre a violent misdemeanor, the laws of new york would not permit you to have a concealed weapon but the laws of georgia would and the law of georgia would prevail in new york under this bill. You raise an interesting question that i have not asked and i will ask it since i have a panel here. The license that says i lu not issue a license unless they are of a certain age, not issue a license to someone unless they do not have xy and z in their past, there is no is there a new york law that prohibits people from having a gun . Or is it law that we will not issue a license to someone who has those issues . New york law makes it ill lee for anyone without a license to carry a gun. So the answer is theres no distinction really. The New York Legislature determined that people who have committed violent misdemeanors should not be able to permit in new york. This bill would say never mind that determination. It prevails in new york. The licenses are recognized . Not just that the license is recognized. If a New York New York city cop or up state stops someone for speeding or whatever and finds out that hes carrying a concealed weapon and finds out that he has committed a violent misdemeanor in the past. Under new york law he would be arrested for illegally carrying a gun. Under this law, he would not. Because new york law is overridden. If he comes from a state that permits it. The real question is why should you permit the law of one state to override the law of a different state which may prevail under different circumstances and we generally allow unless the federal government is going to come in and say our general requirement for you to demand the following standard, which we do sometimes. Unless thats the within their borders. And here youre saying, because oklahoma has decided one standard, we will enforce oklahomas standard in new york. Licensure standard. Not just license youure sta. Who is allowed to carry . Under new york law, if im 16 years old, i am not allowed to drive in new york city, period. New york city. New york state you are. Im prohibited. Yes. From driving in the city. Yet with my georgia drivers license, at 16, i can go rolling right on down because the legislature the streets. Because the legislature of new york found it expedient to make that accommodation. Thats their privilege. To republicans the licensure, the traffic laws of new york continue to apply. If the gentleman will yield. We have to yield. The difference here is that there is no federal constitutional right to drive a car. There is a federal constitutional right to keep and bear arms. And so therefore, the ability to transport that firearm, if the concealed carry permit has been granted to the individual, by a state that has been through a process to make that determination the same. Now, the gentleman from new york brought up the wisconsin determination, which is correct, that they have determined that there will be no minimum age to possess a firearm. Actually, wisconsins not the first one to the gate on this. They are the 34th state to permit individuals to possess firearms based upon no minimum age requirement. However, wisconsin has a age 21 concealed carry permit. So if someone shows up in new york and they are concealed a firearm and theyre 16 years of age, theyre in violation, both to new york and the wisconsin concealed carry permit law, and theyre not in compliance with the law. Now, with regard to your point that there are certain items under new york law, yes, this bill makes it very clear that while the licensing process is the determination of the state of residence of the citizen, it is the state that they take the firearm into whose laws they must comply with with regard to how thats exercised. Not who, not, you know if first of all, when you talk about violent misdemeanors, the federal law prohibits people guilty of Domestic Violence, which is a misdemeanor in most instances. They cant have a firearm at all. So they cant use it as a concealed carry. But there are other that the gentleman from new york would describe as a violent misdemeanor that are not covered by that. Stalking and other things. And that is an exception here, to make clear, that if people meet the basis for carrying the weapon in their own state, theyll be able to transport it across state lines. And congress has very Clear Authority to allow this. This isnt the first time we have seen similar language, mr. Chairman. In the past, i recall states that did not have a licensure requirement that simply allowed concealed carry by their citizens as a constitutional right, being left out of this are you brick. That i have a license from georgia, because georgia issues a license. If i come from a state that doesnt issue a license, historically we voted on bills that offer no protections to me. How has this bill addressed that . We have addressed it by saying that as long as you have met the requirements of your home state, concealed carry permit, you no longer have to fear entering certain states where people have been arrested and charged with serious crimes. Oftentimes, not even realizing that they are doing so. Simply for exercising their constitutional right to keep and bear arms. And simply showing my drivers license then, if i come from one of those nonpermit states, that satisfies my burden of demonstrating that im if you can establish that your state has a constitutional concealed carry, you can do that. May i just offer a point about the constitutional okay. Conceal to carry conceal carry. The gentleman from new york made a point, very valid point, that the Supreme Court has indicated that the Second Amendment is not unfettered. And that there is a proper regulatory scheme that can be accepted. The chairman indicates that the individuals carrying the guns dont have a fear going into the jurisdiction those people have a fear and the Law Enforcement officers will have a fear. Youre asking Law Enforcement to do two things on the street. Youre asking, first of all, to look and see whether the georgia license is, in fact, credible. That it is a legitimate georgia right to conceal carry. Having not been a georgia Police Officer and being a new york Police Officer or texas Police Officer, and our laws are very much like georgia. They would have to make a determination on the street. Secondarily, they have to make a determination as to whether this person still complies with new york laws. I think they would probably want to do so, which is if there is a misdemeanor violent charge that they have had, it may be acceptable in georgia, but it may not be acceptable in new york. So let me just read from the chief of police of the fourth largest in the nation, soon to be the Third Largest in the nation, houston. As it relates to concealed weapons. The chief says, each state has carefully crafted its own laws relating to concealed weapons. While congress has heretofore respected the constitutional sovereignty of the states, there is legislation now pending that would undermine the authority of state laws relating to carrying of weapons. We strongly urge congress to reject the misguided and impractical proposal for reciprocity. As Police Officers could not be expected to recognize legitimate or forged permits from thousands of jurisdictions, it would be impossible to determine which persons are authorized to carry a concealed weapon. This is what youre going to face across the nation, in spite of the 27 attorney generals and 34 states. Youve got to talk to chiefs of police and patrol officers. I frankly im talking about individual patrol officers. And i ask anonymous consent to submit this letter into the record. Mr. Chairman . Has been granted when the gentlewoman and i ask for the chief association to be in the record and the National Task force to end sexual and Domestic Violence, opposing this vigorously. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I yield back. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Mcgovern . Thank you, mr. Chairman. I cant believe were here. Having this discussion. And i cant believe this legislation is even before us. I mean, as the gentle lady from new york pointed out, the outset here, we have some pressing, urgent things that need to be done, like keep the government open, for example. That now has been pushed off. We dont know whats going to happen. We need to reauthorize the c. H. I. P. Program to make sure our kids get access to health care. We have Hurricane Relief issues we need to deal with. I mean, a gazillion things that are urgent that need to be dealt with now, and here we are, dealing with this. And, you know, and it is a little bit frustrating to sit here and be told that there were no hearings on this legislation. I mean , its december. So its not like we just started a new session. Its december. And it would have been nice to bring the police chief that as jackson lee referred to up the Judiciary Committee, let them express their concerns or anybody you want who supports this legislation. But i mean, there is value in listening to people outside of the little bubble here in washington. And i look at this, and i ask myself, you know, how much in the bag with the National Rifle association is this leadership and this house . I mean, theres this makes no sense that you are going to impose the weakest standards that exist in some states on states that have Higher Standards when it comes to issuing licenses for those who can carry concealed weapons. I looked at the National Rifle associations web page. Conceal carry reciprocity is the nras highest legislative priority in this congress. And so we all know why were here today. I mean, we follow the money. I mean, this is about campaigning, this is about contributions to Political Parties and members of congress who are worried about the next election. But this is not about whats in the best interest of the American People. I mean, this bill were taking up today would force states to let violent offenders and people with no firearms Safety Training carry hidden, loaded guns, even if those people could not otherwise legally purchase a gun in the state. I mean, really . I dont get that. Each state determines if it will recognize conceal carry permits issued by other states. Currently 11 states do not recognize concealed carry permits issued by other states. Most states only recognize conceal carry permits issued by states with equivalent standards. This is a rush to the bottom. I dont im trying to understand why anybody would think this is a good idea. The gentleman from georgia tried to compare these two drivers licenses. Well, you know, as i understand it, drivers license, as far as their concerned, there are standard, verifiable documents with the same criteria nationwide. Conceal carry, theres no uniform standard security features. No national, and sometimes no statewide database. I mean, drivers license requires things like vision and laws and inperson driving tests. Conceal carry licenses, as we have learned, the training varies widely, and it isnt even always required by states. And yet youre going to impose those low standards on my state . I mean, massachusetts has the lowest firearm death rate in the entire country. Im proud of that. Dont screw around with what we have done in my state by trying to forcibly, through statute, lower the standards. I mean, this is just not right you know, i could go on and on and on. But, you know what, this is a big waste of time. And im hoping the senate wont even take it up. Because this is this is just a terrible idea. This is about campaign contributions. This is not about good policy. And with that, mr. Chairman, i yield back my time. The gentleman yields back his time. Thank you very much. The gentleman from georgia. Excuse me just a moment, please. Yes, sir. At the beginning, you mentioned to ms. Lauder that you were you guaranteed a fair fight on this issue. Well, that to me means not just our ability to talk up here. It means making sure that the amendments, like the one that have been offered here today and others be made in order. And i hope this means either an open rule or that all amendments that have been introduced be made thats a fair fight. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Yes, maam. What i tried to have the basis of my discussion withhe gentle woman was the time in which we would do this. The time of day that we would do this, knowing what we had with some accommodations that you understand and i do of families being in town today. And i that the premise was, i asked her she said i would like to talk about the gun bill and i said youll be allowed that time. And were doing every bit of that. Not that we dont have anything else to talk about [ inaudible ] well, whether or not well, but i we admitted that yesterday. On the phone. Admitted it right on the phone. Right on the phone. And were still doing that. Right. Maybe you could take a minute now while youre here and tell us when we will get it. Tomorrow. Okay. The rules committee on that tomorrow. We have not got that point. The judge is going to ask in a few minutes when were going to do that, and im going to tell him tomorrow. [ inaudible ] well, i told you i told you on the phone. [ inaudible ] i told you on the phone the other day when we would do it. [ inaudible ] okay. But it wont be a few minutes. Yes, sir. Judge, do you wish to be recognized . Yes. The gentleman is recognized. I just want to let you know. It wont be that i will be asking that question in a few minutes. But i will ask that question. Yes, sir. Does the gentleman seek recognition . Yes, i do. The gentleman is recognized. I started to go that way, and then i came back this way. And im going to stay where i am. Well, i appreciate it. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chairman, first let me Say Something about the National Rifle association. Every member of the National Rifle association are not people who should be put in the same category as others. Many of them would look at the same provision that we are dealing with today, and have difficulty understanding why we are doing this. There is a distinction in almost all organizations between the membership and the leadership. And the leadership of the National Rifle association is really, really a set of very cunning individuals who are determined not to support gun manufacturers who somehow or another get left out of the equation when we talk about these matters. We put it on the National Rifle association, who really are doing nothing but the bidding of gun manufacturers. I remember in sandy hook, many guns were manufactured, and the Gun Association Manufacturing Association was less than six miles from sandy hook elementary school. During all of the brouhaha, they quietly moved out of that area. And i find that passing strange that we focus sometimes on matters differently than, in my view, of what we should. Mr. Mcgovern mentioned, as did miss slaughter, the significant number of issues we have dealing with all of us awakened today to a report that one of the highest variable rates for hov driving in virginia on i66 is 34 to drive at a certain time on that highway. And thats because we havent paid attention to all of the extraordinary needs with crumbling roads and crumbling bridges in our country. And here we are talking about something without addressing the real significant issues with reference to gun violence. Im a gun owner. I want to make that clear, because i always get threats. And i understand that. I dont worry about the people that call and say theyre going to harm me. I worry about the ones that dont call. But the simple fact of the matter is and mr. Goodlatte, i want to address this to you. This is my florida gun permit. To carry a concealed weapon. In the streets, these can be knocked off and proliferate all over the place. To carry a concealed matters. If i have this permit, and ive carried a gun to a state that doesnt allow for carry, compared to this is my florida drivers license. And i wont even get into the falsification part. My argument to you is that if a Police Officer stops me and looks at my drivers license he or she can determine that i have a valid drivers license. But if a Police Officer stops me, how is that Police Officer, with no hotline established, as would be the case with drivers license, make a determination whether or not im valid with reference to carrying a concealed weapon . Well, mr. Hastings, as you and mr. Nather have noted, with regard to drivers licenses, states have cooperated with each other. But it was noted here that ten states are completely unwilling to recognize the constitutional right constitutional right of people to travel with their firearm outside of their home state into the other state. So even if that state and every state but one has a concealed carry permit process, that one state being vermont, and they have constitutional so you do agree excuse me. Reclaiming my time. So you do agree that theres no state by state hotline, for example, to confirm that a permit is valid. It would be great if more efforts were taken to improve that. But that is not a necessary thing. Wasnt necessary when drivers licenses were first recognized across state lines. You mean to tell me if a Police Officer stopped somebody and they claim they have a carry permit, that a Police Officer shouldnt be able to determine whether or not that is valid . They can determine, but they cannot unreasonably detain the individual. Gee whiz. This gets crazier and crazier. Here we have, in my judgment, collectively, lost our minds with all of the things that we have seen with gun violence. And mr. Chairman, i want to include in the record, so we can put this issue to rest, i could spend the rest of my time dealing with concealed carry permits are nothing like drivers licenses. But let me ask anonymous consent to include every towns analysis that i commend to mr. Goodlatte. Without objection. With regard to conceal carry, usually Congress Sets the floor for conduct. In other words, if states want to take further action on a given matter to strengthen the law, they may do so. But they may not provide fewer protections than the floor established by congress. The approach we see here today with conceal carry turns this approach on its head, and rewards the bottom dwellers. In other words, states seeking to protect victims of Domestic Abuse will have to yield to states who do not. Mr. Ranking member, i want to make sure i have this right. By way of example, we have two states. One allows those convicted of Domestic Violence to carry conceal weapons, and the other does not. Under this bill, the state that quite reasonably does not allow those convicted of Domestic Violence to carry concealed weapons will have to welcome in a person and their concealed weapon, because that persons state allows Domestic Abusers to carry concealed weapons. Is that correct . I was talking to you, jerry. Yes. All right. Let me share with you all in here the statement of country music. Musicians. You said ranking member. I thought you meant mr. Sessions. Yeah. Well no, i was talking to you. But thats okay. Country musician caleb keater was mindful of the hail storm of bullets in las vegas. And he played guitar with josh abbott band, which performed that sunday afternoon, just hours before 59 people were killed there. Let me quote him. He says, ive been a proponent of the Second Amendment my entire life. Until the events of last night. I cannot express how wrong i was. We actually have members of our crew with chl licenses and legal firearms on the bus. They were useless. We couldnt touch them for fear police might think that we were part of the massacre. And shoot us. A small group, or one man, laid waste to a city with dedicated, fearless Police Officers, desperately trying to help because of access to an insane amount of fire power. Enough is enough. , he says. Now, i want to ask you, mr. Goodlatte, how do you handle 50 people getting on an airplane with a carry permit to come to any one of the states . How does that work . What do the people with their guns and their carry permits do . They have to stow them in the plane. They cant carry them on board the plane whether they have a concealed carry permit or not. What if all of them arrive about 15 minutes before the shutoff time for en try . Theyve got to go through security like the rest of us do. So the delay of air travel would take place. I dont necessarily think so. I think theyll be delayed themselves from getting to the plane, unless they have, as most people understand, if you want to carry a firearm, you have to stow it in your luggage. You cant carry it on board the plane. How about trains and buses . Trains and buses have different standards. But i think that the transportation provider has a right to determine that. How about 175 people showing up here at the capitol, going through the same thing. Theyre not going to be allowed into the capitol. But they should be under this law . No. No. Why shouldnt they . They are allowed to carry, and we have reciprocity. Because this bill makes it very clear that not only the federal government, state and local governments, can make that determination. And, by the way, can any private business owner. So if you have a bar or whatever, you can you can prohibit you can make that determination as a private citizen that youre not going to allow people to carry a firearm into your bar. How would i know that the person had a gun . You can ask them. You can have a metal detector. So everybody that enters into bars and restaurants nowadays are going to be subjected to magnet magn magnetometers . If the proprietor chooses to do that, yes. Mr. Goodlatte, have you ever been on broadway . To shows, yes. Would