Prevent outbursts or clapping or demonstrations of any kind during these hearings. There was so much interest in todays hearings that we had to expand opportunity for the audience in an adjoining room. The overflow room is 226 of the dirksen building. I will make opening remarks and give Ranking Member cruz the same opportunity and then welcome our first witness. We are here to discuss a critically important issue, maybe a very basic question. We venerate in this country are committed to the life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness of those who live in america. We also guaranteed under our bill of rights the right to bear arms. Can we make these two consistent . Can we protect a persons right to own a firearm and still say to the rest of america we also need to protect your light youre right to life, peace, freedom from violence from those same firearms . According to the centers for disease control, more than 11,000 americans 11,000 are murdered by guns each year. That is more each year than the lives lost in the tragedy of 9 11 and the wars in iraq and afghanistan combined. Each year. Every year, more than 30 men, women, and children are killed in violent shootings. 200 are shot and survived. Numbers dont capture the deeply personal impact of a gun violence. There are too many families to face in ntc get a dinner table, too many parents to what has been empty bedroom, too many husbands and wives who have lost to the gloves of their lives is the love of their lives because of gunfire. It has become almost routine in this great nation. In park in chicago, in a nightclub in st. Louis, illinois, in a Movie Theater in aurora, colorado, a Shopping Center in tucson, arizona, a sikh temple in oak creek, wisconsin, and the College Lecture halls in illinois and blacksburg, virginia, and a first grade classroom in s,wtown, massachusett americans all over the country are saying enough. We need to act. We need to better protect our families, our kids, our schools, our loved ones from the epidemic of violence. Some say that we should just enforce the laws on the books, but that is not enough. There are so many gaps in these laws that we now they created the situation we face today. The senate will take up proposals to close those gaps and reduce gun violence. We will consider universal background checks for gun sales, tougher gun laws against illegal stock purchasing, stopping the flood of new militarystyle assault weapons on to our streets, limiting the capacity of new gun magazines to a level that allows for reasonable selfdefense but reduces the scope of carnage that a mass shooter can cause. All of these proposals are based on common sense. All of them have strong support among the American Public. And all of them, i believe, are clearly consistent with the constitution, the Second Amendment, and the bill of rights. In the Landmark Supreme Court decision in heller in 2008, the court determined that americans have the individual right to possess firearms for lawful purposes such as selfdefense. But Justice Scalia, no liberal, writing for the courts conservative majority, made clear that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited, and like other rights, it is subject to reasonable regulation. The heller decision makes pays not to cast any doubt on common sense gun laws. Over and over, gun regulation is described as permissible, supported by historical tradition and presumptively lawful. When given the opportunity to retreat from those statements in the 2010 macdonald case, the court instead reinforced the same statements and described them as assurances. In hundreds of cases following heller, lower courts have upheld commonsense gun laws as consistent with the Second Amendment. There are some who continue to challenge the constitutionality of reasonable gun regulation, even though history, president , and the Supreme Courts statements in heller and mcdonald way heavily against them. They do so hoping that judicial activism will advance their no compromise ideology when it comes to guns. I think we need to be careful. This is not some abstract legal debate. Guns have forever changed the lives of so many people guest let me mention just a few of them. Hadiya pendleton, and understood in an inspiration to our friends, all walking angel her cousin called her. She was taken from us two weeks ago. Her family is here today a student at Northern Illinois university, with a warm heart and bright future, murdered in her classroom by a man with a history of Mental Illness. Her mother is here today. Blaire holt killed while shielding his friends from a gang members spraying fire on a city bus. His friend is here today marcus norris, hit in the face by a bullet that came through the wall of his house. Thank god he survived. We are glad to have him here today. A true American Hero who dedicated his life to serving his country and his community, killed by gang members with a straw purchase gone. I attended his funeral service. The officers family is here, and his sister will testify today. There are many more in this room today whose lives and families have been changed by gun violence. I would like to ask the friends and family of the victims of gun violence to please stand. Look about his room. Understand that the debate we have before us has affected so many lives. Thank you all for being here today. As we conduct this debate and honor your loved ones who are no longer with us, we know that we have to act. Thank you for joining us at this hearing. Senator cruz. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Let me say it is a particular honor to serve as Ranking Member on this committee with you and a particularly high honor to serve on the committee with two former Ranking Members and chairman of this committee, senator cornyn and senator hatch, as well as the Ranking Member of the entire committee, senator grassley. All of us were rightly horrified by the tragedy in newtown, connecticut. To see Young Children senselessly murdered takes your breath away. Let me say to each of you who has come here today that are the victims of crimes of violence, my heart goes out to you. Thank you for coming, thank you for standing for your lost loved ones. I will tell you that i have spent personally much of my professional career working in a Law Enforcement to, number one, prevent these horrible crimes of violence, and number two, to ensure that anyone who carries them out is subject to the very strict as punishments. I am hopeful that the fervor that we see on this Judiciary Committee hearing for standing up for victims of crimes of violence will carry over to issues other than guncontrol guest i am hopeful t that same fervo i am hopeful that that same fervor will be present when a judicial nominees are here, who have a record in history of allowing those who have committed Violent Crimes to walk free. I hope that same fervor on a bipartisan basis will be present when were talking about how to ensure that the laws and resources are there to prevent a violent criminals from carrying out their horrific crimes and to ensure that every one of them receives a fair and just punishment. In my view, the divide on this issue is fairly straightforward. The focus of Law Enforcement should be on criminals, and we should be unstinting in protecting communities, many of the communities that each of you have suffered losses in, communities that sadly, Law Enforcement has been failing. And we should be working to fix that problem. At the same time, i think that we should continue to respect and protect the Constitutional Rights of lawabiding citizens. It is often lost in the debate over guns that the Second Amendment is part of our constitution. It is part of the bill of rights, it is indeed, as Justice Joseph story put it, the palladium of liberty, a fundamental protection of every american. In my view, stripping the Constitutional Rights of law abiding citizens does nothing to prevent criminals from carrying out a Violent Crime. And indeed, the overwhelming weight of the empirical evidence demonstrates that when the rights of lawabiding citizens to protect themselves, protect their homes, protect their families are taken away, a Violent Crime increases, citizens defenseless are more horrible horrible to violent criminals more vulnerable to violent criminals. For that reason, the two cities with the strictest gun control policies, washington, d. C. And chicago, both of which for years had effectively total ban on firearms ownership, so it could not be possible to have a stricter policy, both of the sadly suffered from some of the highest crime rates and highest murder rates, notwithstanding those laws. I would suggest in significant part because of those laws. If you look in contrast to jurisdictions that have protected the constitutional right to bear arms, you have consistently seen a lower crime rates, aser ratemurder individuals are able to protect their family. The Supreme Court decisions in heller and mcdonald were landmark decisions to they concern the question whether each of us is protected by the bill of rights, because the position of the cities of d. C. And chicago in that litigation was that no individual has any right whatsoever under the Second Amendment. The position of the litigants in those cases was quite extreme. Today we are discussing what are the limits on that right, because the Supreme Court made absolutely clear that the Second Amendment is the constitutional right of every american, and i would point out that Constitutional Rights are designed to be protected by just when they are popular, but especially when passions not just when they are popular, but especially when passions seek to restrict those rights. I look forward to this hearing underscoring the rights of the Second Amendment for every american. Thank you, senator cruz. In keeping with the practice of the committee, the witness will please stand and raise the right hand to be sworn to do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give before the committee is the truth, poultry, and nothing but the trick, so help you god . Let the record show that the witness answered in the affirmative. We are pleased to be joined by u. S. Attorney tenness timothy h. There was a request by the republican side it to send a witness to our next hearing on the importance of enforcement of the gun law. Timothy heaphy was appointed as u. S. Attorney for the Western District of virginia. He has worked in private practice and taught at the university of Virginia School law. Mr. Heaphy, thank you for joining us today. We will give you five minutes for an opening statement. Your complete dimon will be part of the record. And then we will ask you questions. Thank you chairman durbin, Ranking Member cruz. I am pleased and honored to speak with you about the continuing work of the United StatesAttorney Community and the department of justice to address nonrelated violence. This is a very person to address a gunrelated violence. This is a very personal issue to me. Ive prosecuted hundreds of gun cases in my years as a federal prosecutor, including a yearlong trial of a violent drug gang right here in washington, d. C. Akron to serve as United States attorney in a district that has felt the pain i currently