D. Destructive devices In order to make completely clear the intended scope and coverage of the Federal Firearms Act (as it would be amended by H.R. 6629) with regard to a destructive device, the definition beginning on page 2, line 12, of the bill would be restated as follows: "(4) The term 'destructive device' means any explosive or incendiary (A) bomb, or (B) grenade, or (C) mine, or (D) rocket, or (E) missile, or (F) similar device; and the term shall also include any type of weapon by whatever name known which will, or which may be readily converted to, expel a projectile or projectiles by the action of an explosive, the barrel or barrels of which have a bore of one-half inch or more in diameter." The new subsection (b) is the definitions section (containing exceptions to the applicability of certain terms) would contain the following provisions setting forth the exceptions applicable to the term "destructive device": "(b) As used in this act "(2) The term 'destructive device' shall not include_ "(A) a device which is not designed or redesigned or used or intended for use as a weapon; or "(B) any device, although originally designed as a weapon which is redesigned for use as a signaling, line throwing, safety or similar device; or "(C) any shotgun (other than a short-barreled shotgun); or "(D) any nonautomatic rifle (other than a short barreled rifle) generally recognized or particularly suitable for use for the hunting of big game; or "(E) surplus obsolete ordnance sold, loaned or given by the Secretary of the Army pursuant to the provisions of 10 U.S.C., 4684 (2), 4685, or 5686; or "(F) any other device which the Secretary finds is not likely to be used as a weapon." E. License fees The proposed removal of all ammunition (except for ammunition for destructive devices) from the coverage of the Federal Firearms Act totally eliminates regular ammunition manufacturers and dealers as well as all usual ammunition reloaders from all provisions of the Act. It is further intended to reduce the proposed license fees for dealers in firearms, including pistols and revolvers, to $50 and for persons dealing only in sporting-type firearms, such as rifle and shotguns, to $25. These fees would then approximate the occupational taxes for persons dealing in distilled spirits and in malt beverages, respectively. These changes would be effected by striking out on page 12 of the bill lines 10 and 11 and inserting in lieu thereof: "(C) in firearms (other than as described in subparagraphs (A) or (B) but including pistols or revolvers, a fee of $50 per annum. "(D) in firearms (other than as described in subparagraphs (A), (B), or (C) a fee of $25 per annum." F. Statutory hearing procedure in the issuance of regulations It is proposed to amend the Federal Firearms Act to specifically provide that regulations issued pursuant to the act be issued only after the Secretary of the Treasury shall have given reasonable public notice and afforded to interested parties opportunity for hearing. This would be done by amending section 7 of the existing Federal Firearms Act (relating to the issuance of regulations) to read as follows: "SEC.- Rules and Regulations.-The Secretary may prescribe such rules and regulations as he deems reasonably necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act. The Secretary shall give reasonable public notice, and afford to interested parties opportunity for hearing, prior to prescribing such regulations." (Appropriate conforming changes will be made in the bill relating to section numbers.) NATIONAL FIREARMS ACT (H. R. 6629 AND 6782) There follows the language of the proposed amendments to the bill to amend the National Firearms Act, referred to in the statement of Sheldon S. Cohen, Commissioner of Internal Revenue, before the Committee on Ways and Means on July 12, 1965. A. Destructive device The revisions with regard to the coverage of destructive devices would be in substantial conformity with and to same substantive effect as with regard to destructive devices as defined in the bill to amend the Federal Firearms Act. (See item "D" under proposed changes relating to bill to amend the Federal Firearms Act.) B. Provision for exemption for persons transacting business with or on behalf of the United States Section 5803 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 would be amended to read as follows: "SEC. 5803. Exemptions. "(a) General. Any person required to pay special tax under section 5801 shall be relieved from payment of such tax if the business in respect of which such tax is required to be paid is conducted exclusively with, or on behalf of, the United States or any department, independent establishment, or agency thereof, and the Secretary or his delegate may relieve any person conducting business with, or on behalf of, the United States or any department, independent establishment, or agency thereof, from compliance with any provision of this chapter with respect to the conducting of such business." Mr. BYRNES. There has been extensive questioning concerning the responsibilities dealers have under present law. I gather from your responses that you feel present law doesn't give you very much authority over what dealers do in terms of selling firearms. Mr. COHEN. That's right. This statute was drafted a long time ago and I don't think it is up to date. Mr. BYRNES. All right. What recommended changes relative to dealers are you advancing to cure the alleged deficiencies? Mr. COHEN. The dealer would be required under the change here to follow a very specific procedure as to the identification of purchasers