you personally like for every one of those people to be carrying a gun . If they have a lawful concealed carry permit, i would feel safer than if i were at a venue where no one was allowed to have a gun except the person who smuggled a gun in for the purpose of committing mayhem. Would we as Congress Persons be committed to carry our guns on the floor of the house of house of representatives . No, i dont believe so. Why . Why wouldnt we . That would depend on the rules of the house. Im here to talk about this bill today, not about to propose changes to other rules. Then tell me why you chose to put this bill with the nix fix when, in fact, the nix fix would have mine and your support, and this bill is going nowhere fast, other than utilizing the time that im utilizing now . Well, i believe i believe that both bills complement each other in keeping people safe. Because the statistics are very clear that, for example, in your state of florida, which has the largest number of concealed carry permit holders of any state and i want to make it clear to my detractors that im one of them. But go ahead. And i applaud you for that. But the fact of the matter is that studies have been done in florida, and that concealed carry permit holders have a an incredibly lower incidence of committing violence than the average citizen. Even offduty Police Officers. I really dont have the time to help dispel that myth. And i dont want to bore my colleagues. But i do want to use the Giffords Organization to compare florida to georgia, for example. Florida for concealed firearms license must demonstrate competence with a firearm. Through completion of a course or participation in organized shooting or military service. Not so in georgia. In florida, an applicant is ineligible for a license if he or she was convicted of using a firearm. Not so in georgia. A license will be denied if the applicant has been found guilty of any misdemeanor crime or violence in florida. Not so in georgia. The florida Crime Information Centers state maintains an automated listing of license holders and related pertinent information. Georgia law specifically prohibits the creation of a statewide database of licenseholders, which comes back to my original point of not being able to know who the carriers are. But in the markup, several of our colleagues offer matters that were defeated. And i find that abhorrent. The violent misdemeanor offense was offered by mr. Nadler to prohibit offenders who have been convicted of a violent misdemeanor in the past three years from carrying a concealed gun in a state where that conviction would otherwise disqualify them from carrying in public. It was defeated. Ms. Jackson lee offered an amendment to block Domestic Abusers and stalkers from taking advantage of proposed reciprocity. It was defeated. Miss lofgren offered an amendment to require an individual be a resident of the state from which their concealed carry permit is issued in order for the individual to take advantage of the bills reciprocity. It was defeated. Mr. Raskin of maryland offered protecting state Public Safety standards, very sensible measure. The amendment failed, despite democratic support, and it really failed by voice vote. My colleague, ted dor much, offered an amendment to ensure safeguarding of private property, asking that our Property Rights be protected. It was defeated. State laws with age restrictions, it was offered in committee. It was defeated. Highcapacity ammunition magazines offered by mr. Cicilline to prohibit a bill from allowing the carrying of highcapacity magazines for use with handguns. Defeated. State laws concerning handgun possession. Assaulting or impersonating a Police Officer. Restrictions on conceal carry on certain beaches offered by my colleague, mr. Deutsch, one that would allow managed by the army corps of engineers, not allow for guns to be on it. It failed. Animal cruelty, offered by mr. Deutsch, failed. Requiring periodic background checks and verification mechanisms. That failed. Respecting the laws of the district of colombia. We knew that one was going to fail. Hate crimes offenses. Ms. Jackson lee offered a measure, and we have had an increase everywhere in this nation of every kind of hate crime, and yet we could not have something offered and made a part of this bill. Driving under the influence. Background check requirements. All of these measures were defeated in committee. And i can tell you this. What we have in this country is a gun violence epidemic. And the evidence bears this out and one would think it does not bear repeating. But bills like this one come before us and it becomes quite clear that some folks up here either just dont care or are simply too beholden to the gun manufacturers and the gun lobbying. This bill, without a shadow of a doubt, will make it easier for Domestic Abusers and stalkers to commit murder. More than half of women killed by guns in this country were killed by intimate partners or family members. And let us not forget that federal law only blocks Domestic Abusers or spouses, dating partners and convicted stalkers are not covered. Many states have addressed this glaring loophole in federal law, and moved to block abusive dating partners. This bill would needlessly eviscerate these sensible laws. We sit in the wake of Mass Shootings after mass shooting. We sit in the wake of thousands upon thousands of dead People Killed by guns wielded by Domestic Abusers, and this is the bill we get . A bill pushed by the powerful gun lobbying gun manufacturers at the expense of policies. And dont think just because you attached this ridiculous bill to something sensible like strengthening nix means you have done something particularly clever. Just because you add a dash of sugar to a dirt pie doesnt mean youve got yourself something worth eating. I cant even begin to talk about the disappointment that im sure Many Americans feel. That we are here talking about gun laws with all of the problems that this nation is confronted with. And not dealing with gun epidemics. And going to do in this measure a bump stock study. You dont need a damn study. What you need is to stop that madness from allowing people to alter weapons to that extent. And dont give me that garbage about the Second Amendment. The people that did the Second Amendment had no idea we were going to be confronted with what we are confronted with in our society today. Things have evolved. And each one of these states, you all run in here time and time again, arguing states rights until it becomes sensible for you to do so. And now states rights dont matter. Youre going to override it in each one of the states. I offer, mr. Chairman, by unanimous consent, every towns analysis of overriding a conceal carry laws. Without objection. And id like to enter the giffords report that i spoke of, as well. I also am going to enter every towns conceal carry reciprocity focus to let Domestic Abusers carry. Without objection, it will be entered into the record. And the giffords federally mandate conceal carry reciprocity measure. Without objection. In addition, their mandated or conceal carry on gun violence. State smart gun laws would be dangerously undermined. Without objection, it will be entered into the