Transcripts For CSPAN3 Judiciary Hearing On Assault Weapons 20240714

The committee of the judiciary will come to order. Without objection the chair is authorized declare recesses at any time. We welcome everyone to this mornings hearing on protecting america from assault weapons. I will now recognize myself with an Opening Statement. Assault weapons have been repeatedly used of weapons of deadly violence on our citizens. In the last two years, las vegas, parkland, pittsburgh, midland and odessa have seen Mass Shootings at the hands of an gunman with assault weapons. Last month we added el paso and dayton to the list of communities to experience violence. Todays hearing is about whether america will tolerate weapons of war in our streets and neighborhood. Civilian assault weapons are just semi automatic versions of military weapons. They have no purpose but to kill as many as possible as quickly as possible. By allowing killers to rapidly fire targets without stopping to reload, assault weapons are designed for bloodshed. State laws have proven too easy to evade. This is one reason i support a national ban on assault weapons. For example, despite californias ban on assault weapons, a man was able to drive across the border into nevada to buy an assault weapon. A 75 round high capacity magazine plus five 40 round m magazines and used this to kill three people and wound 17 others in a matter of minutes. Gunmen intent on killing whether the target is one person or many can hop over state lines and return to kill others. We must examine this problem. A federal assault weapon ban that e pirxpired in 2004 was a watershed moment. Mass shooting fatalities were 70 less likely to occur compared to the periods before and after the ban. The study found the assault weapons ban was associated with a 25 drop in gun massacres and a 40 drop in fatalities. The ban however was not without its shortcomings. During the ban, the gun industry as usual putting profits over morality, they modified assault weapons that were technically legal. One ak47 clone, in spite of assault weapons ban im sorry in spite of Assault Rifle bans, bans of high capacity magazines, the ranting of the antigun media and the rifles of political correctness, the kalishnakov has flourished. Today theres probably more models and accessories to choose from than ever before. Closed quote. Boasting about how to evade the law. A law intended to protect human lives. As we consider how best to address the problem of assault weapons, we must examine the loopholes in the 1994 law that weaken its effectness. Although tassault weapons preset a far broader problems. The weapons pose a daily threat to our communities. Whether or not their particular use cause mass casualties or make national news. They hold a particular appeal to criminals who can wield terror without them even without causing loss of life on a wide scale. For too long, the response in congress to the daily toll of gun violence in our streets and our schools and places of worship has been moments of silence. Thats changed. Earlier this year, this committee reported and passed legislation to expand and improve our background checks system. This committee recently approved bills to establish systems for extreme Risk Protection orders, ban large capacity magazines and prohibit individuals convicted of hate crime misdemeanor from possessing firearmsi. Todays hearing continues the important task of addressing our Shameful National problem of gun violence. Today, well discuss assault weapons and examine options for dealing with these particularly dangerous weapons of war. Tomorrow, our subcommittee on crime terrorism and Homeland Security will conduct a hearing concerning Community Responses to gun violence in our cities. You must take a comprehensive approach to solving the National Crisis of gun violence. An issue that for too long has been ignored by national leaders. We know the American People want us to examine the facts and to find solutions. This hearing is an important step towards that goal. I would like to recognize the survivors and advocates here today, including those from newton, parkland, march for our lives and moms demand action. Thank you for your tireless advocacy, you inspire us all. I thank our witnesses for appearing today and i look forward to their testimony. I understand that the Ranking Member is on his way. Well proceed to witness testimony at this time and well recognize the Ranking Member for his Opening Statement when he arrives. Without objection, all other Opening Statements will be included in the record. I will now introduce todays witnesses. T nan whaley is mayor of dayton, ohio. Mayor whaley has been a leading advocate for gun safety legislation. Before joining city government, mayor whaley served on the montgomery board of elections and as a deputy to the Montgomery County auditor. She received our b. A. From the university of dayton. Dr. Tovar is a surgeon at el paso. After the mass shooting at a walmart in el paso, the doctor treated victims of the shooting. He received his m. D. From the university of texas school of medicine at san antonio. Dr. Bractney is the chief of police in charlottesville, virginia. She was the first africanamerican woman to oversee a special operations division. She received her b. A. And m. A. From ca Carnegie Mellon univers kristin rand is the legislative director for the Violence Policy Center. Before joining the center in 1994, she served as the counsel for consumers union. She received her b. A. From university of southern california. Amy swearer is a senior legal policy analyst in the center for judicial studies at the heritage foundation. She held position with the lancaster nebraska public defenders office. She received or bachelor of science and her jd from the university of nebraska. Dana mueller is the founder of the Grass Roots Initiative to bring one woman from every state to washington, d. C. To meet with lawmakers. Previously she served for 22 years in the tulsa police department. She received a bachelor of science in criminal justice and psychology from the university of central missouri. David chip is a senior policy advisor and is a member of the Firearms Committee of the International Association of chiefs of police. Prior to assuming his current position, he served for 25 years as a special agent for the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives. He received his b. A. From American University and his masters in management from Johns Hopkins university. We welcome all our distinguished witnesses and we thank them for participating in todays hearing. If youd please rise ill begin by swearing you in. Raise your right hand. What happened . Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testimony youre about to give is true and correct to the best ofbest of your knowledge, information and belief, so help you god. Let the record show the witnesses answered in the affirmative. Please note each of your written statements will be entered into the record in its entirety y. Ask you summarize your testimony in five minutes. To help you stay within that time, there is a timing light on your table. When the light switches from green to yellow you have one minute to conclude your testimony. When the light turns red, your five minutes have expired. Mayor whaley, you may begin. Thank you chairman nadler. On august 4th at 1 00 a. M. , the district was buzzlistling with Diverse Group of friends and neighbors. People hopped between bars and restaurants as last call approached. Others waited in line at a popular taco truck for a late night snack. That all changed in an instance. A man armed with an ar15 pistol variant walked down an alley between two bars and began spraying high velocity rounds into the crowd. He then turned down a crowded street as people tried to run for safety. Friends pulled each other into doorways to try to escape bullets. One man threw his girlfriend to the ground and covered her body with his own. People literally ran out of their shoes. Less than a minute later, nine people were dead, and 17 others had been shot. Dozens more were injured in the commotion. 32 seconds. In just 32 seconds, 26 people had been shot, nine families had lost loved ones, and dozens more will never be the same. The entire incident was over in half as much time as ive been speaking to you so far today. And those 32 seconds the shooters weapon did exactly what it was designed to do. Kill or injure as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. It was a weapon designed to inflict maximum damage to human beings. It left a trail of destruction not on some foreign battlefield, but down a Historic Brick street in dayton, ohio. I visited the crime scene the morning after the shooting. The thing i remember most clearly is the smell of bleach. A street sweeper was being used to try to clean the road and men in hazmat suits were scrubbing the sidewalks. The meat still sat on the grill of the taco truck. Bullets looked like they had been scattered without thought. I was in a place that was both completely familiar and completely foreign. The shooting occurred three months ago but our sidewalks are still stained after numerous power washes. Many buildings and street signs still have bullet holes in them. These are just the physical scars left by the shooting. Young people who were in the district that night talk about their new fear of crowds. Bartenders are consumed with anxiety at the sound of sirens. Neighbor dread the sound of fireworks after being awakened by gunfire. Our whole city is hurting. All because a young man with a history of violent ideas could get his hands on a weapon capable of such destruction. And, yet, we are lucky. Just 32 seconds after the shooting began, Dayton Police neutralized the gunman. He was killed as he attempted to enter a bar with hundreds of people were hiding. If he shot 26 people on the street in 32 seconds, what could he have done in that bar . We are so lucky that seven Dayton Police officers were less than a block away when the shooting began. Were so lucky that these officers relied on their training and their courage and ran directly into the gunfire. I have thought a lot about the bravery of the Dayton Police and the impossible situation that confronted them. Why do we ask our First Responders to face down weapons that can do so much damage in so little time . Our city has honored these heroes. The white house has honored these heroes. But if were serious about honoring and thanking our brave First Responders, the best thing we can do is make sure they are never put in this situation again. Police should not have to confront a weapon that can kill nine people in 32 seconds. No one should. The evening after the shooting, thousands of people gathered for a vigil on the same street where nine of their neighbors had died only hours earlier. When the governor took the stage, hundreds of people shouted in frustration, do something. Do something. The massacre that happened in dayton and has happened in too many communities across this country demands a response. We must insure that no american neither a young person on a casual night out nor a Police Officer on patrol has to face down weapons capable of so much destruction. Im here today on behalf of the citizens of dayton and mayors across the country to ask you to keep weapons like this off our streets. Im here to ask you to do something. Thank you, chairman. Thank you. Dr. Tovar . Chairman nadler, vice chair, Ranking Member collins and distinguished members of the house Judiciary Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to come before you today and participate in this hearing. Ive been a trauma surgeon and the trauma medical director at the Medical Center at el paso. On saturday morning august 3rd, i just finished a typical 30 hour shift at the hospital with the usual gallbladder surgery. I picked up mcdonalds on the way home looking forward to eating and getting sleep until sunday morning when i had to do it all over again. After i got home at 10 55 a. M. , i received a text message from my chairman of surgery who was out of town. Active shooter, walmart, unknown number of victims. Didnt think much of it. An active shooter alert a month earlier and the s. W. A. T. Team only brought in one person at a time. I texted two minutes later was sent to all surgeons in our group. If anybody is in el paso, go to the hospital. Theres an active shooter and well get at least four or five victims. By the time the text was sent, i would learn later the shooting was over in just about 20 minutes. And more than 20 people were killed, more than 20 were injured and countless lives would be changed. I ran red lights and sped to the hospital. I knew that most of these patients would require immediate surgery and i was trying to coordinate who would be there to help operate. By the time i arrived, each of our six trauma bays had patients, each needed surgery. A doctor was already in the operating room with one of them. The one that drew my attention was a patient with cpr in progress. She has been talking a few minutes before and now from a shoulder wound she was lifeless. My resident and i quickly and methodically cut open her chest to begin manual cardiac compressions. Three liters of blood immediately spilt to the floor. After working for several minutes, i knew our efforts were futile and i had to pronounce the time of death. Ten minutes after i arrived to the hospital. The look of disappointment in my residents eyes ate at me. We had more to do. Im not a military surgeon. But what i saw looked like a war zone. Gunshot wounds in the legs led to exit wounds greater a grapefute. Ive never seen anything like this before. How could a firearm create this type of destruction. The next woman had her pelvis shattered, multiple holes in her intestine were too extensive to be repaired. In damage controlled surgery, decisions have to be made to remove parts of the intestines when there are more pressing issues to be addressed. In this case, it was clear none of this intestine could be salvaged. We packed with temporary dressing, when she was stabilized and could return to surgery in a day or two to assess for any missed injuries. I treated countless patients with gunshot wounds from small firearms. In those cases, sometimes its difficult to find the holes because of how small they are and the clean cut appearance that looks like a pencil made them. Here, it was not so. We had patients coming in in the span of 34 minutes, the other main hospital in town received 11 patients. Seven of our patients went straight to the o. R. For surgery in a single hour. Most had to return to the operating room several more times. And their journey is not done. In the next few months, temporary colostomies, multiple orthopedic procedures will have to be performed and reversed and closed. In the aftermath, 22 people lost their lives that day. We did save 13 out of the 14 patients that arrived to us. But that first patient haunts me every night. I wish i could have done more. I blame myself for her death. I saw her autopsy recently to try to get some closure. She was protecting her child and so she was actually shot in the back and through her shoulder. She had a hole the size of a baseball at the top of her lung. Her vessels were essentially nonexistent. If this injury had been caused by a smaller firearm she might have had a chance of survival. But there was nothing i could do to fix that type of devastating injury. I hope she died knowing she protected her child from the same fate. Thank you, chairman. Thank you. Chief . Committee chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the u. S. House of representatives, committee on the judiciary. I bring you greetings on behalf of the executive board and members of the National Organization of black Law Enforcement executives, noble. As you know my name is dr. Brackney. Im the chief of police in charlottesville, virginia and all that brings with it. Its an honor for noble to provide written testimony on the topic of protecting america from assault weapons. No one is concerned about the level of gun violence in the United States and specifically the correlation between violence and the proliferation of assault weapons and high capacity ammunition magazines. Its our organizations opinion that violence, particularly gun violence is a Public Health issue. And as with all Public Health issues, it demands a comprehensive nonjudgmental pragmatic evidence based approach to saving lives and reducing injury. Noble along with other organizations such as the national Law Enforcement partnership to prevent gun violence of which were a member, is committed to addressing the pervasive nature of gun violence and its impact on communities across maent. Specifically, firearm related injuries and deaths to include homicides, suicides, and accidental shootings involving assault weapons is unacceptable. It depends immediate action. To be clear, nobody defines assault weapons as semi automatic guns with a high capacity ammunition magazine designed for military use. We advocate for limiting high capacity ammunition magazines to ten rounds and the regulation of new semi automatic assault weapons. In 2016, assault weapons accounted for one in four Police Officers killed in the line of duty through gun violence. Noble supported the Public Safety firearms use protection act or the federal assault weapons ban of 1994. And the federal assault weapons ban reauthorization act of 2004. We currently support hr 8, which is a bipartisan background check act of 2019. As does 90 of all americans. Assault weapons have been used in many Mass Shootings such as marge in parkland florida. The tree of life synagogue shooting. The las vegas Music Festival shooting and in el paso. We believe the level and the lethality of gun violence directed at Police Officers and our communities requires an organized and aggressive response from policy makers at the federal, state and local levels elected officials must commit to closing gaps in the current regulatory system, including those that enable felons, minors and other prohibited persons to access firearms and those that allow the trafficking of illegal guns. Law enforcement plays a central and Critical Role in preventing gun violence and solving crime. Effective strategies for the strict enforcement of laws concerning the illegal possession, trafficking, and criminal use of firearms are vital. We need to be supported by data, research, technology, training, and best practices. Because the Publics Health and safety depends on the efforts of Law Enforcement, agencies must have resources sufficient to prioritize the protection of officers and communities against guns and firearm violence. The crisis of gun violence in our country necessitates a sustained coordinated and collaborative effort involving the citizens, elected officials, lo Law Enforcement and the criminal justice system. On behalf of the Law Enforcement leaders of noble, we thank you for supporting Law Enforcement and our ability to maintain Public Safety while continuing to address the health issue of gun violence. Our members stand ready to meet the needs of our communities and the nation. And we thank you for the opportunity for you to do the same. Thank you, very much. Ms. Rand . Thank you, mr. Chairman and members of the committee for hearing the views of the Violence Policy Center. Were a National Educational organization working to reduce gun violence. Generally semi automatic assault weapons are civilian versions of military assault weapons. Semi automatic assault weapons look the same as their military counterparts because theyre virtually identical save for one feature. Military assault weapons are machine guns capable of fully automatic fire. Assault weapons did not just happen. They were developed to be welldefined combat needs. The most significant assault weapon functional design feature is the ability to accept a detachable ammunition magazine. The gun in the street introduced semi automatic versions of military assault weapons in order to create and exploit new civilian markets for these deadly weapons. The gun industry began to aggressively market assault weapons in the 1980s. And although the gun lobby today argues theres no such thing as a civilian assault weapon and nowu refers to them as modern sporting rifles. Gun magazine describe these as Assault Rifles, assault peweapo to boost civilian sales through the the 1980s. The industrys marketing of assault weapons has intenseified as the market for traditional hunting and sporting firearms has waned. Todays militarized gun industry is focused primarily on developing and marketing increasingly lethal assault weapons. The gun industrys Marketing Campaign stress that semi automatic assault weapons available to civilians are the equivalent of those used by the military. The industrys marketing materials are replete with military images and language. Ill just give you one example from fns 2019 catalog. Our Tactical Firearms