being introduced in the above bills, is the eventual restriction, registration and confiscation of the firearms from the individual citizen; the ultimate goal, complete diarmament of the American public. No one abhors the misuse of firearms more than the law-abiding gunowner and we support legislation such as introduced by Representative Bob Casey, of Texas, to penalize the criminal use of the firearms by individuals. I, for one, resent the mistrust by the Government of the American people as implied in this type of legislation being heard before this committee. I hope that this committee will find in this hearing, that most American citizens are law abiding. With a little research, I am sure the committee will find that this type of legislation will not help solve the crime problem and therefore recommend it be “killed" in committee. Thank you. Very truly yours, W. T. ATKINSON. STATEMENT OF MICHIGAN GUN COLLECTORS ASSOCIATION (AFFILIATED WITH NRA) Rarely in the history of our great country as a travesty upon justice been attempted so brazenly and yet with such subterfuge, upon the constitutional rights of the good citizens as the proposed antifirearms legislation in question. This is being fostered in the name of righteousness when in essence it only gives the criminal element greater security in his pursuit by disarming the good citizen, penalizing the innocent, and ultimately destroying the recreation of the millions of sportsmen and those engaged in the hobby of collecting antique or contemporary firearms. In the name of righteousness alone, why are the various legislative bodies of this country so reluctant to penalize the criminal per se and create laws so stern as to be a deterrent to crime (as exemplified by the Lindberg law on kidnaping), yet so prone to only want to legislate against the constitutional rights of the lawabiding people as the only alternative. These proposals are the epitome of mediocrity and an insult to the wisdom of our forefathers and legislative intellect of the contemporary representatives, of the American people, who strive in the best interest of their country. Bad laws only hurt the good; good laws benefit all without exception. Amended laws only serve to exemplify medocrity which is the result of ignorance and stupidity, or some ulterior motive. It behooves us to have to question such outrageous machination in our democracy which should be undefilable, at least from within. The Constitution of the United States of America is inviolate; through the test of time alone it transcends the efforts of tampering, and unquestionably the efforts as demonstraded by some of the present ideologists. We request that you as our Representatives give this problem your most profound consideration and let your wisdom prevail as statesmen as our forefathers did in their dedication. It is your direct responsibility to not politically covet the hysterical, the weak, the uninformed, to their ultimate detriment also. In conclusion we wish to make a few statements of fact for your consideration. In Switzerland where military training is compulsory for every male citizen, it is mandatory that each maintain a firearm in his home-crime is practically nonexistent. Hitler stipulated that the first consideration to weaken a people was to locate the registry of gunowners and confiscate all weapons under the penalty of death. There are some 20 million sportsmen in this country who use firearms in their pursuit. In our State of Michigan alone in 1963, the manager of the Lansing office of the Michigan Conservation Department reported a total of 1,137,687 licenses were issued of which 510,172 were resident deer licenses; 9,071 nonresident; 614,233 resident small game licenses; 41,211 nonresidents. There are also thousands of registered and nonregistered collectors of contemporary and antique firearms organized into national, State, and local organizations who attend intrastrate and interstate meetings. The sole purpose of these meetings is to display these weapons for their esthestic or historical value, to permit research, purchase, or trade and promote those attributes conducive to good citizenship. For these people a firearm is an inert object, as is any law. Its potential is existent only in its activation-good or bad. We therefore recommend that the proper use of any firearm as intended by our constitutional right not be tampered with and that you dedicate yourselves to legislating the criminal out of existence instead of the honest law-abiding citizens who desire to own firearms as their prerogative under the Bill of Rights in "their pursuit of happiness." STATEMENT OF WASHINGTON ARMS COLLECTORS, INC. Honorable chairman and members of the committee, the undersigned organization of the Washington Arms Collectors, of over 400 members, finds itself compelled to go on record as vehemently opposing the aforementioned bills because of the absence of two simple exceptions, the details of which follow and the presence of which is vital to all antique arms collectors organizations, in the aggregate, roughly comprising 115 clubs with a membership of 23,000. SUMMARY OF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Recommended amendment to except common rifles and pistols from the definition of "destructive devices", their inclusion therein being obviously a technical error. 2. Recommended amendment to generally except antique firearms from these bills. DETAILED STATEMENT I. Recommended amendment to except common rifles and pistols from the definition of "destructive devices," their inclusion therein being obviously a technical error. The purpose of Senate bill S. 1591, and House bills, H.R. 6629 and H.R. 6782, is the additional inclusion into the National Firearms Act (along with machine guns) of such purely military weapons known as bazookas, antitank guns, mortars, etc., all patently unsuited for hunting or target shooting and not overly desirable for collecting purposes. These military weapons have been lumped under the definition of a "destructive device" having a bore of one-half inch or more in diameter (p. 2, line 16 to p. 3, line 3). Shotguns, having a bore of onehalf inch or more in diameter, have been specifically excepted from this definition (p. 2, lines 22, 23, 24) but, due to failure by the authors and/or writers of these bills to obtain complete technical data, the recording in the