record. In addition, every towns analysis of overriding state Public Safety laws, which is really very clear. Without objection. And i gather i dont need to put in the record, mr. Chairman, all of the matters dealing with the report itself. Obviously, were disappointed there were no hearings. And there should have been for something to allow for different views to be heard. Also want to put the cancer star article on the fine young man, caleb keater, that i recited from his tweet into the record. Without objection. In addition, the someone factchecked the chairman of the house. Ill leave that out. Bob goodlatte is my friend. I like him. But i think that this is insanity person filed for us to be up here dealing with something of this significance, and not dealing with the real issues. No one in this room can make me understand why anybody other than Law Enforcement and military people need to have an assault weapon. And i came here, we passed an assault weapons measure. Mr. Nadler was here. We worked on that measure, and it was done. And now we cant even get altered weapons to be addressed. How many more people have to be killed . How many more people have to commit suicide with weapons . How many abusers of women or men do we have to hear before we take action and do what is necessary to address the gun epidemic . There was a Surgeon General here, mr. Sacher. He literally got run out of town, because he made us aware that there was a gun violence epidemic in this country. Associated with a number of other epidemics that we are failing to deal with. Here we have an Opioid Crisis of magnanimous proportions. And what were up here talking about is allowing people to carry guns all over this country into places. I hope that none of your relatives, as some of mine have been killed by weapons. I hope that you think that because you are in a bar or you are in a concert or a theater that if 50 people have a gun and the Law Enforcement people are trying to find the one person doing the killing, i hope you think that that will not cause problems. But i can tell you, your thinking is faulty, and you are getting ready to help lead to further disasters. And i for one resent it. I yield back. The gentleman yields back his time. Any other member that would seek time . Mr. Chairman . Seeing none yes, maam. Mr. Chairman, if i might. I just want to reinforce some comments that mr. Hastings made, which is to, again, raise my amendments dealing with hate crimes and Domestic Violence. The rebuttal to the submission of these amendments is that theyre federal law. My point is that this is a freestanding bill that should be comprehensive on two of the most heinous aspects of a background of a intending conceal to carry individual. And would jeopardize the lives of individuals crossing state lines, as evidenced by charlottesville, and as evidenced by the military person who engaged in mass murder in one of our churches in texas. So i would ask my amendments on that issue to be made in order. And also with respect to a more detailed requirement of the military to submit data, too. Another point i want to make about mr. Hastings is the fact in the litany of questions, he evidenced the confusion that will come about with the concealed weapon. Whether it is broadway, whether it is the cathedral on fifth avenue, whether it is in the boston commons, whether or not its at the university of virginia, it is massive confusion for Law Enforcement to determine what you have is legitimate. And i just want to make the point, it seems that every horror story of killing, we have a sense of emotion. We were on the pathway of banning of bump stocks. I dont know why we stopped. Why we couldnt have a simple bill that would ban these bump stocks. And so what we wound up with is provision 206, that just requires the attorney general report on the use of bump stocks. We know what the use of bump stocks is. They use them in las vegas and 58 people are dead. So i dont know whether this puts an end to real legislation on bump stocks, but here we are. And so i hope my amendments would be able to be made in order. But i do agree that this is a very disappointing. With that, mr. Chairman, i yield. Yes, maam. I want to thank you so much. I hasten to say this at all, because im really not trying to engage anybody. But, mr. Chairman, i think what you did is you brought up a bill today that today is allowed by law by states that have already agreed to do this. I have not heard any bit of evidence that suggests that thats not working today in the states that do this. I think that what happened is that this would allow anybody that has a permit to be respected by another state. But you would still have to follow the laws of the state that you go to. If it said you cant walk into a building with one, you cant say, well, it was okay to walk into the State Capitol of texas, as it is, with a gun. But you can do it here. Thats not what this is about. What it is about is to respect that person that travels, that goes to another state, to respect that they have the license to follow the laws in the state that theyre in. And for anybody to think that i could get on a plane in dallas, texas, and fly to austin, texas, with my gun, that just is not the way it is. It is not that way. I would have to follow the laws whether i was going from dallas to washington or washington to dallas. Same as i was going to austin. So i dont know if this is as confusing as the pitch is today. I want to thank all three of you for being here today. Please remind you anything in writing will be left. I appreciate you very much. Thank you very much. Okay. Were going to go to the second panel, please. Mr. Nadler, thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, ms. Jackson lee. Were going to go to the next panel. Panel two. Mr. Schneider and miss titus. Brad, it was good to see you at dinner the other night. It was good to see you. I enjoyed that very much. And thank you for your not only insistence that we enjoyed the dinner, i enjoyed your presence and your company. Miss titus, delighted youre here. The gentle woman would note that both of you would be extended the privileges of whatever you brought to us in writing today. We would like for you to leave for the stenographer to complete the record. The gentlewoman is acknowledging. She may proceed. Thank you very much, mr. Chairman. As all of you know, just a little over two months ago, the deadliest shooting in modern u. S. History occurred in the heart of my district. 