are the stuff of legend. Every innovation is born in the battle front, built for the home front. The rise of public Mass Shootings directly coincides with the increasing availability of assault weapons and high capacity magazines. Prior to the 1980s, the United States very rarely experienced the trauma of a public mass shooting. That began to change in 1984 when james hubert decided he wanted to go hunting for humans at a mcdonalds in california. He wielded an oozy carbine and killed 21 and wounded 19. Now these attacks are coming with increasing frequency and higher death tolls. The impact of the industrys intensifying focus on military style firearms can be seen in the weapons chosen by todays mass shooters. For example, the shooter who killed nine and wounded 27 in dayton chose an ar type assault pistol equipped with a stabilizing brace. A relatively new trend in industry innovation. A major point i would like to make given this opportunity is that assault weapons are not just about Mass Shootings. The threat posed by these weapons is much broader than that. In fact, they pose a significant risk to Law Enforcement. The Violence Policy Center performed an analysis of unpublished information from the fbi and determined that one out of five Law Enforcement officers slain in the line of duty in 2016 and 2017 were killed with assault weapons. Assault weapons are the clear weapons of choice across border gun traffickers supplying criminal organizations in mexico and other latin america countries. We have an ongoing project looking t firearms seized in the context of these types of trafficking prosecutions and found that 55 of the 6,000 firearms named in trafficking prosecutions were assault weapons. And finally, assault weapons are yu yu used in street crime, which im sure youll hear more from Law Enforcement today. I want to address some items with respect to policy, a ban, the definition must be very clear in something the industry cannot evade. We must find a way to grapple with the grandfathered weapons. Those are the two major flaws with the 94 law. We need those to bedriese addre thank you very much, ms. Swearer. Chairman nadler and distinguished members of congress. My name is amy swearer. Just as doctors can only recommend an effective treatment plan if they first form a correct diagnosis based on assessment of the systems, policy analysts and policy makers must have an understanding of the societal problems theyre seeking to combat. Too many policy makers seem uninformed about gun and gun violence. Dont misunderstand me. We all want safer communities, but the characteristics distinguishing socalled assault weapons from nonassault weapons are not factors like caliber, lethality or rate of fire. Proposals to ban scary looking features like barrel shrouds or pistol grips are for all intents and purposes, proposals to force law abiding citizens to own guns that are harder for them to handle, harder to fire accurately and more likely to cause them injuries, even when theyre being used for lawful purposes. Moreover, semi automatic rifles are not a driving factor behind rates of gun violence. Two thirds of gun deaths are suicides. Gun crimes, over 90 are committed with hand guns. Rifles of any kind are used in 3 to 4 of gun hauomicides eve year. An american citizen is more likely to be stabbed to death. Despite claims that semi automatic weapons are the weapon of choice, in the last decade, over half of the shootings have been carried out with handguns alone. On the other hand, semi automatic rifles like the ar15 are so well suited for defensive action against threats in a civilian context that the department of Homeland Security quite literally designated them as personal defense weapons for Law Enforcement officers. Its Little Wonder then that millions of law abiding citizens in this country choose these types of semi automatic rifles as their own personal defense weapons. Far from needing to be protected from these rifles, law abiding americans benefit when theyre allowed today defend themselves with them, particularly in situations where theyre out numbered. Just last week, a homeowner in georgia relied ocn his scary looking assault weapon to defend himself against three masked teens. Ironically the rifle deemed an assault weapon was used defensively to protect innocent people against assault where the perpetrators used a nonassault weapon to commit assault. Some of the most famous examples come from scenarios where the government has been either unable or unwilling to defend entire communities from large scale civil unrest. During the 1992 la riots, for example, Law Enforcement was nowhere to be found as hundreds of looters ransacked korea town. Ordinary store owners took it upon themselves to defend their livelihoods from lawlessness using in many cases semi automatic rifles. Similar stories emerged from ferguson, missouri, in 2014. There are some here who dont understand why or how anyone would need such scary looking rifles for purposes other than mass murder. So i have permission from my mother to explain it to you by partially embarrassing here. My mother did not grow up with firearms and they will never be her favorite thing in the world. She never handled a firearm until i took her to the range for the first time several years ago. I love my mother, but like every other novice with a handgun she was quite bad. She struggled to hit a stationary target from six yards out under ideal conditions. Then she picked up an ar15. And i watched my mother put a fist sized grouping of lead from 20 yards out. Thats why law abiding citizens buy millions of these firearms. When stopping power and accuracy matter theyre simply better. Americans use firearmed to defend themselves between 500,000 and two million times every year. God forbid my mother is ever faced with a sharon whecenario has to stop a fight for her life, i home politicians protected by security didnt strip her of the firearm she can handle more competently. I hope she has in her hands the scariest looking assault weapon she can find so we can both be confident in her ability to end the threat. Thank you. Thank you, ms. Mueller . Details. Thank you, chairman nadler and Ranking Member collins. Ill acknowledge him even though hes not here. My name is Diana Mueller and im an ordinary american. One who has had different Life Experiences that bring me here today as a desceissenter of new control laws, including the assault weapons ban. After 22 years as a Police Officer with assignments that included patrols, street crimes, gang and narkcotics i retired a a professional shooter and ive had the honor to represent my country. Four years ago i came to this town as a tourist and during a haphazard meeting with my congressman i asked if there was anything i should be doing to dispel the information about guns and gun owners thats running rampant on capitol hill. From there, the d. C. Project was born and educational efforts and nonpartisan effort of 50 women, one from every state meeting their legislators as gun owners and Second Amendment supporters. We are as diverse as any Cross Section of america. Many of our women like victims of these mass public murders have endured unspeakable violence themselves or lost loved ones. Their stories are similar to kate nixons. It was reported that kate knew her coworker was unstable and felt he would shoot up the place. Here husband encouraged her to take a pistol to work. But she didnt want to break the rules. She followed the policy that was supposed to keep her safe, a gun free zone and she was murdered the next day in the Virginia Beach tragedy. These laws and policies are taking away a womans right to choose. Gun rights are womens rights. Thats why im honored to be here today to be a voice for the millions of americans who share american women who share my idealogy but are not represented in Mainstream Media or skquelched on social media. As a woman im smaller and less equipped or if im out numbered by people who may do me arm, my firearm levelled the playing field. Ia i married late in life and i spent the majority of my adult life sleeping by myself. There were so many nights that there were im sure its happened to you guys. But i have a piece becaueace be have a firearm by my side. Im worth protecting. My family is worth protecting. So why does anyone need an ar15 . Let me explain it in shoes. You wouldnt run a marathon in dress shoes and you wouldnt go to a formal ball in sneakers. Similarly, each of my firearms have a specific purpose. The ar15 just falls in the category of that really comfortable dressy shoe that gets called on on many occasions. Its my go to for home defense and vehicle gun as a competitor ive turned a hobby into a living and my husband hunts with an ar. The ar15 platform is the most popular general purpose rifle because its the most versatile and most customizable. Freedom doesnt ask why the need. To quote william pitt the younger, necessity is the plea for every infringeament of huma freedom. For 22 years i enforced the lawsiolaws you created. Its frustrating to see the revolving door of prosecutors reduce or drop charges. Al i find it ironic in todays effort of criminal justice reform. Laws youve already created, while at the same time proposing more laws that turn ordinary law abiding citizens like myself into criminals. How about holding the people accountable for the laws that are already on the books . Laws are already on the books before we pass any further legislation that would only be a burden on the law abiding. If these laws were the answer, chicago, baltimore, l. A. , and even this city would be the safest city in america. The Firearms Community is doingsomething. We are leading the way on meaningful safety measures. I implore you work with us instead of demonizing us. Lawabiding american gun owners are not the enemy. Help our community promote programs like project child safe, eddie eagle and the Kids Safe Foundation that teaches kids about firearm safety. Faster saves lives and School Shield are School Security programs and walk the talk america is Suicide Prevention programs. These are initiatives that are being driven by the firearms industry. If you really want to make a difference in gunrelated deaths, get behind these programs and fund them because we believe one life unjustifiably taken is one life too many. Lets put firearms education back in schools and start protecting our kids line we protect the people in this building. Education over legislation. Thank you for your time to speak thank you for the opportunity and thank you for your time and your service. Thank you. Mr. Chipman . Good morning, chairman. Members of the committee, thank you for letting me testify today. My name is David Chipman and i am the Senior Policy Adviser at giffords, the gun violence prevention organization. I am a gun owner and i served as a special agent for the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms and explosives for 25 years. Throughout my atf career i served on the front lines of our governments efforts to prevent Violent Crime and effectively regulate the firearms industry. I worked to disrupt firearms trafficking conspiracies along the iron pipeline, served on atf s. W. A. T. Team and later was in charge of the agencys firearm programs. My time as a federal Law Enforcement officer taught me although all weapons can be dangerous in the wrong hands, some weapons are particularly lethal and should be more strictly regulated. Our nations current gun violence crisis has made things two very clear. One, it is far too easy for violent people to get their hands on deadly weapons, and, two, the American People overwhelmingly Want Congress to act now to make their communities safer. Assault weapons are a class of semiautomatic firearms originally intended for military use designed to kill people quickly and efficiently. These weapons are often the weapon of choice for mass shooters. Assault weapons like the semiautomatic ar15 i used on atf s. W. A. T. Team are configured so a shooter can fire accurately and rapidly. Most importantly, they can accept detachable magazines. There is virtually no limit to the possible size of a magazine. This enables the shooter to continue firing as many as 100 rounds without having to stop and reload, maximizing the casualties in a shooting. Absent the ability to fire automatically, these weapons are identical to those used by the military. The public and many lawmakers, including many on this committee have called for a renewal of the 90sera assault weapons ban. As an atf officer charged with that law, there were both benefits and limitations. The 1994 act had a positive effect on Public Safety. Mass shooting facilities were 70 less likely to occur compared to the periods before and after the ban. The 1994 act suffered from notable limitations. The law did not regulate the transfer or possession of assault weapons manufactured before the laws effective date. Manufacturers took advantage of this loophole by boosting production of assault weapons in the months leading up to the ban. Consequently, while the law was in place assault weapons were regularly resold through private transactions undermine its effectiveness. However, we rarely saw the kinds of Mass Shootings we are seeing today. Since the assault weapons ban expired in 2004, the gun industry has continued to design and sell more dangerous weapons. For instance, during the 1990s, assault pistols like the tek 9 fired. 9 milammeter handgun rounds. Modern a. R. And ak pistols like the weapon used in dayton and earlier this year to kill a milwaukee Police Officer fire rifle rounds. We currently do not have a reliable count of how many assault weapons are in circulation. Estimates are in the tens of millions. If our goal is to balance the rights of responsible lawabiding gun owners and the urgent need to keep particularly dangerous weapons out of the hands of criminals, simply reinstating the 90sera ban on assault weapons is not enough. One option would be to require the registration of all existing assault weapons in civilian hands under the National Firearms act while banning the future manufacture and sale of these firearms. The nfa was enacted in response to violent gun crimes and the deaths of Law Enforcement officers during the 1930s. The nfa imposes an excise tax and registration requirement to possess certain weapons including silencers, sawedoff shotguns, short barrel rifles, machine guns and other particularly dangerous firearms. Applicants must pass a background check, provide fingerprints and a photo, pay a 200 transfer tax and region stir their nfa weapon with the atf. It would use an existing and effective regulatory structure that allows lawful ownership while also addressing the Public Safety concerns. For more than 80 years this regulatory system has worked effectively. Legally owned nfa weapons are rarely used in crime. I have built my career around the belief that it is possible to balance rights and responsibilities. Ive stood in the face of danger to protect Public Safety carrying an assault weapon. It is simply unacceptable that militarystyle and highpower weapons are so readily available to citizens today and contribute to the loss of lives. Thank you for considering my testimony today and i look forward to your questions. Thank you very much. The Ranking Member, the gentleman from georgia, has arrived and well hear his Opening Statement before we begin questioning under the fiveminute rule. Gentleman from georgia. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for your indulgence today. Thanks for holding this hearing on the socalled assault weapons. Lets hope todays hearing well all have a better understanding of these types of rifles and are used in committing crimes, particularly murder. I hope we can also have an open and honest dialogue about the firearms my colleagues wish to ban. I hope we can avoid the rhetoric that has plagued this discussion for decades. Only when were equipped with the facts can we mobilize to prevent Violent Crime. Assault weapon, when the term entered the american lexicon. Many attribute the invention of the term to josh sugarman, the boss of one of our Witnesses Today. In 1988 he stated assault weapons just like machine guns and plastic firearms are a new topic. Versus semiautomatic assault weapons, anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun. Can only increase the chance for public support on restriction of these weapons. Few people can envision practical use for these weapons. Assault rifles are rapid fire magazinefed rifles designed for military use. They are shoulder fired weapons that allow the shooter to select between semiautomatic and fully automatic, allowing the operator to hold the trigger as the gunfires continuously and or in threeshot bursts. The socalled assault weapons are semiautomatic. They arent Assault Rifles and they cant be used as a fully automatic Assault Rifle. Semiautomatic rifles require you to pull the trigger each time per shot, just as a pistol. Unfortunately, many in the American Public and in the media and shockingly in this body do not understand the difference. We must understand what different firearms do and how they function if we want to have effective laws to prevent gun violence. I cant imagine anyone here today would advocate for legislation that doesnt actually make our families safer but thats what i fear were headed for. As one member of this committee has conflated the term sexual Assault Rifle and assault weapon multiple times. As we dive into these conversations, lets clear up another popular misconception. The a. R. In ar15 does not stand for Assault Rifle. Rather, it stands for armalite rifle. They are semiautomatic rifles that function similarly to hunting rifles where the operator pulls the trigger to fire each shot. The differences between these guns are largely cosmetic. Sadly, this information comes from many sources. A state senator from california stated it has the ability this is their term, not mine, a. 30 caliber clip, should be a magazine, to disburse 30 bullets in a half a second. Either thats a blatant misrepresentation or an indication of shocking ignorance. Even a fully automatic militaryissued m 4 cannot fire at such a rate. Another member of the Committee Said i held an ar15 in my hand, i wish i hadnt. These kinds of bullets need to be lie sensed and do not need to be on the street. This is a brief statement somehow manages to make several basic factual errors. An ar15 weighs between 6 and 7 pounds, fires a. 223 caliber of ammunition. It does not fire. 50 caliber. Anypla i hope we can clear up the misconceptions in todays hearing. However, my hopes are not high. When we have a democratic president ial candidate say hell yes were going to take your ar15, lets hope cooler and more rational heads prevail today. Some estimate and calculate the number of assault weapons in private hands at around 10 million. In 2017, according to the fbi, there were 403 murders committed with all rifles. Not just those deemed to be assault weapons. By comparison, knives and cutting instruments were used in 1,591 murders. Hands, feet, were used in 696 murders. At the same time, the national highway traffic and Safety Administration found speeding killed 9,717 people, yet i do not see any of my colleagues advocating for the prohibitation or purchase of a vehicle traveling more than 70 miles an hour. My friends, if were going to have this debate and we should, we must be honest with each other and take time to learn basic facts about the items were looking to ban and also the result of what that might actually incur. Thats not too much to ask and hopefully the Witnesses Today can assist with that task. With that, i yield back. I thank the gentleman. Well now proceed under the fiveminute rule with questions. Ill begin by recognizing myself for five minutes. Ms. Rand, there are certain features that distinguish assault weapons from hunting rifles. Earlier this month this committee reported out a bill by representative deutsch that would ban large capacity magazines. During the 1994 ban, people got around the ban by various means. How should we define an Assault Rifle that we might want to ban in order to get around the easy the adaptability of such weapons by putting on various parts of it some other way . Thank you for your question, chairman nadler. I think the major problem with the 94 law is that it defined an Assault Rifle, for example, by the ability to take a detachable ammunition magazine, which is the most important and most deadly feature, and then require two additional listed Assault Rifle features such as a pistol grip on or a bayonet lug. And basically what the industry did was take off one of the more spur flus factor like a bayonet lug but they could retain the pistol grip, which allows the shooter to have better control during rapid fire. So if we go to whats known as a one characteristics test and clearly define those characteristics that define an assault weapon, also include assault pistols