bills of the corresponding exception of ordinary rifles and pistols was forgotten, obviously through an unintended technical error. There are tens of thousands of antique U.S. Army and Navy single-shot cartridge rifles and pistols notably U.S. rifle models 1868, 1869, 1870 and 1871, U.S. pistol models 1866, 1867 and 1871, Winchester rifles models 1886, Sharps and numerous other cartridge single-shot rifles, not to mention English doublebarrel rifles, all having a bore of one-half inch or more in diameter. The former (antique U.S. rifles and pistols) are particularly dear to thousands of collectors of U.S. martial and historical arms. Therefore it is urged that this technical error be corrected through an amendment in the Ways and Means Committee by the insertion of the words: "or a rifle having a barrel or barrels sixteen or more inches in length or a pistol or revolver" immediately following the words "other than a shotgun having a barrel or barrels of eighteen or more inches in length" (p. 2, line 24). II. Recommended amendment to generally except antique firearms from these bills. Inasmuch as the definition of "destructive device" (p. 2, line 16 through p. 3, line 3), indeed includes any and all shoulder arms and pistols having a bore one-half inch in diameter or more, including even 14th century matchlocks (500 years old) and 15th century wheellocks (400 years old) and blunderbuses the bore of all of which was generally three-quarters to eighty-five one-hundredths of an inch in diameter and which antiquities in most instances carried no identifying marks; and furthermore, inasmuch as the subject bills require that the owners of such firearms "shall identify the firearm with such number and other identification marks" (p. 4, lines 22, 23), which marking was intended to apply to ultramodern mortars and bazookas, but under these bills, as drafted, would apply to 500- and 400-year-old matchlocks and wheellocks; and furthermore, inasmuch as such stampings of numbers and markings would amount to vandalism, forthwith depreciating the value of some of these extremely rare and highly prized antiques from $3,500 to $30, now therefore we request that the three identical subject bills S. 1591, H.R. 6629, and H.R. 6782 be amended in the Ways and Means Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives to contain the following exception for antique firearms: "Nothing in this Act shall be construed as being applicable to antique firearms such firearms being those manufactured prior to the year 1898.” This date having been for several years used by the Office of Munitions Control of the Department of State of the United States (sec. 123.51) as well as by several of the States for defining antique firearms. This exception for such antiques would not except any of the machineguns, bazookas, antitank guns or mortars, as none were invented, let alone manufactured, prior to the year 1898. Thanking the honorable chairman and members of the Ways and Means Committee for the opportunity to formally present our recommendations for those two minor amendments to the subject bills. A. A. DE CARRIERE, Chairman, Legislative Committee. STATEMENT OF WABASH VALLEY GUN COLLECTORS' ASSOCIATION Mr. Chairman, my name is Leonard S. Burroughs, legal residence, Brownsburg, Ind. I am at this time president of the Wabash Valley Gun Collectors' Association, Inc., an Illinois corporation, having a membership of 1,000 persons, which is made up of individuals residing in numerous States. Speaking as president of and for and on behalf of this organization, I wish to state for the record this organization's unanimous opposition to all of the bills of this hearing pertaining to gun restriction or gun regulation in any manner whatsoever. The reasons for our vehement opposition are as follows: REASON NO. 1 Our present National and Federal firearms acts completely cover lawful and unlawful use of firearms. Any further Federal control of firearms is totally unneeded and uncalled for. We recommend honest and strict enforcement of our present laws against all criminals instead of more new complicated gun legislation which would harass the legitimate gun collectors, hunters, target shooters, and sportsmen. REASON NO. 2 To stop the imports of cannon, bazookas, antitank rifles, and machineguns, etc., etc., we have the Mutual Security Act of 1954 which gives the President of the United States authority to stop these imports at any time he sees fit. We recommend that he use this authority instead of asking for more. REASON NO. 3 We feel that present proposed gun legislation could and in all probability would lead to total gun registration. And as any statesman should know it is a matter of historical fact that a disarmed nation is a helpless nation. At this time we wish to state that we support 100 percent Congressman Robert Casey's bills No. 5641 and 5642. We honestly believe that these bills would strike a deadly blow at cause of our crime problem today. Namely, strike at the criminal who, as we see it, is the cause of all these hysterical attempts to push through these numerous antigun bills which only serve to harass the honest gun owner and have no effect on the people who use guns for unlawful acts. We recommend laws and enforcement of the present laws to punish the criminal-not the gun. Mr. Chairman, in closing we sincerely hope that you and your committee will pause for a few moments and think before you act. Are these bills in the best interest of the honest God-fearing American citizens who value the heritage of their Founding Fathers very highly of their right to keep and bear arms or, are these bills designed by bureaucrats and power-mad politicians for reasons best known to themselves? L. S. BURROUGHS, President. CHISHOLM TRAIL ANTIQUE GUN ASSOCIATION, Re Dodd bills and antigun legislation. House Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR CONGRESSMEN: The Chisholm Trail Antique Gun Association respectfully submits that the legislation pending before Congress, of the type represented by the so-called Dodd bills, does not and cannot accomplish the only legitimate purpose its proponents desire, to wit, the prevention of the commission of crimes involving the use of firearms. A criminal, either actual or potential, is a lawbreaker. He will not comply with any law restricting the possession, or requiring the reporting, registration, or