58 innocent people were killed, over 500 were injured. And the lives of thousands of friends and family members have been changed forever. Now, in the two months since that time, absolutely nothing has happened. Until today. So i was optimistic that maybe something would get done. But instead, im here listening to testimony, not about banning or regulating bump stocks, not about expanding or cleaning up background checks. But instead about expanding access to concealed weapons. I am like mr. Mcgovern. I just really cant believe it. And i dont know what to go back to my district and tell these people that congress is doing. And how little they care about the plight, not only of those 58 and their family and friends, but also of the hundreds who have been killed in this country since that occurred. Now ive sad here for hours and listened to testimony that, again, is astounding. We have parsed words about the difference between regulation and outlawing. We have heard ridiculous assumptions about how carrying a concealed weapon can make us safer. Well, i can tell you, those people at the concert would not have been safer if they were carrying weapons, because the shooter was a thousand feet away in a tallstory building. There is no way they would have made you safer. And so my question is, if this bill is so great, and you are so proud of it, and you want to pass it so much, why didnt you just bring it as an independent bill . Why did you have to tack it as a poison pill on to a bipartisan measure that had broad support from members of the congress, including myself, as a co sponsor, and all the organizations to try to get at a real problem and do the nix fix . Why did you tack it on . And frankly, thats kind of why im here. I didnt think i was going to be adding an amendment. But i just couldnt help myself. You know, we have we have seen through the course of this year and this congress this kind of behavior occurring over and over again. You have seen mysterious amendments appear, and other amendments that have been considered in committee disappear. Bills change from the time they are heard and passed by committee until the time they get to rules. It is no wonder that the people of this country do not trust what is going on back here in congress. It was just this friday that we learned that the fix nix bill, which is fix the National Instant criminal background check system introduced by my friend from texas, mr. Culverson, was now suddenly going to be added to the expanded conceal carry bill. For no apparent good reason, its just a matter of deception that goes on behind closed doors. So my amendment is very simple. It would just strike the entirety of title 1 of the bill, which is the conceal carry provision. You want that, go for it. But go for it on its own. Dont add it to our bill, which is a good bill. And it would also get rid of that socalled study of bump stocks. You know, youve heard a lot from other people before me about the problems with the conceal carry weapon provision. I wont go into that except to say my home state of nevada is still the wild west. We have pretty liberal gun laws and yet even we dont believe that teenagers are somebody who has been convicted of a Violent Crime, even if its a misdemeanor, should have the license to carry a concealed weapon. Excuse me. There is no evidence thats been no testimony that indicated that that was a fact. That what was a fact . Children are not allowed in any state to have a conceal carry weapon license. Thank you. Well, as i understand it, in nevada, the restrictions are at 19, and if you move across the state line to idaho, you would be able to carry a weapon. I think thats a fact. Were talking about conceal and carry license. Yes, i am too. Some states are 18. Thank you, mr. Schneider. An adult. An adult. Well, 18 well, i dont know. Ive seen some people who are in their 30s who dont act like adults. But 18, 19 is not usually considered an adult. You cant gamble at 18 in nevada. You have to be 21. But you can join the military. I appreciate that. And you can vote. Yeah. But still, i stand by the point that at 19, you cannot carry a weapon in nevada, but you can move to idaho and you can get a concealed weapon there. Carry a concealed weapon. Considered an adult. Not a child. Okay. At 19. Or 18. But anyway, nevada would have no choice but to recognize idahos law, even though it is more lax than nevadas. So youve heard all those arguments. My primary reason here is to split those bills. These are two separate issues. They the addition of the concealed weapon measure undermines the attempt to fix the reporting system, a system that needs to be fixed. And following the recipe of the judge here, adding a study about bump stocks is like building a monument. You wont do anything else, and a study like this wont tell you anything, because there is so little reporting of bump stocks. You want a study, come study those 58 crosses in my district. Then youll see what bump stocks do. So i just think you ought to split these bills. If you want them, go for them. Consider them. But dont add them on to something that might do a little bit of good. Miss titus, thank you very much. Brad, youre recognized. Thank you very much are. And thank you for the time to be here. I want to particularly thank mr. Hastings for your remarks. I speak here very personally. My hebrew name is samuel. Im named after my grandmothers brother, sam, who was murdered when a gunman walked into his office in 1942 and shot him four times. Called the police and waited for him to arrive. My grandmother had 18 grandchildren. My cousin jeff took his own life. He dealt with Mental Illness for a long time and was able to get a gun. Thank you. I understand many people come to this issue with their personal perspectives. I personally strongly oppose the reckless and dangerous concealed carry reciprocity legislation that this house is considering. Or preparing to consider. Its inconceivable to me that after more than 300 mass shooting events just this year alone. And daily gun violence in cities and communities across our country, were voting on legislation tweaking common sense restrictions that are already in place. Concealed carry reciprocity, i believe, undermines american gun laws by forcing states to accept carrier permitting standards of every other state, including some states that have no standards at all. My constituents want gun Safety Standards to protect our communities. Not to race to the bottom on a policy that puts our neighbors and neighborhoods and communities at risk. Illinois has common sense regulations on concealed carry permits. For example, if you had two or more duis within the past five years, you do not have the right in illinois to obtain a concealed weapons permit. In fact, a majority of u. S. States deny concealed carry permits to people with multiple duis. This is a deliberate decision about people who often are simply too irresponsible to carry a firearm in public. Yet this bill would steam roll over states laws, allowing multiple dui offenders to carry anywhere in the country, so long as they seek out any low standard or no standard permitting system that will issue them that permit. In a new study published earlier this year, researchers showed that among handgun owners, convictions for dui and other alcoholrelated crimes are associated with a major increase. Four to fivefold increase. In the latter risk of arrest for a firearm crime, or other Violent Crime. In other words, these convictions for dui are a serious red flag that a person is at risk of committing a future crime. States that have decided to bar these offenders have determined that they are too irresponsible to carry in public. And congress should not be overriding the decisions of these individual states. Today im offering an amendment to this legislation that allows states like illinois to continue to enforce their state laws, barring people with two or more dui offenses from carrying a concealed handgun. I