and shotguns, we would be on much firmer footing. They would eliminate the weapons we commonly refer to as assault weapons that can cause these mass casualties. Yes, i believe a good definition coupled with an effective magazine ban, you cannot overstate the importance of a magazine ban, would do the job to ban assault weapons. Thank you. Mr. Chipman, assault weapons have become the favored weapon for many mass murders. These weapons are also preferred by individuals who commit crimes in our communities. What impact did the 1994 assault weapons ban have on improving Public Safety in general. What could we expect if we repeated that in a more effective fashion. I think there are two things involved. First, when looking at Mass Shootings, i see 70 less likely to be killed in a mass shooting during that period. When i was at atf what i did see is an impact on the availability of assault pistols, which we were seeing more daily as a thread to everyday gun violence on the streets, things like the tek 9. And i think that what we would expect to see in the the future is splimilar declines over time. It enhanced Public Safety. It certainly didnt make the streets more dangerous, which is often the claim if we didnt have those weapons available to the public. Thank you very much. Doctor, what does a gun shot wound from an assault weapon look like compared to a wound from a handgun . What additional challenges did you face in the aftermath of the el paso attack. These largecaliber cartridges, bullets, had serious cavitation what does cavitation mean . What do you mean by that. An effect with the bullets and a temporary cavitation effect kind of like a blast effect that is internal as well. With my experience with handgun gunshot wounds, which travel in a lower velocity, i see its straight through and through and not as significant of damage that can be readily identified and fixed in the operating room. I havent seen anything like this before. This mass shooting. And i havent seen anything since then. And thats because of the greater velocity of an Assault Rifle bullet . Thats my understanding, yes. Thank you. Mayor, i commend you for your leadership in the wake of the dayton shooting. Beyond physical injuries or death what effect did the mass shooting have on your community. Thank you, chairman. The effect has been long term, particularly for the trauma the communitys dealing with even today. Other mayors experienced this in their communities as well. Like the mayor of pittsburgh and parkland, et cetera. Any time another shooting happens in the in the country, the whole Community Goes through the shooting again. Weve seen that already, unfortunately, with the midland and odessa shootings and we know that the Mental Health work well need to do will take years for us to really make sure that people have the services they need. This is an area of town where young people and people of great Diverse Community come together and, you know, were really concerned that they dont have, you know, medical access to the Mental Health services they need and were trying to provide those even today. Okay. Thank you very much. My time is expired. I recognize the Ranking Member, the gentleman from georgia, mr. Collins for his questions. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Ms. Mueller i have a question. Can you i mean, just in general what youve heard already this morning, some of the misconceptions we frequently hear in this discussion surrounding what we call a socalled assault weapons. Ill get this down before we end. Some of the things ive heard here today were talking about cosmetic things. I disagree with what ive heard today because a. 22 rifle that everybody may have seen as a brown stock and something that your father may have given you, we can turn that into an a. R. Platform and it look like an a. R. Platform and you would think this is a weapon of war. These are cosmetic differences and they do not make it any different can i stop you right there for a second. Is it not true historically that all weapons come out of war . Well why are we continuing to say that this is a weapon of war . All weapons come out of war. Correct. Well, my point is that any firearm is lethal, is lethal force, so our community is all about safety and trying to educate people into how to, you know, being responsible gun owners. Were not for i think the issue here is when you came out, you know, flint, you know, muzzle loader, you come into the bolt action with world war i. They were started for protection and enforcement, whether it be in Law Enforcement or war. They come from the idea that all of a sudden they jump from war to the streets is when they came home from world war i, they wanted to use what they used in world war i. This is what they used for hunting. This is where it progressed. Do Assault Rifles shooter any faster than any other semiautomatic . No, sir. You served as a Law Enforcement officer during the previous time of the assault weapons ban. Did it have any impact on your safety as a Law Enforcement officer or those you were sworn to protect . No, sir, i was before, during and after the previous assault weapons ban, and i saw zero effect on me personally and i believe the fbi statistics stated that it was ineffective and therefore i believe you guys let it sunset. Last week this committee passed on a Party Line Vote a red flag law. Do you have any concerns with what this committee reported, and if so, what are they . Thank you for your question. So ive written fairly extensively on red flag laws, and while i agree there may be a place for targeted intervention for people who are objectively dangerous due to Mental Illness or other reasons, there are serious concerns with such policies that have recently come out of this body. Part of that is a complete lack of due process. We are talking about taking away even temporarily a fundamental constitutional right. There need to be very high burdens of proof. There need to be objective narrow measures as to whats constituting dangerousness. There need to be with regard to things like ex parte orders quick followup, not allowing people to wait 30 days before they have their hearing after already infringing on their Constitutional Rights. We need to ensure that there are provisions for the restoration of those rights and things like that are vitally important and they are not measures that ive seen adequately imposed in many of these bills. And im sure you followed this from last week. We really took two bills and we did what we do up here a lot and sandwich it into the same bill, which created a lot of problems, and i think one of the issues was jurisdictional influence, form shopping, is that concerning in what was passed out here than would actually solve anything were looking at. My understanding is the one that would be passed would it would essentially be statetype grants. It did until we added a federal side. When were looking at federal type of red flag laws, one of the big things should be followup in terms of, like, Moment Health treatment, you know, ensuring that people have a right to, you know, have their rights restored to them. So part of the problem is jurisdictional. You dont have that at a federal level the way you do at a state level, and, frankly, its not really a federal jurisdictional type of issue. And i appreciate that. I appreciate, you know, the conversation about the. 22. As many bullets down into an old log as quick as anything else and its 50 years old. It is not a brandnew gun. I appreciate what you do for your community and as someone who was a part of our response in iraq, i was in the hospital, i saw these from ieds and everything else. Your testimony is very compelling on this, but isnt it true also that a. 357 magnum and a hollow point bullet would cause catastrophic damage that youve seen also from a a. R. Its my understanding, yes. Cavitia cavitiary lesions from those weapons as well. If y but they are similar and i think thats the only point i was trying to make, similar concussions from guns that nobody is talking about taking away here. Theyre very similar. Thank you for your testimony. Thank you for your work. I yield back. Thank you, mr. Chairman. On july 28th a shooter in gilroy used a wasener arrangement semiautomatic rifle called a wasr10 which is a variant of an ak47 and had a 75round drum magazine and five 40round magazines as he carried out his attack. Now, the sale of this firearm and highcapacity magazines are actually banned in california, but he went over to nevada, bought them there and brought them back to gilroy. You know, he he killed stephen romero, age 6, who lived in my district and kyla salazar who was 13 lived in my district and trevor irby and he injured seven others and he did that in under 60 seconds because the gilroy police, who were outgunned, actually ran up to him and in less than a minute they shot him and then he shot and killed himself. So i really am grateful to the gilroy Police Officers, but i feel a need to take action so that you cant have a weapon that can do so much damage in under 60 seconds and kill innocent people who have a right to be able to go to a familyfriendly festival and not be in fear of their lives. You know, after that, mayor, i heard your testimony about the impact on a community. Its very real for the people who were there for their neighbors, for their fellow parishioners and their friends, but, really, its a whole community. The next weekend there were familyfriendly festivals that were cancelled because people were afraid to go out in public. Paris and so we have created here a situation where, you know, the kind of thing that i had growing up, where i could go to a park or a Grocery Store or walk down the street and not be afraid, thats not the case anymore. And we have an obligation so that to make sure that americans have that same level of freedom that they had when i was a young person, and we failed in that. And thats why were having this hearing today. You know, i was interested, mr. Chipman, your long experience in the whole Law Enforcement weapons area. Have assault weapons become more lethal since the expiration of the 94 ban . Certainly ive seen a big leap in assault pistols. As i said in my opening testimony, on the streets during the 80s and 90s we were facing tek 9s that carried handgun rounds and now a blatant attempt to work around the intentions of the National Firearms act and the regulation of short barrelled rifles you can get ak and a. R. Pistols which werent used in war, they were developed to kill people here domestically. I dont think i know any common gun owners who look to that as a great selfdefense weapon, but they fire rounds that leave devastating wounds and we saw that in dayton. Theyre outside the norm and theyre more lethal. Now, im wondering, i mean, when i think about california and the actions taken by the state legislature and governor to make the state safer, do you think state laws are sufficient given that, as in gilroy the shooter can just cross a state line and get something banned in his own state . We need a National Comprehensive approach. I was just out in denver, and were talking to people there focused on the issue of gun violence. Half of their crime guns come from other states. Many of the crime guns in chicago that we heard talked about earlier are coming from states like indiana, and thats from firearms trafficking. If we had comprehensive and universal laws and approaches to regulation at the national level, there would not be this interstate travel to go and work around the law. Its really no different than when we had different drinking ages. Kids would go to another state to get buy underage. So i think thats why its important for us to be as federal authorities making decisions for the country as a whole. Well, i thank you for that, but there is a difference because a 19yearold going to drink in new york is a lot different than a 19yearold going to nevada and killing children in gilroy. I yield back, mr. Chairman. Absolutely. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Chabot is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I wasnt yet a member of this body when the 94 gun ban was passed. I was elected that year and sworn in the following year, but as a strong supporter of the Second Amendment, i would not have voted for that at the time. And i would note that when the socalled assault weapons ban was in place it was 94 to 2004. I would note that that is when the columbine shooting took place, right in the middle of that, i think it was 99 if im not mistaken, and i think contrary to the majoritys belief, there is really no conclusive evidence that the weapons ban had any appreciable effect on Mass Shootings or Violent Crime. Ms. Weir, would you want to comment on that . Is that your understanding as well . Thank you, congressman. That is my understanding and that was the understanding of the those who released the official report after the ban expired. What they actually found was that should it be renewed it would be unlikely to have any meaningful or measurable effect. In part because, as i noted previously, these types of firearms are rarely used to commit crimes in the first place. Its actually handguns and nonassault weapons that are historically and still to this day most often used to commit crimes. Thank you. Ms. Mueller, you served as a Law Enforcement officer in i believe tulsa, oklahoma, is that correct . Yes, sir. Thank you for your service. And when you were a Law Enforcement officer that was during the assault weapons ban, when that was in place, is that correct . Before, during and after. Okay. And given your experience, would you agree with ms. Weir relative to whether there is any evidence that we are any safer as a society, as a community when that was in place . What are your thoughts about that . Yes, i would agree with her. Personally, professionally, i had zero it had zero impact on me. I saw no difference before, during or after the beginning or the end of the assault weapons ban from 94 to 04. Thank you. Ms. Mueller, could you describe some of the misconceptions that you frequently hear when it comes to the discussion surrounding socalled assault weapons . One of the things when we talk about weapon of war, i hear it being a weapon of war. First of all, war anything can be used as a weapon when youre in battle, i suppose, but the ar15 specifically, i have friends that have served in combat roles and they have told me that that is not a desirable round. They do not like the ar15, the. 223 or the. 556. This is their personal opinion, but they would pretty much prefer to carry a. 308 or something with greater stopping power. Thank you. And the guns that were discussing here this morning, do people use these for to hunt . Do they use them for selfdefense . Are they suitable for both . Could you comment on that . Yes, sir. We certainly use them in my family. We use them for both. And i will have to be the lawabiding citizen that does have a pistol a. R. And i choose that because it is more compact and it does give me the greater capacity and the more its just a better defensive firearm and it fits better in my car and in my vehicle that im traveling in, so its a little bit easier to move around but i get the same advantages of the a. R. Thank you very much. Ms. Weir, let me go back to you if i could. What do you believe are the major motivations behind the Mass Shootings that weve seen and is it your opinion that we ought to be focused on whats actually causing these things as opposed to what were focused on here today . Congressman, that is absolutely my opinion, and it is very clear when you look at mass public shooters what you see is much higher rates of untreated serious Mental Illness. So people who either like 1 4 of mass public shooters have been decidi diagnosed with a serious Mental Illness. What youre actually seeing is people who are not in a mentally stable place, even if they havent been officially diagnosed with any sort of Mental Illness. These are by and large individuals who are not in a good mental place who are showing clear signs of being a danger to themselves or others where, you know, there is room for intervention with them. So that is one of the avenues we have to look at is how do we actually treat those underlie problems and intervene in an effective, narrow way, specifically for those dangerous individuals. Thank you very much. My time is expired, mr. Chairman. The gentleman yields back. Mr. Cohen is recognized. Thank you, mr. Chair. Let me ask mr. Chipman, as a former iecp person myself, a Legal Adviser a long time ago. These companies are made by lots of companies, is that not correct . That is correct. So is colt the exclusive manufacturer of ar15s . No, they are not. We have a variety of ways that you can acquire an ar15 model. There are imported ones. But colt has decided not to produce anymore, manufacture anymore, is that right . They described the market as flooded and my understanding is its flooded by foreignmade or the ability to make your own now. Would any of those be coming from russia . The russian model im familiar with is an ak variant. Ak 47, are they sold here . Theyre not only sold here, theyre manufactured in this country if youre talking about kalashnikov. How long has that been manufactured here . I dont im not certain. Okay. A few years ago i was in russia, maybe three years ago, and there was an effort then by the russian government to try to change our policies and get more kalashnikovs sol kalashnikovs sold in this country. This was before the election of president trump. I was there during obamas term. Im aware that Companies Like kalashnikov found it add ven day judge to build the guns here in america to not have to deal with some of the import issues. And was there a restriction on them manufacturing here . Im not aware. Okay. Do you know anything thats happened during the Trump Administration that night have benefitted kalashnikov . I am not. Okay. Do you know the official position of the iecp on assault weapons . For many years they have opposed the and supported a ban on assault weapons. And why is that . I think first as a Law Enforcement organization they saw a threat to Law Enforcement and also were responding to these scenes. We are i think 200 offduty officers were in las vegas being shot at. I know there were atf agents. We have families, too, and so i think it comes from a place that police are members of our communities and they want to do a good job and keep streets safe and these are particularly lethal and threatening when in the wrong hands. But mr. Chipman, how can you say that with a straight face when you realize one good man with a gun could take out that person. Yeah, i was trained to be that person, and i think thats a big myth. I think the first thing i learned when i was trained with secret service is you dont have enough time to pull your gun. You need to get in the way of the bullet and get shot. So i think thats what we see, is the reality is any time youre responding to a shooting, a lot has happened very badly and we cant have National Policy relying on winning gun fights. We need to focus on preventing them. I appreciate you recognizing my sarcasm. Chi chief, do you agree in your group that assault weapons should not be sold in this country . Absolutely. Whats disingenuous is were arguing about terminology. When youre looking down the face of a highpowered, highvelocity weapon, do you want to ask is it an ar, ak and can you pull it one trigger at a time, is it a semiautomatic or is it something more . I also say the same thing, when were talking about even pushing back against the only person that can stop a bad person with a gun is a good person with a gun. Actually, what stops a bad person with a gun is keeping a gun out of their hands to start with. Ask that from any Law Enforcement officer who has ever had to look down the face of a barrel. Go tell that to their families, their widows, widowers. Tell that to the communities and the persons from all of these Mass Shootings that were going to argue about definitions versus the impact that its having on our communities. I know this hearings about assault weapons, which is extremely important, but there is also armor piercing bullets. Do you also agree that armor piercing bullets have no place in our society . Absolutely. Theyre actually dubbed cop killers is originally how they were put out on the streets and thats because they could pierce through our bulletproof protective gear, our personal protective equipment. So absolutely. The organizations that i represent and am a part of, perf, iecp, noble and all the other ones, we stand firmly behind that there is no place in society for the type of weapons that can do the type of damage to not only Law Enforcement but to the community at large. Mr. Chipman, you agree with that . Thats the iecp position . Yeah, absolutely, and there are ammo to defeat armor like military armor and rifle rounds that defeat ballistic vests that we rare