and of course the dealer would also have to meet the restriction of being a person who is of good repute and so forth and so on. Mr. BYRNES. That is in the law today. Mr. COHEN. It is not quite; the new law would be more affirmative in that respect. Mr. BYRNES. I understand that this proposal imposes certain restrictions. They can't make indiscriminate sales of pistols or revolvers. They can't sell them to nonresidents. Mr. COHEN. That is right. Mr. BYRNES. Are you going to be able to require the dealer to make sales only after seeing evidence of the purchaser's residence? Today the law provides that dealers can't sell to a felon, yet you say that present law does not enable you to require the dealer to make an investigation of that fact? Mr. COHEN. But in H.R. 6628, section 2 (b), I believe it is, the restriction says: that it shall be unlawful for any licensed importer, manufacturer, or dealer to sell or otherwise dispose of without following the required procedures for ascertaining, in a manner prescribed by the Secretary, and I am paraphrasing there, the identity and the place of residence (or business in the case of a corporation) of such person or if such person is under the age of 21 and so forth, or if he has 51-635-65-pt. 1- -13 reason to believe or knowledge he is not a resident of the State and so on, and there are a number of other restrictions there, too. They go down the line, giving very specific authority to require very specific information and penalty. We think it is much more tidy. It is much more modern. It is much more up to date and it is much more clear that we have the authority to do this. Mr. BYRNES. In other words, your position is that under present law you cannot require them to seek information from the buyer other than what is necessary to keep the records that you require: namely, the name and address of the purchaser? Mr. COHEN. That is right. There they might be violating a very fuzzy regulation; that is, one with fuzzy authority. Here they would be in direct violation of the statute, which I think is a much, much stronger and more serious thing. Mr. BYRNES. What changes in the law does the bill make concerning the type of individuals who may qualify as a licensed dealer? Mr. COHEN. The proposed law would set forth a specific statutory standard, whereas under the existing law there is no statutory standard. Mr. BYRNES. Where is that in the bill? Mr. COHEN. Section 3(c). Mr. BYRNES. What page? Mr. COHEN. Page 13. It sets forth specific authority to require that he maintain a place of business in specific terms. If you notice in paragraph (2) thereof it has the language that "by reason of his business experience, financial standing, or trade connections," he can't have his license if he is not likely to maintain operations in conformity with the law. That is the tough line that we like to take here and specifically be able to cite that against any individual who was on a fringe area that you and I might I think agree shouldn't be engaged in this business. Of course, we would have to give hearing on these situations, as is right. Mr. BYRNES. You mean on the matter of a denial? Mr. COHEN. Yes, sir, under the Administrative Procedure Act. This is a denial of a license under the Administrative Procedure Act and hearing notice would have to be and of course appeal. Mr. CURTIS. The hardware store that we were talking about would have qualified under this, wouldn't it? Mr. COHEN. Probably. I am not certain of that. Mr. CURTIS. I mean at least these things we are talking about. Mr. COHEN. But the fact of his financial standing may or may not qualify that gentleman. I don't know that, sir, right now. Mr. BYRNES. That is all, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Any further questions? If not, Mr. Cohen, we again thank you, sir, and those at the table with you for coming to the committee. We are sure that your responses to our questions are helpful to the committee. Mr. COHEN. Thank you, sir, very much. The CHAIRMAN. Without objection the committee adjourns until 10 o'clock next Monday. (Whereupon, at 12 noon, the committee recessed to reconvene at 10 a.m. Monday, July 19, 1965.) PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO FIREARMS ACTS MONDAY, JULY 19, 1965 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C. The committee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to notice, in the committee room, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. A. S. Herlong, Jr., presiding. Mr. HERLONG. The committee will come to order. The first witness this morning in the continuation of the hearings which have been going on for the last week, will be Mr. Franklin L. Orth, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association. Mr. Orth, do you want Mr. Kimball and Mr. Gutermuth to sit with you during your testimony, or are they to participate with you? STATEMENT OF FRANKLIN L. ORTH, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA; ACCOMPANIED BY THOMAS L. KIMBALL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION; AND C. R. GUTERMUTH, VICE PRESIDENT, WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT INSTITUTE Mr. ORTH. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would like to have them here at the table. Mr. HERLONG. Fine. If you would please identify yourselves for the record and then you may proceed. Mr. ORTH. My name is Franklin L. Orth. I am the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association of America. During the past few days when the Government witnesses appeared here from the Treasury Department and the Justice Department, they offered certain memorandum proposals for amendment of the present bills which are before this committee, H.R. 6628 and H.R. 6783, and by virtue of that fact, I would like to offer my original statement into the record, but speak from a supplemental statement which is half as long. Mr. HERLONG. Without objection, your original statement will appear in the record and you may proceed with your supplemental state inent. (Statement referred to follows:) STATEMENT OF FRANKLIN L. ORTH, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA Mr. Chairman, gentlemen of the committee, I appreciate this opportunity to testify before this committee with respect to the proposals for firearms control as contained in H.R. 6628 by Congressman John M. Murphy (16th District of New York) and H.R. 6783 by Congressman Abraham J. Multer (13th District of New York). During the course of this statement I will refer to several other of the many firearms control measures that have been introduced in the House of Representatives since the commencement of this Congress and referred to this committee for consideration. The National Rifle Association, a shooter-sportsman membership organization of 700,000 individuals and over 12,000 affiliated clubs and associations, has been dedicated for almost 100 years to the support of the national defense, law and order, and social welfare. It has conducted training in small arms marksmanship for the citizens of the United States who would be subject to military service. The history of the organization is replete with praise from our Presidents, the Cabinet, the Supreme Court, and outstanding citizens of our country for the work we have performed in each of these areas. During the 1930's, the National Rifle Association worked with the committees of the Congress, with the American Bar Association, and the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in the formulation of legislation which resulted in the basic national legislation pertaining to firearms, mainly the Federal Firearms Act and the National Firearms Act. As you know, this legislation was aimed at the gangster and other criminals who misused firearms and terrorized the public during the days when the Volstead Act was in effect. I think we can all agree that the legislation overall was quite successful in accomplishing its purpose. Today we have a new era of lawlessness in America due, in part, to social conditions and civil unrest. The fact that we have a critical crime situation in this country today is obvious to us all. President Johnson has said that he will create a commission to study the real causes of and the best ways to correct this problem. We commend the President for his vigorous leadership in this regard and favor the establishment of research projects on crime and a Presidential Crime Commission. We agree with the President that, in the main, laws regulating the sale of firearms are within the province of the States. The fields of authority of the Federal Government are limited as defined by the Constitution and the general police powers are retained by the States. We agree with the President that the sale of firearms in interstate commerce, as ordered through the mail, is a proper subject for legislation by the Federal Government. However, we view such highly restrictive legislation as proposed in H.R. 6628 and H.R. 6783 as unsound. These bills are aimed at all law-abiding individual citizens in an attempt to reach criminals and other classes of persons who misuse firearms. The National Rifle Association has been seeking ways and means to assist law-enforcement organizations in accomplishing legitimate objectives for many years and at the same time providing safeguards to insure that the citizens and sportsman not be disarmed. The NRA has worked closely with police departments throughout the United States in the development of programs to teach the proper and safe handling of firearms by law-enforcement officers. When the police shooting program was first started, it was expected to appeal more to small departments than to large ones. While the program has been favorably received by small departments, the largest departments are also very much interested. For example, all New York City Police firearms instructors have applied for their NRA credentials. National law enforcement agencies and State police forces have affiliated in this splendid program, as have large and small county and municipal departments, totaling more than 600. NRA staff members have been invited to instruct at several colleges and universities which offer police training courses. NRA staff people have been invited to give instruction to police departments and agencies, such as Birmingham, Ala.; Chattanooga, Tenn.; the U.S. postal service; the Illinois State Police; the South Carolina State Highway Patrol, and others. The NRA sponsors annually regional and national police combat pistol championships for police departments exclusively. The NRA police programs has been enthusiastically received by police organizations and we anticipate an even greater expansion of NRA activities in the police field. We have worked with the staff of the Juvenile Delinquency Subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee for more than 4 years in order to obtain a bill which would be meaningful and helpful, aimed at preventing criminals and juveniles from obtaining firearms by order through the mails. Last year I thought we had agreed on such a bill (S. 1975, by Senator Thomas J. Dodd of Connecticut), which was developed by that subcommittee and by sportsmen |