urge this committee to allow a vote on my amendment so that states can continue to enforce their own common sense rules, preventing irresponsible concealed carry. Thank you very much. Sir, thank you very much. Miss lauder . I thank you both for being here. I know that you personally have the grief of easily available guns. So thank you for your testimony. I dont give you much hope for anything. But nonetheless, i was glad to have it here and have it on the record. Thank you both. Mr. Mcgovern . Well, as i said earlier, i think given the fact that there were no hearings on this bill, that at a minimum, if we want a fair fight here, as the chairman promised the ranking member, we ought to open this thing up so the members have an opportunity to offer their amendments. I agree with miss titus. The idea they attached a really, really bad bill to something that had bipartisan support just shows how cynical this place has become. But as i said before, this is not about good policy. I mean, i follow the money. This is about money. This is about the power of the nra. And quite frankly, this is another reason why we ought to be talking about Campaign Finance reform. We have to finally figure out a way to separate the money in politics from this system. Because it results in this kind of garbage being brought to the house floor. So i thank you both. And i hope your amendments are made in order. Thank you very much. The gentleman from florida, mr. Hastings. Thank you, very much, mr. Chairman. Both of you were very clear and its deeply appreciated. I wish your amendments were to be made in order. I dont think they are going to. And its kind of senseless for us to have good policy ruined by adding, as you put it, miss titus, poison pills. This is a very sad day for this country. And it gets sadder with more deaths and us not doing anything about it. I yield back. The gentleman yields back his time. Is there any member that would seek time . I want to thank both of you. I do recognize that both of you took a good bit of your time this afternoon to not only participate in the full hearing, but to take time to offer your thoughts and ideas. If i could please remind you to leave whatever you brought in writing for us and the stenographer will complete her job. Thank you very much. Thank you. I need to acknowledge that the gentleman from ohio, congressman jim jordan, came and told me that he did not have more time to spend this afternoon. But that he wanted to make sure that he knew that i would acknowledge that he asked that we separate the two bills, the nics, from the reciprocity bill, and that would be what his testimony would be about. I hasten to say that without regard for making that available. But it would be his idea. He did not bring written comments, but had that. And i acknowledged that i would bring that forward before the hearing was done. Are there any other members that seek to be heard on hr38 . Seeing none . This now closes the hearing portion. The chairman will be in receipt of a motion from the gentleman from distinguished gentleman from oklahoma. Mr. Chairman, i move the committee grant hr38, the conceal carry reciprocity act 2017 a closed rule. The rule provides one hour of debate, equally dividing the committee of the judiciary. Waves all points of order. The rule provides that an amendment and the nature of the substitute, consisting of the text of the rules committee 11545 shall be considered as adopted and the bill as amended shall be considered as read. The provisions of the bill as amended. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or without instructions. Thank you very much. I heard the motion from the gentleman from oklahoma. Is there amendment or discussion to that . Yes. Mr. Chairman, i have an amendment to the rule. I move the committee consider hr4477 and hr38 as standalone bills, granting each in open rules so all members have the opportunity to offer amendments to this incredible bill on the floor. It is shameful that we are considering a rule that combines the text of a partisan nrasponsored bill with a bipartisan bill to provide muchneeded updates for the National Background check system. The fix nics bill will help close dangerous loopholes that have led to countless deaths, and we should do everything we can to advance the bill, not sabotage its chance of becoming law. And i ask for a yes vote. Thank you very much. Youve now heard the amendment offered. Is there discussion . Seeing none. The vote will now aye . Aye. Those opposed, no . The clerk will poll the committee. Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Woodalls . Mr. Burgis. No. Mr. Collins. No. Mr. Byrne. No. Mr. Newhouse. Mr. Buck. Mrs. Cheney. No. Mr. Slaughter. Yes. Mr. Mcgovern. Aye. Mr. Hastings. Aye. Mr. Polis. Mr. Chairman. No. The clerk will report the total. Three yays, six nays. Could you tell me how mr. Newhouse were Washington State of washington is recorded on the slaughter amendment . Mr. Newhouse is not recorded. Okay. Does the gentleman wish to be recorded . I would like to vote no, sir. The gentleman is requesting that he be recorded as a no vote. Mr. Newhouse, no. Could the clerk please reprovide the total. Thank you very much. Three yays, seven nays. The amendment is not agreed to. Further amendment or discussion . Yes. I have another amendment to the rule. I move the committee make an order and give the necessary waivers for the amendment to hr38 by representative jackson lee, number 19, which would prohibit a person from carrying a concealed firearm across state lines if the individual has been convicted of Domestic Violence or stalking. Youve heard the amendment from the gentle woman, number 19, from texas. Is there a discussion . Seeing none, the vote will now be on the slaughter amendment. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed, no . Nos have it. Roll call, please. Clerk will poll the committee. Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Woodalls. Mr. Burgis. No. Mr. Collins. No. Mr. Byrne. Mr. Newhouse. No. Mr. Buck. Miss cheney. No. Miss slaughter. Aye. Mr. Mcgovern. Aye. Mr. Hastings. Aye. Mr. Polis. Mr. Chairman. No. The clerk will report. Three yays, seven nays. The member from massachusetts. I move the committee make an order and give the necessary waivers for the bipartisan amendment to hr38 by representatives moleton which would ban the manufacture, possession or transfer of any parts designed and functions to increase the rate of fire of a semi automatic rifle such as bump stocks and similarly functioning devices of a different name. I would say to my colleagues, the kick in the can down the road or this meaningless study that is in this bill doesnt suffice. Too many people are dying in this country as a result of this technology that turns these weapons into weapons of war. Turns them into machine guns, essentially. And, you know and i have been critical of this institution, because in the aftermath of massacres, all we do is have a moment of silence and move on. Today im critical, because what were doing is actually putting forward legislation that will endanger my constituents. And so i would hope this amendment could be made in order so we could actually maybe do something positive. And with that, i urge a yes