to defend against handgun rounds. I thank you for your testimony and your service. I stand with the police and the sliv Sheriffs Department and not with the nra. Yegentleman yields back. Mr. Chairman, thank you. You know, i would disagree with what has been said here. One of the problems we had last time, and i was here when this was passed, was making proper definitions. So if we want to achieve this goal we have to have those definitions done correctly. Now, ive heard a lot of the arguments on this, and a lot of it revolves around what the firearm looks like rather than how the firearm works. And it seems to me that the problem is how the firearm works. Now, fully automatic militarystyle rifles have been illegal for somebody to buy since the 30s except with a very, very hard to get permit from the atf. Rifles that are semiautomatic are legal for hunting in most if not all states. I havent gotten this up to date yet, but there are a lot of semiautomatic hunting rifles that state dnrs or fish and game regulators feel are sporting rifles. I dont think we have any business here taking away hunting rifles from people who are not disqualified from owning them and people who think that hunting is a good sport. I am not a hunter, so i, you know, i dont go out and sit in the cold during the deer hunting season. But, you know, lets, you know, define this correctly. I would like to, you know, ask, you know, some of the people who support banning, quote, Assault Rifles to tell me, you know, do you think that hunting rifles ought to be banned if they are semiautomatic . Lets start with you, mayor whaley. Thank you, representative. My point here today is just to reiterate that Constitutional Rights require a responsibility and balance, and the people of dayton also have the right to be can you give me a yes or no answer on whether hunting rifles ought to be banned if we dont define this correctly . I think that this body will define this correctly whats your opinion . Youre asking what our opinion is. Dr. Tovar, we got no answer from mayor whaley on whether hunting rifles should be banned. Let the record state. The question is should hunting rifles be banned . Is that the question. Yes or no. I agree there should be a definition of what a socalled Assault Rifle is. Just answer the question. You know, if you had this definition, you know, of a semiautomatic firearm that looks bad because, you know, its got a, you know, a shoulder thing and something that, you know, people can i dont own and firearms so im not defining this correctly. I was not elected to sit here, you know, and tell people who like to hunt that all of a sudden the firearm that they have been using legally according to state dnr regulations, you know, ends up being banned because we in congress thinks it should be. Should we write a definition that is so broad that hunting rifles will be banned . Yes or no . I think a definition should be made as terms of what should be legal and what should not. Okay. Well, youre not answering the question. Chief . Yes or no thank you for the question. I believe any weapon that can be used to hunt individuals should be banned. Well, thats not what the virginia dnr says. Ms. Rand . We think that you can clearly distinguish Assault Rifles from sporting hunting rifles, and just because you can hunt with an ar15 does not make it a hunting rifle. Having said that, we do not support a ban on true hunting rifles. Okay. Well, ill put that down as a question mark. If the question is whether whether hunting rifles should be banned just because they are semiautomatic, the answer is no. I would point out that, again, when were talking about functional difference between hunting rifles and assault weapons, were not talking about lethality and were not talking about caliber, were talking about things like pistol grips and barrel shrouds that dont change the functional mechanics. No, we shouldnt be banning hunting rifles because they have a pistol grip. Ms. Mueller and then my time will be up. No. I yield back. Gentlemans time is expired. Id like to briefly id like to briefly address the members of the audience in the hearing room. We welcome and respect your right to be here. We also in turn ask for your respect as we proceed with the business of the committee and its the intention of the committee to proceed with this hearing without disruptions, and we ask everyone to respect that. Mr. Cicilline, youre regular niced for five minutes. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for holding the first hearing on assault weapons in 20 years. There is a reason assault weapons have become the weapon of choice for mass killers. Theyre weapons of war designed to kill as many people as possible in as short a time as possible. To take the lives of nine people and injury 27 more people in less than a minute in dayton, ohio. Just one day earlier a gunman legally purchased an ak47 style and within minutes killed 22 people and injured 27 in a walmart in el paso. On july 28th, 2019, a gunman legally purchased an assault weapon weeks before killing three people and wounding 12 people at the gilroy garlic festival in california. Despite the Quick Response times, 34 people were killed within a weeks time and 60 more people injured. This does not even begin to account for the Mental Health consequences these shootings have on survivors and the impacted communities. I want to welcome all the wonderful advocates who are here. The family members who have lost loved ones to gun violence. Thank you for being such powerful voices in this debate. I want to particularly thank mayor whaley for her grace in a very difficult time. I reintroduced the assault weapons ban of 2019 to address the harm that meetings have on our communities and keep the American People safe from senseless acts of violence. This Bipartisan Legislation with 211 cosponsors prohibits the sale, transfer, manufacture or importation of semiautomatic weapons and ammunition feeding weapons capable of feeding more than ten londons and protecting hunting rifles. There are weapons exempted in the bill that are sporting rifles and so this notion were going to ban hunters is false. Had the legislation been passed and signed into law it would have prevented the tragedies we witnessed in dayton, el paso and gilroy. You would think the assault weapons ban is some radical idea thats never been done before. The truth is it was the law for ten years, from 1949 94 to 2004. It passed the house with 38 republican votes. It worked. And no lawabiding american lost their guns. In Mass Shootings, 63 more people were killed when shooters use assault weapons and highcapacity weapons rather than other types of firearms. During the tenyear period of the assault weapons ban, mass shooting facilities were 70 less likely than when the ban was in place. With a ban its less likely that americans will be killed while at their favorite band concert, hanging out at a bar with friends, praying at their places of worship, while simply going to school. Instead of attacking the problem of Mass Shootings head on were building schools with curved hallways to minimize casualties and sending our kids to school with bulletproof backpacks. This is sickening. We have an opportunity to do something, we have a solution, one that worked and made a real difference. Ms. Rand if you look at this 2006 study from the university of massachusetts at boston, he analyzed data on every gun massacre where six or more people were shot or killed for 50 years to analyze whether the tenyear ban on assault weapons had any effect. When the ban lapsed, the number of gun massacres shot up with 183 increase in massacres. 34 massacre incidents and 230 increase in massacre deaths. Does that establish in effect the effectiveness of the assault weapons ban . Well, i think that the 94 ban definitely had a Chilling Effect on the industry. It was able to evade the law in certain ways, and your bill addresses all of those things that the industry does. So your bill would be even more effective. But we know from the statistics that there clearly was a reduction in Mass Shootings. And since the ban lapsed, the industry has only become more and more and more aggressive, and one point i would like to make about the increasing lethality is the huge increase and the capacity of magazines. We very seldom saw 75round, 100round magazines. We see those all the time now. Thank you. The legislation i proposed has the one character you previously spoke about. Chief, on august 14th of this year, since Police Officers in philadelphia were shot during an eighthour standoff with a gunman using an ar15. According to the Violence Policy Center, in 2016 one in four Police Officers killed in the line of duty was killed by an assault weapon. And attacks on Law Enforcement that resulted in mass police facilities, assault weapons killed 75 of those officers. In your opinion, would an assault weapons ban assist Law Enforcement with protecting themselves and their communities from gun violence. Absolutely. What we also want to consider is an open carry state. Its much easier to identify a person who has an illegal weapon if theyre not allowed to have one or not. I wouldnt have to make the distinction between a good person with a gun or a bad person with a gun. I have letters of consent signed by nearly 150 organizations including the Newtown Action alliance and the Brady Campaign. Without objection. I ask unanimous consent to have a study by the Violence Policy Center that shows one in four Law Enforcement officers slain in the line of duty by an assault weapon. Without objection. I ask unanimous consent that this report of a 2018 study published in the journal of trauma and acute care surgery which found that mass fatalities were 70 less likely to occur orc during the 1994 assault weapon ban period. Without objection. An article reflecting a poll by Morning Consult showing 70 of americans, including the majority of republicans, support an assault weapons ban. Without objection. And finally a fox news poll that shows 67 of americans support an assault weapons ban. Without objection. Thank you, mr. Chairman, i yield back. To testify on behalf ar15s and other rifles the gentleman we will not comply with any efforts by we will not comply with any efforts to ban or coff confiscate our legally owned property. Go to jail we will not give them up. We will not comply with radical leftist plans to ban legally owned property. Byebye. Byebye. Another reminder for the audience, that while we appreciate your being here, if you refrain from making any noise or otherwise disrupting the proceedings or like the last gentleman the Capitol Police will remove you from the audience so we can return to order. Mr. Buck, youre recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Ms. Whaley you stated in our Opening Statement that the shooter was neutraled by police. Was he killed by police . Yes, representative. Was he killed with a gun or several guns . Several guns. Okay. Mr. Chipman. Would you agree with me that most gun violence is caused im sorry, that most violence is caused by handguns, most gun violence is caused by handguns . Most criminal gun violence handgun is used in that violence. Would you also agree with me first of all, let me thank you for your 25 years of experience with the atf. I spent 15 years as a federal prosecutor, ten years as a district attorney, worked many times with atf and appreciated their hard work. Would you also agree with me that gang and gang members are responsible for upwards of 90 of all Violent Crimes in this country and nationwide 80 of all gunrelated homicides in the u. S. Are caused by gang members . That conflicts with all the information i have. You ever use a gang database while you were with the atf . Sure. And did you find gang database reliable . It depends what i was looking for. Gang affiliation. Yeah, the gang affiliation is a very loose term that Law Enforcement can label people. Again, my hesitancy is that there was nothing in my 25year experience at atf that suggests that 90 of gun crime is tied to gangs. Nothing at all. I asked you about gang affiliation. Let me ask you about the nix database. Are you familiar . Yes, i am. Have you ever run across a false positive, meaning someone who has been identified as a prohibited person because of a prior felony and yet the database indicated that this particular person who attempted to purchase a gun was prohibited and they were not prohibited . Yes, very rarely. Okay. But it happens . It has happened. Could we put a picture up, please . My question to you is approximately how many ar15s are owned in america . So theres no precise estimate, but if were talking about the ar15 semiautomatic general rifle platform of that nature, estimates are at least several million into upwatfowa 16 to 18 million. And approximately how many have been used in Mass Shootings in the last decade, for example . Probably several dozen. Several dozen . Okay. Yes, sir. And so the several dozen minus the 16 to 18 million, my Democrat Friends are suggesting that those lawabiding citizens have those weapons taken away from them, is that correct . That is my understanding, yes, sir. Okay. Do you see the ar15 that i am holding with a former member of the Judiciary Committee trey gowdy from South Carolina . Yes, sir, i do. And can you tell by looking at that gun if that gun has ever killed anybody . No, i cannot. And why is that . Because, frankly, i have i dont know who is holding it, i dont know its history, but if i had to guess based on statistics alone there is a very, very high chance it has never been used to kill an innocent human being. Along with the 16 to 18 million guns that are in circulation in america right now . That is correct. The vast majority of them will never be used in criminal actions. And are those individuals and let me just tell you from my experience in my district in eastern colorado. An ar15 is used to kill raccoons that are or foxes or other animals that are predators and trying to disturb individuals for trying to, you know, kill chickens or disturbing agriculture in some way. Is that your understanding also of how some im not saying a majority of that 16 to 18 million but some of those guns are used . Yes, its actually not suitable for a lot of more higherend hunting for larger game because its actually more suitable for, as you inferred, more varmint hunting, small predator hunting. Okay. And what would the effect, ms. Mueller, of this particular law that we are discussing now have on lawabiding citizens in terms of either using weapons to protect Domestic Animals or farm animals or for selfdefense . What would the effect be for those 16 to 18 million that weve just identified . It would criminalize us having the firearm that we choose to use. As she said, her mother was able to use accurately and i dont understand some of the conversation that were having about making it more difficult for the 100 Million People that might have these weapons, make it more difficult for them to control or use properly. Gentlemans time has expired. I yield back. Mr. Richmond, youre recognized. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I dont necessarily profess to be an expert in hunting varmint, but my general sense is that if you hit them with an ak15, youre not hunting them, youre killing them. Thats the only purpose of doing it. Let he just get two things straight with mrs. Swearer and mrs. Mueller. The purpose you see, especially your mother choosing her firearm was accuracy and stopping power. So when you describe characteristics for selfdefense, you would characterize stopping power and accuracy as primary objectives . Yes, sir. Yes, if i have a threat, i want it to stop. Okay. Now let me go to chief brackney. Lets take the gun fn57 which has zero knock down power but its bullets will go through your shield if you have an aprilered shield and your vest. If it has zero stopping power what selfdefense purpose does that gun, the fn57 have . It would not. When you think about stopping power and the risk of being on the other end or the receiving end of those highvelocity, highcapacity round and things that can go through them, you want to think about accuracy. I do appreciate the story about a mom having the ability to be very accurate and to have a very tight capacity in putting rounds into place. So think of the damage that if my mom, who is 78, god bless her. If she decided she wanted to be extremely accurate. What about the person who is very well intentioned, how accurate could they be, how quick could they be in the damage they could do very well intentioned . Let me also ask because i know that our Law Enforcement every day stop people who are citizens of the United States but who also answer to another calling and cause called sovereign citizen. If we just take my district since ive been in congress, ive lost five officers who were overpowered by perpetrators because they were better armed than my Police Officers. One of which was in baton rouge, louisiana. Both within we can argue over an Assault Rifle, how we determine it, but lets just for purpose of this hearing call them weapons of mass destruction because there are three officers in baton rouge who will never see them again and two in st. John parish because in st. John parish it was a traffic stop that initiated. A sovereign citizen does not recognize Law Enforcements ability to stop them. So they exited the car with the trailer with an assault weapon, ambushed the officers and they never had a chance. If we go to baton rouge, the officers responded to the call, knew the perpetrator was dangerous but they had handguns. He had a long gun wearing body arm and they never stood a chance. So in the sense of patrolling and i guess im trying to make a balance in between that need for a weapon of mass destruction and the need for selfdefense because i think of my family. But when i thought about my family not being necessarily the best in marksmanship, i thought about having a shotgun, which has a wide spray. Then theres the judge, which is a could fire. 357 bullet, a revolver, or fire a shotgun shell, which is great for selfdefense. But the question becomes, why such large capacity magazines on these assault weapons and Assault Rifles if were talking about hunting . When you hunt, you miss, you load up again, you try again. But if your goal is mass carnage, then you just keep pulling your trigger or install a bump stock and you can create multiple carnage. From a Law Enforcement standpoint, im trying to figure out for the home, selfdefense, are we really talking about selfdefense when were talking about these weapons of mass destruction . And god forbid, if you lived in an apartment complex or a community with attached homes, how the bullets will go through the walls and travel apartment after apartment after apartment if you have the wrong one. So, if your Law Enforcement estimate, does the selfdefense argument hold water when youre talking about weapons that shoot such high velocity projectiles and has such large capacity magazines . Thank you for that. In 2009 in pittsburgh, pennsylvania, april 4th, a domestic case, an individual had a weapon for protection in their home. Three officers responded to that domestic because a dog urinated on the floor. When they arrived, immediately open fired, ambushed. I lived three homes down from that killing. The person the perpetrator shot the officers immediately in the face as soon as they opened the door that went through their vests. He then proceeded with his highpowered weapon to shoot the second officer, who thought he was playing oppum, shot him in the face. An offduty officer was responding from around the corp. He got out of his car, he unloaded 30 rounds into that officer who lay dying on the street as we exchanged over 600 rounds. We were outgunned, outfired outfirepowered at that time. That weapon was supposed to be for protection of his home. It was definitely used as an assault weapon to murder three officers in the city of pittsburgh. And that city has been traumatized. I mean, its been ten years exactly to this date. Thank you. Thank you. The time of the gentleman has expired. The gentleman from texas. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Mayor, i was curious, you indicated in your testimony that youre here basically to ask us to do something. What bill would you like to be passed to effectively, in your words, do something . Well, theres a number of bills what would be your favorite . Well, i would first for this body, the assault weapon ban bill that mr. Cicilline put forward. That bill would affect the dayton shooting, frankly. It would make a great difference so there wont be cities like dayton that experience this kind of trauma. I appreciate that. We hear people, especially in this committee, at times say even if its wrong, we need to do something. And thats not the way you maintain a Constitutional Republic and you maintain any freedom if its not very thoughtful. Doctor, you were mentioning the wounds, the horrific rounwounds were dealing with. You mentioned normally you are dealing with pencil hole entries that are sometimes hard to find. Those pencil hole entries are normally made by. 223 california ber, barely a hair bigger than a. 22. Isnt that right . You were looking at more like a 308 because it was more similar to an ak47 wound, correct . I dont know the types of weapons nomenclature. To my understanding basically, the manufacturer of an ak47 that is much, much bigger than the ar15, which is a 223 round. Just barely bigger than a. 22, whereas the aka, the nomenclature in the army, 762 but basically like a. 308. And those can do devastating damage. My understanding is that somebody privately made that and sold that. Apart from shotgun wounds, which are also devastating because of the large impact, i havent seen anything like this in my history as a trauma surgeon and since. I appreciate the help you provided. You talked about the use of guns between 500,000 to 2 million times a year, is that correct . Yes, sir. Its rather amazing that that many times people would need to use guns to defend themselves, rather shocking. But i certainly appreciate your comments about your mom. It is easier to fire one of those. I have to disagree with you when you say it has the maximum stopping power. After vietnam, we were taught that in the army that we went to the m16, now the m4, same nomenclature. Same. 223 size round, that it was faster and might be more likely to wound but not it doesnt have the stopping power of a. 308. To be clear, congressman, i would not disagree with you. My intent is to show it has more stopping power than a handgun so she can use it more accurately and effectively i have to did disagree with you there. A 9mill merely, a 45, 38, they have a lot more stopping power than an ar15. 223 round, correct . I would disagree with you in some cases. You dont think a bullet hole from a 9millimeter would do more damage than a. 223 round . I would much more have a 9millimeter than no firearm but generally speaking its a combination of both stopping power and dont you acknowledge that your mother was more comfortable with the. 223 because it doesnt have the kick, its not as intimidating, you can refire it more easily,y ekt . Part of that is the inherent setup of a rifle. You say the gun stats go back and forth or crime rate, rather, go back and forth over the reerz years. It seems to me it was related to putting criminals in jail, tough on crime, the pendulum swings back, but now it seems the pendulum is swinging towards lawabiding citizens for the first time and that really is a concern. I yield back. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from georgia. Thank you, mr. Chairman. 25 years ago we passed a law that prevented the manufacture or sale of assault weapons for ordinary americans and it made a difference. Mass fatality shootings dropped 70 between 1994 and 2004. 15 years later, congress failed the American People by a allowing the assault weapons ban to sunset. That was in 2004. Since then weve had repeatedly failures. Weve had repeated failures to make even modest reforms to unfettered gun access in the United States. Because of our 15 years of inaction, were living a tragedy. A tragedy of repeated horrific events interspersed with lulls where American Freedom and safety crumble before our very eyes. For what . Because folks are afraid of the nra . Theres a time for moderation, for cautious restrained debate, but that ended when sandy hook happened. When parkland, pulse nightclub, el paso, then dayton happened. Now is a time for a its time for congress to do the right thing. According to recent polls, 7 out of 10 people are in favor of a ban on the manufacture and sale of assault weapons. Theres broad consensus on this issue because it makes sense. Weve done it before, we can do it before and i look forward to hearing from our esteemed panel of witnesses on this topic. Now, the protection of lawful commerce and arms act was passed in 2005, the year after Congress Allowed the assault weapons ban to expire. In the protection of lawful commerce and arms act prohibits people from filing wrongful death lawsuits against gun manufacturers and gun dealers. When the families of the sandy hook victims took Remington Outdoor company to court for Mass Marketing assault weapons to civilians, specifically for Mass Shootings, it took the case five years just to overcome a challenge under the plcaa. And that was one of the success stories. What we dont see are all of the assault weapons cases that are not brought into civil court because of plcaa. Now, mr. Chipman, how does the existence of the protection of lawful commerce and arms act prevent victims and their families from seeking justice . What blocks them from holding an industry accountable before a court of law, like every other business in america is held accountable. Civil suits often act as a regulator to prevent negligent acts by companies that otherwise have no regulatory incentive to act in the best interest of consumers. Not just negligent acts but intentional acts and fraudulent acts to cover it up. Do you believe that assault Weapons Companies are taking steps to avoid negligence when they manufacture these devices and sell them to civilians . I think certainly their marketing these days is suspect. I think that even the markings on the ar receivers made in dayton, not made in my s. Hole country are thinking marketing to a certain type of extreme and violent part of this country. Weve seemed to balance this with cigarettes. People lawfully smoke but protect the marketing. Also the other thing that has been effective in keeping data out is just the restrictions placed on me at atf, that data that wouldnt hurt my criminal investigations but might be useful to this panel to decide what crime guns are the most popular amongst criminals, how do they get in criminals hands. You dont have access to that data. Its blocked. I think theres a whole host of things that make it very difficult to hold this industry accountable, like we hold accountable other industries. Thank you. If plcaa was overturned or rescinded, how do you think it could make a difference in how Companies Sell or manufacture assault weapons . Wed have to see how things played out in court and i have faith that courts would do the right thing to protect our nations. Thank you. My time has expired and i yield back. Gentleman yields back. The gentleman from arizona. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Fewer than 1 in 50 of all prisoners that were incarcerated for a Violent Crime obtained a firearm from a local retail source and possessed, carried or used it for the offense for which they were in prison. Among the 287,400 prisoners who had possessed a firearm during their offense, more than half either stole it, found it at the scene of the crime, obtained it off the street or from the underground market. Thats the reality of where people get guns who use them for a crime. 1. 3 of people get guns from a retail source. 1. 3 . Thats the reality of where people get guns, regardless of what kind of gun they have. Studies have indicated very clearly that higher rates of gun ownership are not associated with higher rates of Violent Crime. Switzerland and israel have much higher gun ownership than the United States but experience much far fewer homicides canada is ranked 12th in the world for guns per capita and has one of the worlds lowest homicide rates. Some provinces have higher homicide rates than United States states with higher restrictive law and lower gun ownership. The Brady Campaign against gun violence ironically makes clear this point. Gun freedom states that score poorly have some of the lowest homicide rates. Conversely, gun control states that received high scores like maryland and illinois experienced some of the nations highest homicide rates. Legally owned firearms used for lawful purposes much more often be than used to create crimes or suicide. In 2013 president barack obama ordered cdc to assess existing research on gun violence. This is what they found. According to the cdc, selfdefense can be an important crime deterrent. Semiautomatic rifles such as the ar15 are commonly used in selfdefense, especially in homes of lawabiding citizens because theyre easier to control than handguns. More versatile than handguns and often the advantage of up to 30 rounds of protection. Here are some examples of when an ar15 has been used to save laws. A man with an ar15 stopped a mans knife attack. Intimidation is why the man dropped the knife and ended the attack, saving the victim. North carolina, 2018, a 17yearold successfully fought off three armed attackers his ar15, saving his own life. Houston, texas, 2017, a homeowner survived a driveby shooting by defending himself with his ar15. Broken arrow, oklahoma, 2017, a homeowners son killed three wouldbe burglars with an ar15. Texas 2013, a 15yearold boy used an ar15 during a Home Invasion to save his own life and his 12yearold sister from an armed violent intruder. Ms. Muller, you served as a Law Enforcement officer from 94 to 2004. Did you see any impact anecdotally on your safety as a Law Enforcement officer or on those you were sworn to protect and serve . I have got me. I have previously testified that i did not see any before, during or after, and im listening to these numbers. I would like to follow up on the 70 less likely to occur during assault weapons ban. I dont understand that and i dont understand why we would have allowed it since then if it were an effective policy. It was contested. As i reported, the cdc did its own study and didnt come up with the same conclusions. Is there anything else youve heard today that youd like to respond to . Theres a lot. Well, press on, then. 26 snekeconds . Yep. Okay. I would like to congressman richmond is already gone but the 57, a little education there. It shoots flatter. As a woman, its less recoil. I love this little gun. Its not a. 57, its a 57 and it shoots flatter so i can be more accurate at longer distances. And with the metal recoil and it holds three rounds for a pistol thats good. Its got kind of a weird grip but that allows me to protect myself better. This is probably and it does have knockdown power, yes. But my goal here is to educate people. We are lawabiding responsible gun owners and please dont legislate the 150 Million People just like me into being criminals because it has happened. Youve already done it. The legislation on bump stocks, i was a bump stock owner and i had to make a decision, do i become a felon or do i comply . And like that gentleman that just got escorted out, i will not comply with the assault weapons ban. Thank you. Gentlemans time has expired. The gentleman from florida. Thank you, chairman adler, for calling this important hearing. Thank you to all the witnesses. Welcome the advocates. I would like to welcome my constituent fred guttenberg, father and brother. I ask unanimous consent for statements from James Guttenberg into the record. Ill move on. Jen is the mother of jamie guttenberg. Jamie was a vibrant, beautiful freshman with she was killed with an Assault Rifle in her school on february 14, 2018. Jen said on that day she lost her best friend and now must live with the image of her child running away from an ar of my 15. Ryan was a survivor of the shooting. They went on to found the march for our lives movement. Some are here today. Ryan said, im not just asking for change, im begging for it. Not because because i dont want to live in a country where every other day i read about another community destroyed, another group of innocent lives ripped away from us. As americans we owe it to ourselves to do better and we can. I have all kinds of questions i wanted to ask, but heres my response from what identify heard today. We heard over and over about the people who need to have these guns. Because theyre easy to hunt critte critters, because they can be used for selfdefense. These guns can also be used to hunt people. Ive been carrying around this piece of paper since february 15, 2018. Im going to read whats on it. Alyssa, 14. Scott, 35. Martin, 14. Nick, 17. Aaron, 37. Jamie guttenberg, 14. Chris hixon, 49. Luke hoyer, 15. Gina, 14. Cara, 14. Joaquin, 17. Alain that, 14. Meadow, 18. Helen, 18. Carmen, 16. Peter wang, 15. Every one of those 17 who were killed at Stillman Douglas will never be older than that age on the day they were killed. I understand the importance of the Second Amendment, but how it is that he about we can have a hearing where one of the witnesses compares these weapons to shoes is just beyond me. Were going to give a list. Ive got another list. How about this list. Dayton, nine killed, 17 injured. Las vegas, 58 killed, 422 injured. Orlando, 49 killed, 53 injured. Sandy hook, 27 killed including 26 and 27yearold babies, two injured. Southerland springs, two killed. El paso, 24 killed, 22 injured. Stillman douglas, also 17 who were injured. I understand this is not easy for everyone but i want everyone to understand how for the lives who have been ripped from the face of this earth for their families, it will never be the same. And when were looking what were trying to do here, the reason this hearing is so important is because we know there are things that we can do to keep us safe. We heard some of them, even apart from the assault weapons ban, we heard some of them today. Miss swaerer you talked about how we can pose those who are a threat. Youre right. We can. Youre right about that. The universal background checks bill sitting in the senate, near universal approval. Lets pass it in the senate. But what were here today to talk about are things that can prevent these kinds of attacks. Mr. Chipman, you talked about the National Firearms act regulation as a way to get assault weapons out of dangerous hands. You walked us through the process it takes for someone to buy a weapon regulated under that system. Registration with atf, photos, fingerprints and a transfer tax. You told us it was passed after National Firearms act passed after valentines day massacre in 1929. We have a val. Tines massacre in my community. Have there been efforts, are people clamoring for us to repeal the National Firearms act, mr. Chipman . No. In fact, the industry is working very hard to work around it. Its a law thats been in effect that have we seen machine guns and sawedoff shotguns used repeatedly the way weve seen assault weapons used in these shootings . No. Its a law that works. Ist a law that we should amend to treat assault weapons the same way we treat machine guns and sawedoff shotguns. That will help keep our community safe. Mr. Chairman, im immensely grateful youre holding this hearing today and i hand back the balance of my time. [ applause ] the rules of the house provide there should be no demonstrations of approval or disapproval from the audience. Without objection, the documents referenced by the gentleman from florida will be entered into the record. I now recognize the gentleman from ohio. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Miss swearer did i pronounce that right . Yes, sir. Miss swearer, define the type of guns the democrats want to ban . It appears to me common se semiautomatic firearms that have features like pistolal grips and barrel grabs. Semiautomatic weapons with a magazine capacity of ten rounds or more with scary features, is that right . Yes, sir, that is my understanding. How many types of guns does that entail . Is that a lot . A lot, sir. A lot . Yes, sir. In your opening remarks you talked about the scary features but theyre just features. They dont i dont other than the look, they dont change the way the weapon the impact the weapon may have on someone trying to do harm. No, sir. They dont change the function. Some of them like barrel strouds protect lawful users from things like serious burns. The right should not be infringed unless it has scary features. Can it doesnt say that. No, sir, it does not. Do you think bad guys are going to follow this law . They fail to follow our laws. Other than good people like yourself and others will follow this law. Yes. Do you think lawabiding people will be less safe to protect themselves, their family, their property if this law that the democrats are proposing actually happen or this bill that the democrats are proposing actually becomes law . I think worse than that, sir. Youll see millions of lawabiding citizens become felons overnight for having scary looking features on firearms. Do you think if a criminal suspects that a person there thinking about targeting for a crime, if they suspect that individual may have a firearm, do you think theres less chance they target them for a crime . We actually know this to be the case. When you look at studies that have come out of the 90s what are considered hot burglary rates, burglary rates where individuals are home during the Home Invasion, theyre actually lower in the United States than in the united kingdom. And when they follow up with those criminals, part of the reason for that is in the United States there is a fear amongst people who would commit burglaries and Home Invasions. Yeah, just there might be someone home its common sense. Bad guys walking down the street, hes trying to figure out which game hes going to rob. In one driveway theres a pickup truck with a rack that says, make America Great again on the Bumper Sticker, right . And then the next destroy theres a volkswagen with a Bumper Sticker that says, al gore for president. Who do you think theyll rob . Ill refrain from making assumptions but krils take the path of least bad guys arent stupid. Theyre just bad. Theyre just evil. Theyre not going to follow the law. What this legislation will do is make it more difficult for a lawabiding people like you, like all kinds of folks to protect themselves when some bad guys bent on doing something wrong. Generally speaking, yes. Thats something we know happens right now between 500,000 and 2 million times a year. Lawabiding americans defending themselves with firearms. Yep. Miss muller, you want to add anything . Yes, sir. I have an extra 30. Yes, sir. Anybody in here who has endured any kind of unspeakable violence or lost loved ones, i want to say thank you or, im sorry because i want somebody there immediately. I want you to be your own First Responder. I will be glad to talk to you about how to keep your family safe. Im sorry this has happened to you. My community is the first one that wants to make sure everybody is safe with a firearm. These gunfree zones, 90 over 90 , what were talking about, these mass murders are happening in gunfree zones. Every time you guys legislate against the gun owner, youre counterproductive. And it breaks my heart to hear these stories of these kids and their ages and that you have to put people back together in a hospital. Its sorry to interrupt. Let me ask one question. This is a ban on sale of this type of weapon as defined under the democrats legislation as we move forward. Do you think this is just a first step . Do you take former congressman orourke at his word when he says, were going to take these type of weapons . Were going to get these weapons . Do you think this is just step one theyre proposing . Yes. Thats the millions of gun owners are fearful in allowing this death by a thousand cuts. Weve already had panelists here that say that every firearm is capable, lethal and if it can hunt a human, then it shouldnt be in our hands. So, and mr. Orourke did probably expose a plan that they have been denying for so long, but we feel it. We know it. You can say it and call it whatever you want, but we know its a slippery slope. Time of the gentleman has expired. The gentleman from california. Thank you, chairman. I want to thanks the gentleman from rhode island. Dr. Riostovar. Thank you for your work in the community. It was hard to hear the story of the first patient that came to you that day but was it a scary looking feature that caused the death of that patient . I dont know what that gun looked like. I just know what the Bullet Wounds look like. When you have a highcapacity magazine, whether its a semiautomatic rifle that you are reloading multiple times, you have the capability to have devastating injuries to multiple casualties. Would you agree when you put a pistol grip on a long rifle where the round has highvelocity, highenergy, you can take the least skilled shooter and they can indiscriminately spray a crowd and the wound like the one you had to attend to can occur . I could assume so. It reminds me of a gunshot victim whose case i prosecuted in oakland where the victim was shot in the back of the thigh and he succumbed to the wounds. His mom asked me, i dont get it. You would think if youre shot in the leg or the arm, that, you know, you would survive. The balancistic expert and autopsy doctor said, no, because it was a long rifle round and 40 rounds were fired at him and he was hit just once, just like the victim you attended to. It leaves very little chance of survival. Mr. Chipman, also thank you for your service to our country. I read your testimony and it seems that you support a ban on the future sales and manufacturing of assault weapons. Is that right . Yeah, similar to what we did in 1986 with machine guns. I hear you and i agree with you as far as the National Firearms act and making sure theyre registered. Would you agree we want to ban future sales and manufacturing because its a dangerous weapon, different than a long rifle used for hunting or a pistol used to shoot for sport or a shotgun used to protect someone in their house . This is just a different weapon . Theyre particularly lethal. And so i guess my concern is, because i want this bill to pass, i will vote for it to pass, but as you described earlier, if this passes just like the 94 law, we will still leave millions. The nra estimates 15 million Assault Rifles in our communities. So if these weapons are dangerous in the future, wouldnt you agree theyre dangerous now and that there has to be some way to protect people now from ever having their kids shot in the school, their parent shot in the church, their sister shot at a concert from one of these weapons . We absolutely have to address the most lethal weapons that are already in civilians hands. I believe the National Firearms act is the best way to approach that. So, my proposal again, i appreciate what the Giffords Group is doing. My proposal is this. If its dangerous in the future, its dangerous now. And that it would be very hard for us to pass this legislation and then, god forbid, there would be a mass shooting. After there was a celebration on the house steps, that a weapon that was grandfathered in was killed to take dozens of lives and we would have to explain to victims that we allowed those weapons to stay in use. And i also think it would create confusion among the public. If theres a ban on assault weapons, why was a weapon used . Knowing the nra and their misinformation operations, they would say, look, they had the ban, it didnt work. My proposal would be to do what australia did, is to have a buyback period. To allow people like miss muller and others to use their weapons at a shooting range or a hunting club to allow them to be possessed there but nowhere else in our community. And that we would pay at market rate as they did in australia for these weapons. Now, australia did this and they were able to get off the streets 700,000. We wont get off as cheaply but its not as if this is something that never happened. So, i hope we can aspire to do that. This is a first important step. I thank all the witnesses for participating. I thank all of the families for being here because the families have picked themselves up from unimaginable grief, we are at this moment, there are 18 fewer nra members of Congress Today endorsed by the nra than they were a year ago. So, keep matrching, keep carrying, well all be safer and i yield back. Gentleman yields back. Gentleman from california. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Miss swearer, the arguments around these bills seem to have an inordinate faith that somehow theyll keep these weapons out of. Hands of criminals and bad men and terrorists. I dont share that faith. I look at how drug laws have kept the drugs out of the hands of addicts and wonder if that faith isnt misplaced. As mr. Biggs pointed out, arent the majority of firearms already used in crimes already being obtained illegally . Yes, that is my understanding. That largely speaking a High Percentage of guns used in criminal activity are coming from people who obtain them illegally and had criminal records themselves. So, theyve already been very ineffective at disarming criminals and mad men and terrorists. Nobody has legitimate use for an ar15. I think youve made a very good point that these arent military weapons. Theyre designed to look like them but the actual firing mechanism is the same as those used in a wide variety of legitimate hunting and target rifles and pistols, but that said, im a gun owner but i dont owner an ar15 because i dont feel i need one. But i might have a different opinion if i was in the third day in a hurricane disaster zone without power or Law Enforcement or if i was a late night clerk in a gang area or a Theater Owner who wanted to protect my customers in a crisis or if i was a border rancher where car tells are operating. Dont i have a right to make that decision for myself under the Second Amendment rather than have my friends on the left make it for me . Yes, sir, especially with commonly owned semiautomatic firearms that have long been commonly owned by lawabiding citizens for lawful purposes. We absolutely ought to be outraged by these growing incidents of Mass Shootings. We didnt have problems like this, at this magnitude or frequency 50 years ago. I think its important to ask, what policies have changed in those 50 years of that would explain this . It seems to me there are three. 50 years ago we used to execute murderers. Weve largedly stopped doing that. Could that have something to do with that . Im not familiar with whatever studies you may be referring to with regard to Capital Punishment and shootings. We used to put violent criminals in prison until they were old and feeble. Now we have Early Release programs, sanctuary laws that are releasing dangerous criminals back into our communities. Could that have something to do with it . With regard to mass public shootings, thats unclear but with regard to gun crime in participate, a lot of gun crime is perpetrated by people with previous violent behavior. Most importantly, we used to confine the dangerously mentally ill when we identified them in a Mental Hospital where we could treat them and prevent them from harming others. In fact, in 1958 my state of california, there were 37,000 mentally ill contained in our Mental Hospitals. Many were dangers to themselves or others. That would be over 100,000 today. But today we only confine 7,000. The rest of them are on the streets. Could that have something to do with it . Without meaning to come across as demonizing all mentally ill as dangerous oh, no. Of course. Some mejsly ill people are dangerous. Those are the ones we confine. Weve written on this specifically at the heritage foundation. There is a relationship between rates of violence and what weve seen in the mass deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill. 50 years ago we had very few gun control laws. Today we have a great many. If these laws were actually the answer to these massacres, shouldnt the problem be Getting Better and not worse by now . With regard to mass public shootings, yes, arguably. I would also say gun vie lebs in general is more complex. I think that should be selfevident. When you go to a bank, you see an armed guard. That guard is there to protect our money. Why would anyone object to an armed guard in a school there to protect our chish . Im not sure why anyone would obtain to protecting our nations children in the same way we protect other important places. Arguably we do not want to turn schools into a prison function where people feel they are behind bars or Something Like that. Maybe we ought to have lethal force to protect our children. People go crazy over that but they dont give a Second Thought of an armed guard in a bank to protect our money. With regard to Mass Shootings, one of the biggest factors is the quickness of the armed response to that shooting. That is one of the possible solutions, yes. Time has expired. The gentlelady from washington. Thank you all so much for being here. Your testimony was very powerful. I am perplexed by this argument from the other side that if i heard it right, that criminals do not follow laws and, therefore, what, we shouldnt have laws . That statement has no relevance to the existing debate around gun reform because fundamentally it is completely irrelevant because it is just as meaningless as saying my microphone is black or the sky is blue or grass is green. Definitionally criminals dont follow laws. Thats what criminals are. So heres the paradox the other side is putting forward. I want to go through it because i think its important to dismiss this argument for what it is, which is bogus, in my opinion. The paradox is this. Law abiding sit simpree ining c law, number one. Criminals are law braeshgz, therefore, they dont obey the law. Brilliant. Number three, laws impose restrictions on the behavior of only those that follow them and, therefore, number four, laws, therefore, only hurt lawabiding citizens. That would mean we shouldnt have any laws at all because definitionally we are making laws based on the kind of society that we imagine. And then we expect the vast majority of people are going to follow those laws and the people that dont will then have accountability. I just think its a ridiculous argument. I dont understand why the other side keeps putting it forward. The data shows Mass Shootings are becoming far more frequent and getting deadlier. My college mr. Deutch gave a powerful statement. 16 of the 20 most deadly Mass Shootings in modern history occurred in the last 20 years and 8 in the last 5 years. Look at the amount of time in each of these shootings. So, in 2017, Las Vegas Shooting claimed an unprecedented 58 lives and 858 injuries in just ten minutes. El paso shooting claimed 22 lives and 24 were injured in less than 6 minutes. Dayton shooting, thank you, mayor, for being here. The dayton shooting claimed nine lives and dozens of injuries in just seconds. All of these by a single shooter who legally purchased semiautomatic weapons and highcapacity magazines. So, let me ask you, mr. Chipman, the Giffords Law Center finds that a person with an assault weapon is able to hurt and kill twice the number of people compared to a shooter with a nonAssault Rifle or handgun. Why is that . Think about just average people out there trying to understand this issue. What are the specific features of an assault weapon most dangerous. Let me talk about rifles specifically. When youre firing a round at over 3,000 feet per second, as compared to a hand gun which is usually under 1,000 feet per second, when it hits it just destroys the body. For instance, i worked for gabby giffords, she would not have survived had she been shot with a rifle. If you mix the speed of the round and then the ability to easily carry 100 rounds in a magazine or 50, and you can fire as quickly as the finger can pull, you do battlelike, you know, wounds. In las vegas, the thought 20 years ago that i could have even imagined a shooting where a single gunman could have inflicted 58 deaths and hundreds of people wounded, many of them offduty Law Enforcement officers, i mean, its hard to imagine. Has everything to do with the capabilities of the weapon. Just a quick clarifying question. When you said a rifle round, for people that dont know what that is, explain what happens when the rifle round actually strikes. Well, then id need the help of my dad, the mathematician and do physics. Let me say when a piece of lead is flying at 3,000 feet per second and it hits you, its a lot different than if its going at 800 feet per second. Thank you. Its just math and the results are what our surgeon said is just catastrophic. Let me turn to the surgeon. The ct scan of one of the victims of an ar15 showed an organ that looked like an overripe melon smashed by a sledgehammer. Can you tell us we have very little time. From your perspective as a doctor, what do you see and what do you experience as youre treating individuals who have had these kind of wounds . That is accurate from what ive seen in my particular patients. The entire pelvis on the left side had a hole the size of a grapefruit that i had no idea how to repair. Im not an orthopedic surgeon. But i had intestine coming out of bones. Ive never seen that before and ill never see it again. Hopefully. Thank you to your service, all of you. The gentlelady yields back. I want to thank our witnesses for being here today. The horrifying acts of Mass Violence our country has witnessed is totally unacceptable. As defenders of the constitution, we cannot tolerate the spread of hatred and violence in our nation. Unfortunately, todays hearing seeks to villainize one of the most popular weapons instead of preventing acts of violence in our communities. Until 2017 the nations total Violent Crime rate decreased 48 . Meanwhile, americans bought more than 11 million ar15s during that period. Its clear the majoritys underlying objective to hold this hearing is to rationalize why the federal government should keep guns out of the hands of lawabiding citizens. Democrats want to paint the ar15 as a weapon solely used for war when in reality millions of men and women own these weapons and use them lawfully every day. They have chosen this as the firearm of choice for recreational shootling, selfdefense, hunting and educating the next generation about firearms and safety. Our families, our neighbors and our communities will not become safer if we confiscate firearms from innocent lawabiding people. In fact, by restricting the fundamental freedom that allows people to defend themselves, democrats will endanger the lives of millions who will no longer be able to adequately protect their families. As members of congress, its our duty to ensure that we are protecting the American People by defending this document. The constitution, and the freedoms enumerated in it. Our republic was founded on the principle that government will not impede on these rights and we must uphold that here in this committee. Ill ask ask miss swearer if there was anything said today that you would like to respond to at this point . Thank you, congress map. Theres been a lot that i wish we had the time to respond to. Ill take just a couple of these in order. I think theres this sort of misunderstanding that if we can just get rid of ar15s that somehow this is going to result this in massive reduction in gun violence. It dramatically misunderstands the underlying vak fors of gun violence in this country. Twothirds of gun violence are suicides. That doesnt matter, frankly, if you have an ar15, a handgun or shotgun. Its essentially irrelevant if you just replace the firearm. When were talking about mass public shootings were talking about something that i think we all agree is devastating to communities but it is a fraction of a percent of gun deaths every year. Were talking about switching out the same caliber rifle for something that is the same caliber in a different rifle but now just doesnt have a barrel shroud or pistol grip and saying this somehow is going to save this large number of lives every year. Were looking at the wrong problems. So were coming up with the wrong solutions. These are things that even if fully effective and not substituted with other types of firearms, were talking about a bare minimum of actually impacting rates of gun violence. We have to be looking at more meaningful factors than things like pistol grips. Thats something we can work on together if we would stop looking at scary features. Miss muller, would you like to respond to anything that was said . Yeah, thank you. I understand everybody in this room wants to make a difference and we want to be safe. We want to be safe. Firearms owners want to be safe. I hope you heard in my oral and written testimony that we, the firearms industry, is driving solutions. And if you are really interested in having that conversation, thats why i formed the d. C. Project, is to come and make relationships and help you be a resource for lets go to the range and lets really understand what those firearms are and who that community is and how they use them. Those are your constituents as well. Ill say them again. Eddie eagle, project child safe and kid safe foundation. Those are teaching your kids how to responsibly look at firearms. It doesnt mean they have to shoot them. Its just like a swimming pool. You teach your kids how to swim. You dont want them to go across a body of water at some point in their life and not know how to live. We want were with you. We want you to be with us. Thank you. Chief brackney, you said something earlier that gave me pause. When you said any weapon that can be used misused to hunt a person should be banned. That applies to all weapons. Is it your contention that all weapons should be banned and that time of the gentleman has expired. The witness may answer the question. Thank you. I think theres opportunities for quite a few of us to amend our statements, senator. Yes, weapons that are misused should be considered. Were looking at percentages of individuals that are injured based on weapons. The fact were willing to boil it down to simple numbers when its actual lives and to say its a percentage of or a consideration of a percentage of. We actually should be ashamed were willing to sacrifice the lives of individuals for data points. I think we should all be able you dont want anyone in charlottesville to have a weapon . Had we been able to ban some of the assault weapons coming into charlottesville, i think we could have had a better response from Law Enforcement or Virginia Beach. All weapons . The time of the gentleman expired. The gentlelady from florida. Thank you so much, mr. Chairman. Thank you to all of our witnesses. For being here today. Im going to try to get my thoughts together because ive been pretty amazed at some of the things ive heard. Particularly from the other side of the aisle. Mayor whaley, thank you for being here on behalf of the people that you represent. Youre doing exactly what we would expect you to do as a mayor. I know your chief is here as well. Thank you, chief, for what you and the men and women that you represent do as well. I was a Law Enforcement officer. I spent 27 years. A gun owner. My father was a hunter. Im from orlando where 49 people we heard a lot about lawabiding citizens. Those 49 people who were in a nightclub that night were lawabiding citizens. And they were not protected. 49 of them lost their lives. 53 others were injured and will never be the same. That does not include those with invisible wounds. One of my biggest fears as a police chief was worrying about the men and women who do the job going home at the end of the night because if we cant protect them if theyre at risk, then we know the average citizen is at risk. I always knew they were going to be outmanned because Law Enforcement always is. But i certainly worried about them being outgunned. Ive gone to more than my share of Law Enforcement officers funerals. Weve got to do something about the number of Mass Shootings that has occurred in a country that we say is the greatest country in the world. A country where we say life first, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have offered nothing as a solution. Im interested in hearing more, miss muller, about your program. I wasnt familiar with that. Chief brackney and miss rand, you said assault weapons account for 1 in 4, 1 in 5 officers killed in the line of duty. It appears that we love our Law Enforcement officers until it comes to banning weapons that can blow a hole in them the size of a grapefruit or rounds that can penetrate their ballistic vests. Chief brackney, i would like for you to talk about the men and women you command, the burden of keeping them safe, and really, why are you here today . Thank you. I appreciate your service as well. For me personally having experienced three officers die in pittsburgh, by an assault weapon, knowing there was nothing we could do to protect them, knowing that one of our officers was lying there at that point in time saying over the air he loved his wife, to let her know, he loved his children, knowing he was going to die. We could not get to him for hours as he lay there dying and bleeding out as a result of that tragedy. Im here because as we know charlottesville experienced tragedy at the hands of hate. When you have the type of weapons that can be brought into a community that can devastate an entire community, i would be ashamed of any former Law Enforcement officer who said i refuse to comply with a law they were swore to uphold themselves. I say to you and each and every one of you, if you have to go home every night thinking about where your team, the people who are out there come home alive every day, if you had that burden to bear and you could see the secondary trauma forced upon families, not just the initial trauma as they look out the doors to see if their parents are coming home, whoever that person is, whos willing to give their life for a stranger. We talk about what greater love is that . We dont ever amend or talk about that weve restricted your First Amendment rights. You cant say anything at any time. No right is absolute. Thats right. So, if were willing anything, anywhere, any time. Thats exactly right. If were willing to amend what you can say, why wouldnt we consider what you commend that could cause the type of devastation in each and every one of our communities . I just thank you just for the opportunity to be heard today. Thank you so much, chief. Thank you to all of you. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. The gentlelady yields back. The gentleman from florida. Thank you, mr. Chairman. The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It says arms, plural. Not certain types of arms. It says arms. I stand by the constitution and i stand by the Second Amendment. The Second Amendment has a lot to do with hunting and it has to do with your constitutional right to defend yourself, your family and others. In is step number one. The democrats planning to take away your guns. Step two, ban a certain type of firearm that no one can properly define today. Ive not heard a proper definition of what it is were talking about banning. Step number two, now that weve taken your semiautomatic rifles away, now well take your semiautomatic hand guns away. Step number three, now that weve taken all your guns and the government only has their guns, now weve turned into venezuela and cuba. There is absolutely no difference in the functionality of an ar15 in a semiautomatic handgun. None, absolutely no difference. We heard the atf individual talk about as fast as you depress a trigger is as fast as a round comes out. As fast as you depress the trigger on ar15 is as fast as a round comes out. The weapon i was issued when i did serve in Armed Conflict was much different than what is available commercially today. The m4 i was issued in the United States army in service of Operation Iraqi freedom had threeround bursts and fully automatic. That weapon of war, the terminology the left likes to use, is not available to the general public. The general public cannot go and buy the weapon i was issued when i served in Operation Iraqi freedom and this ar is fiction. Ar stands for armor light which is the company that manufactured the original ar15. Theres no such thing as an Assault Rifle. If i killed my cup and it killed somebody, that would be an assault cup. So, were using a fiction to demonize a certain type of weapon. So, chief brackney, i have a question. Isnt it true an ar15 discharges a round every time you press the trigger . Is that correct . Yes, thats correct. Is it also correct that every time you you depress the trigger of your service revolver, that a round is dispersed, is that correct . Yes, based on the social contract and the social compact that conpact th pacpac pacpact that i have with society to discharge my weapon, that does occur. So the testimony today is that the functionality of the ar15 and the functionality of the single automatic gun is the same, because the moment that you depress the trigger a round comes out of the weapon, is that right . In the purest sense, yes, when you are pulling that absolute any the purest sense. When we are talking about the targets and the behaviors and the impacts of those, it is very different than the functionality, that is correct. I am talking about the functionali functionality, and that is what you are all talking about is the function ale ti of the ar15 and that is what we are talking about. I was in here when you said this, and correct me if i am mistaking, and we can have the reporter read back what you said verbatim if youd like. Anything that you use to hunt people should be banned, is that correct . Any weapon that can be used to hunt individuals should be banned. Okay. So you then stand for the proposition to ban any type of firearm, because any type of firearm can be used to misuse and kill people . As i stated before, with Law Enforcement in particular, there is a social contract that we have no, based on the statement, you said that anything that is used to hunt people should be banned and that is what you stated and so i am sclar clarif your statement, because all firearms because they can be used to hunt people should be banned and this is your statement before the committee . No, that is not my statement, and you have not clarified, but you have added a statement for me. Why dont you clarify for us, and we can take a break and have the clerk read back what you stated because you said that anything that can be used to hunt people should be banned, and it is my understanding that any point of order. The gentleman will suspend and the point of order . I was in a judiciary hearing where one of my colleagues from the Minority Side stated that it is not right to attack a witneswitness that comes forth in the manner that mr. Stube has been attacking the witness here. If he could tone down the words. Is there a point of order . I had 32 seconds when she asked for the point of odder rdd i will have it back. You want to be so strict. We will add it back seven seconds. So you support banning all rifles that can hunt people, is that correct . You are conflating two, and you said support banning firearms or anything that can be used to hunt people. That is not my statement. What was your statement then . My statement was and please i dont have it as verbatim as possibly as you do that i do support things that are weapons that are used to hunt people to be banned. So any type of ep with upon that can be used to hunt people should be banned is your statement . Go ahead and answer the question. Can you repeat that, because the gavel was going off at the exact same time. Any type of weapon, that you stated, that can be used to kill people should be banned. Sir, you are adding type, and my statement is weapons. Thank you. The gentlemans time is expired and the gentle lady from texas. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you for having this very important hearing that many of us have been waiting for and to all of the families and those who are here that have lost loved ones, thank you for being here. I know that it is every time you to sit and listen to this testimony and the back and forth, it brings back so many memories, and know that we feel your pain, and we are getting ready to do something about it. I know that earlier one of my colleagues said that the democrats even if it is wrong, we have to do something. And im here to tell you that what we are doing is right. It is not only right for us to do it, but i think that our country demands it. Everywhere i go, this issue comes up whether it is a town hall meeting with veterans or town hall meeting with seniors and everybody is concerned about gun violence and not just with these types of weapons, but any weapon. I grew up poor in a farm in south texas. I was taught to use a rifle and a shotgun at an early age. Both were used for hunting to put food on the table or were always ready to protect us and protect our property. I still in fact keep a shotgun at my home. Fortunately, i have never had to use it. To me, that is what guns are for. For hunting and for protecting our property. You dont need a weapon that kills nine to ten people in 30 seconds to go hunting to put food on the table, and you dont need that either to protect your property. So, assault weapons are frankly in my view just for killing people. Weapons are designed to effectively and efficiently kill as many as possible, and frankly posing the greatest threat to us today. We in texas have suffered from this as many other states have, and it is time for all of us to act. I support the bill that mr. Cicilline has before us, and frankly, sometimes i think that it needs to be stronger. So mr. Chipman, i want to start with you. In your written testimony that you say that one other option might be to have the registration of all of the existing assault weapons under the nfa while banning the future manufacturers is safe of these firearms. Is that a position from you or the organization or are all of the other gun violence groups in accordance with this position . It is the position of difference of based on my 25 Years Experience and i dont want to speak about other organizations about that, but it is based on my experience that the law of the nfa was to keep the most dangerous weapons out of criminal hands. It is working. Only 3 of every 1,000 crime guns traced back by the atf is a machine gun. So the laws work. So if we want to focus on other types of weapons, we have a timetested law that has been on the books since the 1930s, and lets take that approach. What is your position on the buyback programs . I think that we should be looking to america and not australia for solutions. As i said the nfa was passed at a time where we had a similar problem. Right. And very lethal weapons. So i would suggest that it is a balance that would honor the rights of the people who have these guns to keep them if they were properly regulated and understood that there are so many of them out there that like machine gun, it would prevent them from being manufactured and sold in the future, and that is striking a reasonable balance between the rights of individuals and the rights of all americans, and a human right not to get shot. And i wanted to put another idea that came really from a senior, a senior town hall meeting that i had in my district a couple of weeks ago. Although it was about senior issues and Social Security and medicare and she approached me after the meeting with a list, and frankly six or seven suggestions, but one caught my eye and i wanted your reaction to it. She thinks that we should place a chip in them in other words at manufacturing inside of the giant guns referring to the assault weapons so they can be tracked. And we know where they are, so if there is an incident to maybe stop an incident before it happens to do something proactively. Have you looked an idea like that . No, we have not looked an idea like that, but when you recover a firearm in the crime, it is useful to know who owns it, and the ability to trace the gun, and the ability to take shell casings that are often left at a crime scene to be able to tie those back to the gun and the shooter are very useful. With a chip in all guns, the reality is that most guns are lawfully owned, and so that is a lot of data that we dont need. I would be more focused on what can help cops solve the gun crime quickly and immediately. I thank you for the thoughts. I yield back. The gentle lady has yielded back. I have heard my colleagues say they are strong supporters of the Second Amendment, and i think that this has been articulated the same sentiment. I am strong supporter of the Second Amendment as well interpreted in heller versus the district of columbia that a handgun is for purposes of defense and hunting rifle for purposes of hunting, but nowhere does it give you armored tanks or anything like that. So does anybody believe that the Second Amendment gives you the right to own a machine gun . No. Does anybody think that it gives you the right to own a armored tank . Mrs. Muler . Yes, sir. You think that it is going to give you a right to a tank . To Nuclear Weapons . Well you started out with machine gun, and we can legally own machine guns if we go through the rich mans game of the nfa. And you are for the unrestricted access to the machine guns . I would look at that, yes. I would look at taking them off of the nfa. And you agree that there is a constitutional right to own a machine gun . I believe that there is a constitutional right to own the equivalent of the same functions of a musket would be just as we have expanded the First Amendment to include, you know, technological advancements, and we include the same sorts of things with the Second Amendment. So we include, and the Supreme Court has found that the proper phrasing there is to say commonly owned for law abiding purposes and a function of the that is used for law abiding purposes and the answers for most of these is yes. So to be clear, both of you believe that people should be allowed the purchase machines as they should ar15s and handguns . My distinction of the fully automated weapons is maybe different. But, yes. Okay. I will go on, and dr. Tovar, and you from el paso. Your testimony was stunning to me. There is something that you said that will haunt me for a long time, and i just wanted you to elaborate on it. You were called back, and you were supposed to be going home that night. You were called back after the massacre to try to save people. As i understand, that you helped to save and your colleagues helped to save more than a dozen people. Is that right . Yes. It was a large team effort. But you lost one person who was i guess the first patient that you worked on and you said that you will always carry the guilt of that with you, and i remembered a passage that i once read from rousseau who said that how often audacity and pride are on the side of the guilty and how often shame and guilt are on the side of the innocent. I wonder why you would feel guilty of trying to save someones life who was assassinated by an assault weapon that you had nothing to do with being in the hands of the criminal . I felt guilty and i still feel that i could have done more and i wanted to do more, but the fact is that i had ten patients there, and reports of up to 20 or 40 patients, and i could not spend as much as i could on one patient when i knew that i had 20 or 30 coming in. Are you still practicing in el paso . Yes. What about the possibility of selling people machine guns or other weaponry in the Second Amendment rights . I would not agree with that, but the Second Amendment stands. Yeah. It has been misrepresented and it has been distorted and the National Rifle association used to be a moderate mainstream organization that supported gun safety regulation, and then it was taken over and hijacked for political purposes, and the idea was to oppose all gun safety regulations, to try to drive a wedge between the rural parts of america and the metropolitan parts of america, and it has worked like a dream. Congratulations. But we have casualties on every city and town, and these are american citizens shot down by the weapons of war which you believe that the Second Amendment covers and the Supreme Court doesnt. So i believe that you said ms. Mueller, friends in the military who do not favor the ar15, because they want something with greater stopping power. Will you explain what that means . Yes, sir. They were saying that, i mean, it is their job in war in combat to kill people. And they were telling me that relating that it is not an effective round. What does that mean not to have what you said before i think was they preferred a weapon with greater stopping power. I dont know that phrase. Will you explain that to me. The gentlemans time has expired and you may answer. Stopping power is stopping a threat. If this person needed to be killed, that the 2g3 was not a good round to do that so in other words, the weapons that killed in el paso or dayton did not have enough explosive force, is that it . Correct. I yield back. The gentleman yields back and the gentle lady from georgia. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Id like to thank my colleague from colorado from yielding to me for a few moments to go first. I want to thank all of the witnesses here today and most definitely i want to thank the survivors and the families and the gvp activists taking the time to be here to discuss this important issue. First i want to underscore that the prevalence of assault weapons was the result of not action, but inaction. Congress did not end the assault weapons ban by lifting it, but simply allowing it to expire. I believe that inaction has most definitely cost lives. Tragically, we have seen extremely little action to address the gun violence in the past several decades and i am pleased to be part of the present moment, and in which we are finally having hearings like this to illuminate the multi faceted process of gun violence and no single measure is going to end this epidemic, but there are bills that will save lives. The house has passed some of those. Universal background check, and closing the charleston loophole and we are continuing to explore other laws, too. The house has also a passed an appropriations package that is going to pass gun violence prevention research, but time and time again, senate inaction is maintaining the status quo. There has been over 200 days since the house has passed hr8 to require universal background checks and in the 200 days, the senate has done nothing. The house voted to provide a historic 50 billion, excuse me, 50 million package to Fund Gun Violence research, but a Senate Proposal instead recommends nothing. Americans are paying for senate inaction with their lives. We lose another 100 people to gun violence every single day. Every day, 100 families face a new and terrible loss. Inaction is absolutely unacceptable. Id like to say for anyone on this panel unless you have experienced gun violence you have no idea the burden of loved ones lost. The burden that it has on their families, and their communities. Dr. Brakney, how did the expiration of the assault weapons ban affect Law Enforcement . Thank you. I am in complete agreement with you. When we are too cowardly to face issues and instead let them to expire like we would milk in our refrigerator instead of taking some sort of action and as we know in some other field, thinking of the medical field, there are often incremental steps that we create to develop med kaegss for curing cancer is. We dont say that until we have the cure we will do nothing. We are doing something similar with Law Enforcement. The attacks on Law Enforcement, and the ambushes on Law Enforcement are increases and people are emboldened that not only the weapon and the capacity to do that but the prevalence of where they can get the weapons, and also, ghost weapons to buy the pieces and the parts of it to get around again legislation when it is coming to what you must be required to do in order to obtain a weapon legally. This is an absolute atrocity. I have attended those funerals of officers over the 35 years that i have been in Law Enforcement, and the more than three decades plus that i have been in Law Enforcement, and it is continuing to hold a pit in your stomach for every person that you see that has been, lost a life, but also it moves concentrically outward and affects an entire nation, and the last shootings that we can remember in dayton stopped the country and we held our breath for literally days, and then we forgot about the shooting forward and forget about the next one as well. Thank you. And ms. Rand, we know that assault weapons are the weapons of choice for mass shooters, and what do we know about why they choose these weapons . Well, i think that the firepower that assault weapons affords a shooter gives them more bravery and they can outgun Law Enforcement, and back to the example of columbine, that it is a little known fact that there were armed guards at columbine who engaged in fire with harris and klebold, but they were unable to stop them, because they were outgunned by the assailants assault weapons. So it is going to provide them with a sense of bravery that they would not otherwise have. They know they can confront Law Enforcement, and they can kill a number of people very quickly, and you know, i think that also if you are looking at the marketing of these weapons. They are sold using the militarized imagery, and now we are seeing assailants who copy that. They come with body armor. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and of course thank you to my colleague, ms. Macbeth who always speaks truth to power in such an incredible way. Chief brackny, you commented on this, but i would like to have you expand on this further. How long have you been in Law Enforcement . A woman should not tell her age, but 35 years, and maybe they hired me when i was really young. How long have you been the chief . I have been the chief of charlottesville for 15 months and i was a chief in George Washington university for three years short of that, and 31 years with the city of pittsburgh to command the swat teams and major crimes. Thank you for the service. The reason that i asked this is because my colleague on florida on this side of the aisle was right to point out in the parliamentary inquiry and request that i took umbrage at the way in which my colleague interacted with you in the Prior Exchange that someone of your caliber and served your community and your country and here today to testify on the importance of us taking commonsense steps to prevent the pervasive violence that is ravaging the communities across the country and i did not feel that the exchange was reflective of the way that the members of the committee should conduct itself. And so thank you, again, for being here today and with the testimony. I would like the associate myself with the remarks of my esteemed colleague of georgeorg and the military. And there is no place in civilian hands and schools and in theaters and in communities, and in colorado, we know this all too well. I happen to represent the great state of colorado, and we lived through columbine 20 years ago where 13 individuals were killed in matter of 16 minutes. We grieved after aurora where 12 people were killed and 58 others injured. Militarystyle assault weapons are designed to kill people quickly and efficiently in large capacity magazines that are often the choice for mass shooters because they are allow the shooter to fire a large number of rounds and quickly reload. Inactions on this issue as so many of my colleagues have said and as so many of the witnesses have attested to, and it is putting our students, our children and our community in harms way. I for one believe that we cannot allow it. When we see Mass Shootings in the news, every single month, we know that it is time to act. We owe it to those we have lost and to the survivors and some of whom are here in the audience today, the survivors of columbine, aurora, las vegas, orlando, newtown, sutherland springs, el paso. We owe it to them, and i am grateful to my chairman and colleagues for holding this hearing to take action. I will say that the difference of my home state and congress is that colorado had the courage to act. In colorado we passed a high capacity magazine ban in 2013 as a broad attempt to reform the gun laws following the aurora theater sheooting the year befoe and it is time for congress to pass these reforms, and i am pleased to support the proposal of banning assault weapons. Mr. Chipman, thank you for your service, and as Law Enforcement officer for putting your life on the line, i know that give en your experience that youve seen and youve used these weapons that we are speaking of today. Why do you believe is important that we have a conversation now about assault weapons, and what about your experiences have led you to believe that we need reform . Because they are getting more lethal, and we should have this conversation decades ago. The firearms industry continues to make more lethal firearms and congress is not keeping up with technology. We see it in smaller weaponry like my panel member likes to have because it is easier to carry around in the car, but it was used to kill a milwaukee Police Officer, because it was able to defeat the bulletproof vest, and so to me, we should not tip the scales on the side of just convenience, but of the right to live in a country absent the fear of getting shot and killed in the line of duty or at a Movie Theater or in your daily affairs. With that, i see my time is closely expiring, mr. Chairman, so i say thank you to the chairman and the Witnesses Today for appearing and your testimony. We appreciate it. The gentleman yields back. The gentle lady from pennsylvania, ms. Dean. No . Okay. The gentle lady from texas, ms. Escobar. Thank you, chairman, and thank you, ms. Dean, so much for switching with me. I want to thank everyone here, and the people who traveled here to be with us here today at this very important hearing. People who stood in a long line for a long time in order to get in. I want to thank the panel. I want to especially thank the panelist who is my constituent dr. Alex rios stevaud and thank you for everything that you did to save so many lives. As we have heard today, there are far too many people on this Judiciary Committee who represent communities who have been impacted by the gun violence, and my community el paso, texas, is unfortunately now part of that very sad and tragic club. On the day of the shooting, august 3rd, i received calls from colleagues who knew too well what we were going through in el paso, and the very next day, dayton entered the awful club, and days later, odessa entered the awful club. Part of why i invited you, doctor, to come here, and part of why i wanted the American People and the congress the hear your testimony is because too often we dont understand what happens literally to people who are shot up by these weapons of mass destlung. Mass destruction. I want to hesitate before i ask you this question that i want to ask you, because that day, august 3rd, el paso was a victim of not just the gun violence epidemic, but also the hate epidemic of this country. And last week we passed legislation, and we marked up legislation out of this committee that began to address that hate epidemic, and it is shocking to me that some of the people who use the language that fuels that hate epidemic of wondering if we need to pass laws of the hate epidemic, but as long as we have people pushing that language and that racism, we will need laws that protect communities like mine. And as long as we have people who say, i deserve to have a weapon of mass destruction so i can shoot critters as we have heard today or so i can have an accessory like shoes as we have heard today, then we will continue to see massacres and bloodshed. We are here today to create change. So committees like mine will not have to endure what we are enduring, because the consequence is long lasting. Doctor, you told us about what you witnessed this day, and what you lived through that day, and can you share with us what you are emotionally and mentally live with today as a First Responder in health care . Thank you for the question. I am not embarrassed to say that, that sunday, i bawled like a child for half an hour. I went through the Facebook Page of one of those victims, and saw that their, that baby is going to live without parents, and is an orphan now. And that week once my patients were extu babated, and i then i have not been able to sleep for about a month since that tragedy occurred. I encourage all of those who have been affected by a tragedy like this, to seek counseling, because it is important to recognize that not just the victims, and the victims families, but the First Responders and even those who are not present, theres a lot of guilt that comes to providers who were not available to respond, because they feel like they should have been there to help out as well. So there is a lot of room for, for therapy and for counseling for the entire community. I think it is very helpful. Doctor, thank you so much for everything that you did to save all of the lives and to touch all of the lives that you did. You are a hero. All of these deaths and all of this pain was needless, and we can change that today. Thank you. Gentle lady yields back. The gentle lady from pennsylvania. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and i thank all of the testifiers and advocates for being here. I thank the advocates or the testifiers for the minority, because you have proven how weak the argument s. Mr. Chairmais. Mr. Chairman, i wanted to take a look and have a slide brought up of the history and the conversation of where this country stood. Take a look. We are writing to urge your support for the ban of the domestic manufacturer of militarystyle assault weapons. Statistics prove that we can dry up the supply of these guns and making them less accessible to criminals and we urge you the listen to American Public and support a ban on the further manufacturer of these weapon, sincerely gerald r. Ford, jimmy carter and ronald reagan. This should not be a political issue. In 2004 we had an opportunity to further authorize the ban, and george w. Bush favored this lifesaving law. Would you play the clip. Sorry. I guess we dont have it. Could you hold the clock, is that possible . Do we have the clip . It is a clip of president george w. Bush. I see that we are having problems with the volume. There we go. So i have made my views clear, and we should extend the assault weapons ban. Unfortunately president george w. Bush was not able to persuade enough of the colleagues and the ban expired through inaction. This should not be a political debate. I will tell you what has changed and what has made it a political debate among politicians only, and not americans. Moer than 500,000 americans have died from gun violence and america has suffered more than 300 Mass Shootings per year, and the nra ramped up the lobbying of the republican members and the republican members on this very committee and 17 of whom the nra spent a record, excuse me, spending a record 54 million in 2016 elections alone and every Single Member of the republican side of this dias has accepted Campaign Contributions and other support to a total of 1. 2 million total. We know now that no atrocity convinces the republican colleagues to reject the nra funding and do what is right. Not sandy hook, not parkland and not tree of life, and not el paso and dayton and i could go on and on. One party has made it a priority and it is us. It should not be us alone. It is a question of our xhoon humanity. Im a mother and grandmother, and so i will ask a couple of quick questions if i may. I would like to start with mr. Chapman, how does a pistol grip and barrel shroud make it that a mass shooter is allowed to kill many people . Well, as senator cruz has demonstrated the barrel of the ar15 can get hot if you try to cook bacon on it. So imagine if you are a determined killer and firing hundreds of rounds. This would allow you the grip the firearm in a way to increase your ability to spray fire and kill more people. To hold on to the hot weapon and maximize the lethality. Mr. Chipman, can you provide our thoughts on the threat to Law Enforcement since you have been on both sides . The single biggest threat is how common now rifle rounds are, have been instituted and now handguns. Traditionally Law Enforcement were wearing vests to protect themselves from handguns that fired handgun ammunition, but it is not enough. The industry has purposely now created the weaponry to defeat bulletproof vests, and this is the biggest threat. There is a bill that actually is ms. Demings has presented that is trying to address this, and we have saw it already this year in milwaukee where an officer executing a warrant has the vest on, but the shooter has an ak pistol and it defeats it. Thank you. I will end with this thought. I am a mother. Im a grandmother to a second grader and two grandchildren coming this year and it is through that lenses they take a look at, please roll the tape, and this is a question of the common humanity and we have crossed a threshold that no country should have crossed. Roll the tape. This year, my mom got me the perfect backpack for back to school. This is a binder to help me stay organized. These headphones are just what i need for studying. These new sneakers are just what i need in order the new year. This jacket is a real musthave. My parents got me the skateboard i wanted. It is pretty cool. These scissors come in handy in our class. These colored pencils, too. And these new socks can be a real lifesaver. I finally got my own phone to stay in touch with my mom. Mr. Chairman, i yield back. The gentle lady yields back and the gentle lady from new york is recognized. I apologize. Thank you, mr. Nadler, chairman. That video is very difficult to watch, because i am also a mother and i lost my father to gun violence, and today, this morning, i answered the phone right when the hearing started and the school was conducting an active shooter drill. And my daughter who just turned 11 years old tells me if she is locked out of the classroom if she is going to if she cant get into the classroom, she would try to talk to the shooter and tell him or her to remember his little brother or sister and to not shoot. This is what our children now have to live with. I wasnt planning on starting my testimony with that story, but i want to share a quote that i received from one of my constituents, and he is an e. R. Doctor, and he is working in the Homestead Baptist Health system, dr. Rotonski and he told me that quote, assault weapons do a tremendous amount of damage to the human body. The tissue damage and destruction is exponentially worse than a conventional handgun. From the carnage that he has personally witnessed, he says that assault weapons, quote, they are not defensive weapons, but offensive weapons designed to inflict death, tissue damage and devastation on the human body, and that is what they do very effectively, end quote. That is clearly what militarystyle weapons are designed for. We have seen these weapons of war in places like iraq and afghanistan and they are now being used in our very own communities taking the lives of our children, our parents, and our sisters and brothers and it has to stop. There is something that we can do here in Congress Today, and ms. Mueller, you said earlier which really struck me, you said, you know, i just, and you were describing a gun, and you said, i love this little gun. It is time to love our children more we have to take action and that is why we are having this hearing today, because there is a way to protect the children and our communities and it is by passing stricter gun laws. Im not done here. We many . No, please. In florida the pain of the loved ones strikes close the home and close to my district, and we have had two recent Mass Shootings that have resulted in 65 deaths. 65 people that lost their lives. In parkland last valentines day on february 14th, a shooter using an ar15 cell rifle opened fire on High School Students that day, and in six minutes, the shooter with his assault weapon killed 17 people, 17 kids including a coach, injured 17 others and in 2016 at pulse nightclub in orlando, another shooter using a military Assault Rifle injured 49 people and injured many others that night. In that crowd was jerry wright, the sonf my very good friends fred and m. J. Wright. He was a wonderful and loving and caring son. He was there to have a good time to enjoy latin music that night. And his life was cruelly taken. He was only 31 years old. I know that m. J. And fred living with that pain every single day. Jerry didnt deserve this. His parents didnt deserve this, but because the shooter was able to obtain the military style rifle he delivered a devastating fate to the Wright Family that day. These are weapons of war, period, full stop. They dont belong in our communities. Now, i want to ask dr. Rios savard, and i have spoken to people in my district who have suffered from these injuries and can you describe the difference of a handgun wound compared to that of an assault weapon. Like i said earlier, these types of injuries, you cant necessarily see on the outside. That one victim that perished had a single gunshot to back and out of, the clavicle area. It looked like a simple through and through and not so much going on, but once that autopsy was done, we saw that a hole the size of my fist was through her lung, the apex of the lung. There is nothing that i could do from that point. As the witnesses can see and the members, the deepness of the passion permeates so many of us. I have been in the United States congress for 24 years, and that means that i have a lot of personal wounds that do not in any way reflect the victims of gun violence who lost their lives. I was here for columbine, when so many said that we were going to do something. And let me read this into the record. Between september 25th, and october 1st, the day of the shooting, he stockpiled an arsenal of weapons associated equipment and ammunition that included 14 ar15 rifles all of which were equipped with the bump stops and 12 had magazines and eight had ar rifles and a bolt action revival and a rifle, and a bump stop modifies a semi autot make weapon the shoot in rapid succession to mitigating automated fire. Mayor, you are on the ground. Tell us what might have happened if your officers had not ran into face of danger . I have a lot of questions, and so i welcome you going right to it, because we know it. I want the record to have it. To know how they saved lives, but how they had to run directly in danger. Thank you, representative. The seven officers that ran to stop the shooter in 32 seconds saved countless lives, because where they stopped the shooter was right outside of an entry way to the bar that hundreds had already shoved in and had no way of getting out. And if we did not have as i like to say six good guys with guns, the amount of damage and death that would have happened could have been in the hundreds. But you had a bad guy armed with an automatic weapon. Exactly, and still in 32 second, and even with those officers there killed nine and injured dozens more. Thank you. You are here to supporting a ban on assault weapons . Yes, maam. Chief, you heard me describe what the shooter in las vegas had mounted on a post, almost like he was in war on a mountain hiding so that those who were making their way up would be in the range of danger. Tell me what in gods name one could imagine at any civilian needed those weapons which resulted in 58 dead and the danger and loss of liven of Law Enforcement who had to run toward that danger . Absolutely. What he had was toho a ability inflict the most amount of damage, and the weapon to do it. Wh ep y when you have a stabilizer, you can do that for a long time. And when we were running into the tree of life attempting to disarm and neutralize the individual who then had killed 11 people at that point in time. He had in a automatic weapon . He had one of those as part of those. And he had used predominantly the handgun there. But he was armed such that he could continue . Yes, he had done the type of damage that he had done. You are an md as well . Oh, no, no, that is the distinguished ph. D. Oh, okay, a ph. D. And we are grateful for your service with that knowledge as chief. Thank you. Let me go to the doctor rios, and let me offer you my sim pa thichlt i am a texan and i came to el paso and i saw the mastery of those alive and i visited the victims in both of the hospitals with heinous shots, and i saw those with personal wounds and physical wounds, and so for my friend, i welcome up the opposition testimony. I respect them, because they are americans. I am adamantly opposed to assault weapons and i believe in the buyback and i have no shame saying that. I ask the National Rifle association to stand with americans. But let me give you this picture. Sandy hook and the babies from 6 and 7 years old were shot with an automatic weapon. Babies. First graders. I am sorry to ask you this. What type of wound would a childs body receive from an automatic weapon . You saw adults, and im not sure if you saw a child. I know someone was wounded. But tell me about the size of the body, the mass of the body and that bullet going into a child child. It is not something that i would even want to think about imagining. But it would be devastating. It is just something that i cannot answer. I am sorry. It would be worse than you can imagine . Yes. And what it would be would be an adult having a cavity and you were trying to explain big holes in the body, is that not right . That is correct. And the mass of an adult is one or two or three times that of a child. Yes. I am not a physician. So in the essence of a child, maybe the child physically would not be able to be contained. Trying to put it well, it would be too horrific to describe. These are the assault weapons that we are here today trying to ban. To the witnesses, and to mr. Chipman, i would like to thank you and did not ask you but i am familiar with the National Firearm act and it can be a source of amendment for many of the legislative initiatives and i do believe in the enforcing of the legislation in terms of the gun trafficking which makes some of the cities like chicago and l. A. And others victims, because the guns are trafficked. I wanted to read this into the record as i thank the witnesses. Assault weapons account for 430 or 85 of the total 501 mass shooting fatalities, and this is done by a group of doctor, and this is researched in a linear regression model controlling for yearly trend, the federal ban period was associated with the statistically significant nine fewer Mass Shootings related per 10,000. Mass shooting fatalities were 70 less likely to occur in the federal ban on assault weapons. The science is clear, and the ed is clear, and the murder of our fellow americans, the loss of life, and the victims that are in this audience that have to listen over and over again about why we are not acting, and we owe them something. This committee is willing to pay the debt. I thank each and every one of you for staying this long, and helping us to provide the testimony that will have us right as we have already done, and pass an assault weapons ban. This is going to conclude our hearing and we thank all of the witnesses for participating. Without objection, all members will have five legislative days to submit additional written questions for the witnesses or additional materials for the record. With all of our thanks and without objection, this hearing is now adjourned. Parts of the hearing will be in its entirety online at cspan. Org if you missed any of the hearing on the gun violence prevention in the u. S. Taking you live now the floor of the house of commons in london for a statement from british Prime Minister boris johnson. In the government, they will have a chance to prove it. They have until the house rises, and let them, listen, listen. Listen. Listen. Listen