serve as United States attorney and a district that has felt the pain of a mass shooting on the campus of Virginia Tech. Victims of these horrible crimes, spoke to victims of these horrible crimes, and working with men and women to investigate them on the street. Attorney general eric holder has stated that combating Violent Crime is a top priority of the department of justice. To that end, his task 93 state attorneys with the responsibility to localize strategies to apprehend, prosecute individuals, street gangs, and other criminal organizations that engage in gunrelated violence. These local strategies require us to work smarter by gathering intelligence and focusing our enforcement efforts on the most dangerous and complicated threats in our communities. We use that intelligence for vigorously prosecuting gun crime, relying on close coordination with agents from the bureau of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and other state and local partners. We do more than arrest and prosecute. In communities where violence persists, we are forging partnerships for prevention organizations and supporting their important work. Our strategy relies on a nationwide effort to keep guns out of the hands of prohibited persons. When licensed gun dealers run a background check on and every potential gun buyers, the ensure that theyre not selling firearms to felons, domestic abusers, drug users, people with Mental Health issues. But the background check system is only effective if it contains all relevant information from every source. The department of justice is working to create incentives and provide assistance to state governments, prime contribute is too deep background check system, to ensure that they put all Relevant Health records into the system. Even if we find a way to get every record in, our effort to prevent criminals from getting guns is hampered by current holds in the background check the system writ of violent criminals often seek out sellers, whether at gun shows, the internet, with the yellow pages, who are not licensed dealers and not required to run the background check. Extending the background check requirement to all commercial transactions, absent limited exceptions, is our best opportunity to keep firearms out of injures hands and keep our children and communities out of dangerous hands and keep our children and communities say. We worked closely with state prosecutors, local Law Enforcement officials, to determine if a particular gun case or gun offender should be charged in federal or state court. When cases come to us, we use federal firearms statutes to prosecute prohibited persons who possess firearms, people who are prevented from obtaining a firearm due to an interception of the background check. We prosecute individuals engaged in the business of dealing firearms without a license or ignore la,. In gun sales to persons. We try to violent criminals charge of violent criminals with a range of other crimes, using statutes with often include lengthy mandatory sentences. Additionally, we do what we can to prosecute cases involving trafficking and firearms, despite the enormous challenges that such cases present. There is no single federal statute for preventing a fire arms trafficking work stoppages in. This gap requires prosecutors to find other statutes, generally paperwork violations, that can be applied to the particular trafficking scheme. Without more meaningful penalties for those who traffic in firearms, we will continue to find it difficult to dismantle the criminal networks that exploit these statutory caps. I want to end by assuring this committee and the American People that the departments commitment to prosecuting is as strong as ever. The number of gun defendants charged by United States attorneys has declined slightly since 2005, but our number is significantly higher than in fiscal years 2000 to 2002. During the same period of time, the number of murders and other Violent Crimes has declined at a greater rate. Our commitment to gun prosecutions has never wavered and has helped to lead to an overall decrease in Violent Crime. Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. I look forward to answering your specific questions. Let me say a word about chicago. It is a great city, but it is not an island. Just outside chicago, in the suburbs, is a gun store responsible for 20 of the crime guns we confiscate in chicago. Despite the laws in chicago, the fact that you can cross outside the city into the suburbs, go down state, neighboring states we found that 9 of the crime guns in chicago can be traced to the state of mississippi. We cannot deal with this in isolation, community by community. I want to deal with the issue of stop purchasing. Start purchasing is a dangerous act that supplies criminals and other private purchasers with the guns. The primary statute used for charging penalizes a person who knowingly macemakes a false statement material to a gun assail. The straw purchaser checks yes on the atf form that asks if you are the actual buyer of this fire arm. Can you talk about the challenge prosecuting the cases that appear to be paperwork prosecutions . Yes. You are exactly right guest when someone goes into a gun store and buys an arm on behalf of someone else, our hands are tied. We can prosecute that as a violation, but not what it is, and illegal stoppages of oregon. The statue that prosecutes a false statement on a firearm crime requires, a, evidence that the person knew he was making a false statement, and that is a difficulthold for us to meet. Prosecutions under that carries minimal sentencing guideline range. Full