licensing of firearms. Such a law would therefore work to the advantage of the criminal by depriving or limiting the ability and means of the average lawabiding citizen in the protection of his life and his property. We respectfully request that serious consideration be given to the essay of Mr. Robert A. Sprecher, winner of the 1965 Samuel Pool Weaver constitutional law essay competition which was published in two parts in the American Bar Association Journals of June and July 1965. We believe that this essay logically demonstrates as a matter of both fact and law, that the type of legislation we oppose is unwise and unconstitutional. The second amendment to the Constitution was adopted for the specific purpose of preserving to future generations the rights and abilities of the colonists, demonstrated 15 years before, when the law-abiding "embattled farmers stood and fired shots heard round the world." They were resisting the British Army which was advancing to confiscate the arms and powder of the colonists, acquired and maintained for their individual and mutual protection. A British "Dodd bill," enforced, would have eliminated the possibility of the creation of the United States of America. We also point out that the restrictions of the Dodd bills and similar proposals would include a major portion of the antique black powder guns collected and preserved by the members of our association and similar organizations and collectors. These obviously are not suitable or available to the average criminal. A firearm is an inanimate object. It is not evil in and of itself. If an individual uses it in an illegal manner, the crime is that of the user, not the object. As an organization we favor and strongly urge the enactment of legislation such as the Casey bill (H.R. 5642), as introduced in the House. The use of a firearm, or a knife, tire iron, or any other instrument of a similar nature in the commission of a crime should be severely punished. The surest deterrent to crime is swift and certain assessment of a severe penalty. Both the National Firearms Act and the Federal Fire Arms Act are good legislation, although they perhaps should be brought to date, requiring the deactivation or licensing of such weapons as were developed during World War II, which have no legitimate use except for war. The Chisholm Trail Antique Gun Association is an organization composed of a cross section of the citizens in this area. Its membership includes farmers, professional men (lawyers, doctors, engineers, etc.), merchants, businessmen, newspapermen, machinists, and virtually all phases of our social and economic life. The members of our association, in their regular monthly meeting held July 13, 1965, unanimously directed and approved the writing of this letter. We respectfully request that this letter be made a part of the record of the congressional hearings on the legislation referred to, because we want the record to show our opposition to the type of legislation represented by the Dodd bills, and our support and endorsement of the type represented by the Casey bill (H.R. 5642) as introduced in the House. Sincerely, DURWARD L. REGNIER, President. 51-635-65-pt. 2—21 CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Hon. RICHARD FULTON, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. DEAR DICK: Attached hereto is a photostatic copy of a letter I received from Mr. Haley and also attachments thereto which are self-explanatory. Would you please see that this gets into the hearings. Sincerely your friend, ROBERT A. EVERETT, MEMPHIS, TENN., July 13, 1965. Hon. ROBERT A. EVERETT, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. EVERETT : The enclosed transcript was wired to the Honorable Wilbur D. Mills, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, this afternoon. This is in accordance with the conversation of Mr. Cecil Godman with you. We are of the opinion that an actual appearance before the committee is not as important as to have our testimony included as part of the hearings and we doubt if the added expense of a visit to Washington is worth while, but rather would prefer our limited funds be used in contacting Members of Congress should a bill such as this come to vote. We appreciate your willingness to work with us on this matter and the fact that you are soon to be our new Representative. Yours very truly, Hon. WILBUR D. MILLS, Chairman, House Ways and Means Committee, Washington, D.C.: R. L. HALEY. It is our understanding that H.R. 6628 is being considered by the House Ways and Means Committee at this time. We respectfully request either the opportunity to have a representative testify in opposition to this proposed legislation or, preferably, to have the following transcript entered as testimony pertinent to the hearing: STATEMENT IN OPPOSITION TO H.R. 6628, A BILL TO AMEND THE FEDERAL FIREARMS ACT AS INTRODUCED TO THE 89TH CONGRESS, 1ST SESSION As a representative of sportsmen, hunters, and gun collectors of west Tennessee, and, in particular, of the Memphis Gun Collectors Association, it is my purpose in presenting this testimony to object to H.R. 6628 in its entirety. This objection is based upon the belief that the regulations concerning the transfer of ownership of guns or firearms and the other amendments to the Federal Firearms Act as outlined in this bill are of such a restrictive nature as to virtually disarm the law-abiding citizen and sportsman either through the encumbrances of these restrictions or by administrative fiat as yet unspecified. It is further believed that the purported objectives of this bill, those of disarming the criminal, immature, or mentally unfit, would not be accomplished and, in fact, criminal acts could be encouraged through the knowledge that the intended and disarmed victims would be unable to effectively resist. We also contend that the restrictions proposed by H.R. 6628 would cause the development of an unlawful commerce in firearms similar to that experienced with the commerce in liquor after passage of the Volstead Act. We particularly and specifically object to the following portions of this proposal: It includes all types of guns in the definition of "firearms" without exception or regard for common knowledge concerning definition of the various classes of guns and thus subjects all guns to restrictions which should apply only to types |