vote. Thank you, very much for the discussion. Seeing none, the vote now on the mcgovern say aye. Those opposed, no. I ask for a roll call. Clerk will call the committee. Mr. Cole. No. Mr. Woodalls. Mr. Burgis. No. Mr. Collins. No. Mr. Byrne. No. Mr. Newhouse. No. Mr. Buck. Miss cheney. No. Miss yi. No. Mr. Mcgovern aye. Mr. Poll lis excuse me, im sorry. Excuse me before we report could you please tell me how the gentleman from georgia is recorded. The gentleman from georgia mr. Woodall is not recorded. Mr. Woodall, no. Three yeahs, eight nays. The amendments not agreed to for amendment or discussion. Seeing none the now be on the vote from the gentleman from oklahoma. Excuse me just a moment, please. Im sorry. I did not hear it. That is my issue. The gentleman from florida is recognized. Thank you. Yes, sir. It would be an understatement mr. Chairman for me to say that im not angry. Ive been on this committee along with ms. Slaughter and you for protracted period of time. I dont know a day that i have been as disturbed as i am today and ive been angry at other times but i really am beside myself about what we are doing here. All of us know that this measure isnt going to become law and ms. Slaughter and mr. Mcgovern have made it abundantly clear as have all of the members here that we have a lot of work to do. Its just its surreal to be in a setting like this and at the very same time to have exacting responsibilities. In addition to ourselves, 25 of the members of the house of representatives offered amendments to this measure. None of them are made in order. This is our agenda as published and i ask unanimous consent that it be made a part of the record so i wont read all of the amendments to you or any of them. Without objection. At least have it understood that the parliamentarian, the drafters of legislation, all of the people is have had to work and here we come to the 54th closed roll. Youve broken the record for the house of representatives and i just on a measure of this consequence, it would seem to me that you stand up and be prepared to vote if its your conscience then vote your conscience. If its your pocket book, then vote your pocket book but at least give everybody else a chance the amendment i would offer is one that was offered on that list, the agenda i just put forward, the number is 20. The woman that offered this amendment is a former police chief and we have quite a number of sheriffs and Police Chiefs here on both sides that this legislation if it were to become law is going to impact the Law Enforcement community in a significantly negative way. This amendment to the rule i move the committee make an order and give the necessary waivers for the amendment to hr 38 by representative val demmings as i indicated number 20 which would strike the provision that would allow persons from other states to carry concealed weapons in school zones. Thats the amendment, mr. Chairman. Ive got a question. Yes. Is there any state that allows any one with a concealed weapon to carry in schools or school zones . Mr. Chairman, there are states that permit weapons at schools and floridas legislature is prepared to under take excuse me. I strike that. I meant not colleges, i meant elementary, junior and high school. Most of us have gunfree zones, most of us in most of our states have drugfree zones around our schools but i think mr. Demmings as a former chief of police really understood the necessity for this particular matter. Yes, sir. The word schools i took to mean not colleges. I understand. Well, florida also has a proposal before our legislature to allow School Teachers at schools and other personnel at schools to carry guns. Floridas getting just about as crazy as some of the rest of yalls. Were if its against that state law that person who would be offered or reciprocation would still have to follow the state law that theyre in. Yeah. The problem, mr. Chairman, once the person is in the area, we are acting as if all of them are cult. The idea is were getting ready to let people carry concealed weapons whether theyre cult or not. Theyve been doing that for years but i was you made the point back to me and i respect that. Some of the states, alabama, arkansas, new hampshire, utah, rhode island, these all allow carry and conceal weapons in k through 12 zones. Wow. Okay. Further discussion . Vote will now be on the amendment from the gentleman. [ inaudible ] roll call vote. Mr. Coal. No. Mr. Woodall. No. Mr. Burgess. No. Mr. Collins. No. Mr. Burn. No. Mr. Newhouse . No. Ms. Chainy. No. Ms. Slaughter. Aye. Mr. Mcgovern . Aye. Mr. Hastings. Aye. Mr. Chairman . No. Clerk will report the total. Three eight yeahs, three nays. [ inaudible ]. Io iowa ayes have it. Mr. Coal . Aye. Mr. Collins. Aye. Mr. Burn. Aye. Mr. Newhouse . Aye. Ms. Chainey. Aye. Mr. Mcgovern . No. Mr. Hastings . No. Mr. Chairman . Yeah. The motion is agreed to. Mr. Collins from georgia the gentleman will be handing this from republicans. Mr. Hastings for democrats. Judge, you want to ask the question. What damage are we going to do tomorrow. Thank you very much. Tomorrow the committee will be meeting at 3 00. Were going hr 3971 the Community Institution mortgage relief act 27 the Small Business Mergers Acquisitions [ inaudible ] this completes our work for the day. Thank you very much. Tomorrow here on cspan3. A senate Judiciary Committee hearing on firearm regulations and background checks. The committee will hear from witnesses from the fbi. The bureau of alcohol tobacco and firearms and the u. S. Air force. Thats wednesday, live starting at 10 00 a. M. Eastern on cspan3. And thursday on cspan3 fbi testifies before the house Judiciary Committee. Thats live also at 10 00 a. M. Eastern. Sunday night on after words. Gold star father khan recalls his immigration from pakistan to the United States in his book, an american family. A memoir of hope and sacrifice. Hes interviewed by california krongman jimmy panetta. This is a common trait. Two things are really common among authoritarian mentalities and audience can draw the conclusion. One is that they dont like free press because free press criticizes them. Second thing is rule of law. They do not like judges, they do not like rule of law and that had given me such a perspective of not having any Civil Liberties to having all these dig knits and as we speak further, ill tell you what a moment it was when i went to take the oath of citizenship. I wish every american would at least read the oath of citizenship. It means so very much and it speaks the hopefulness, the dig anies that are enshrined in our constitution and bill of rights. Watch after words, sunday night at 9 00 p. M. Eastern on book tv. Up next, a conversation on north Koreas Nuclear weapons and Ballistic Missile programs including the role of china in dealing with north korea. President trumps tweets and the possibility for diplomacy with north korea. This was hosted by the u. S. Institute of peace. Welcome back, everyone. Its good to have you with us. Thanks for you all getting settled there. Welcome back. Its good to have you all with us. Its been 72 years since the world has seen the destruction caused by nuclear weapons, most people have no real sense of what a nuclear bomb means but this m