Assault Weapons Ban of 2022

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 1302, I call up the bill (H.R. 1808) to regulate assault weapons, to ensure that the right to keep and bear arms is not unlimited, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. 1808.

Mr. Speaker, today, we take another step to advance historic gun violence prevention legislation. H.R. 1808, the Assault Weapons Ban Act of 2022, restores and updates the prior assault weapons ban that kept weapons of war out of our communities for a decade before Republicans opposed its renewal.

As we have learned all too well in recent years, assault weapons, especially when combined with high-capacity magazines, are the weapon of choice for mass shootings. These military-style weapons are designed to kill the most people in the shortest amount of time. Quite simply, there is no place for them in our streets.

In 1994, we banned these killing machines, and countless lives were saved. But that ban was allowed to lapse 10 years later. Since then, we have seen the predictable results: Mass shootings have increased exponentially in our public spaces. Schools, movie theaters, supermarkets, houses of worship, parades, you name it, have all become vulnerable to attack.

Uvalde, Parkland, Tree of Life Synagogue. How many more mass shootings must we endure? When will we learn?

Well, I hope we are starting to learn today. I hope we are starting to learn today indeed.

The Assault Weapons Ban Act would prohibit the sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of semiautomatic assault weapons and large- capacity ammunition feeding devices. At the same time, it grandfathers existing semiautomatic assault weapons and contains numerous protections for law enforcement and responsible gun owners, including hunters, gun collectors, farmers, sports shooters, and those who use firearms for self-defense.

It is important to consider today's debate in the context of our other efforts to address the violence plaguing our communities.

Time and again, Democrats have advanced responsible gun safety legislation, only to face Republican opposition.

We have advanced legislation to conduct background checks for all gun sales, to close the Charleston loophole, to close the boyfriend loophole, and to keep guns away from those who are a danger to themselves or others.

We advanced my bill, the Protecting our Kids Act, and we sent the President the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, which was signed into law and will save lives. These proposals were opposed by all but a few of our Republican colleagues.

Today, they have another chance to take the action needed to make our communities safer. Will they stand with us? Will they show that they have learned? Or will they stand with an industry that right now is promoting a weapon to civilians that is powerful enough to shoot through bulletproof vests?

Will our Republican colleagues choose to defend the weapons of choice for mass murderers and those who seek to target law enforcement? Or will they choose to defend Americans who simply want to go to school, to go shopping, to march in a parade, or to go to a movie theater without the fear of having a target on their back? It is an easy choice for me.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Pelosi), the distinguished Speaker of the House.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Lofgren), a distinguished member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Jackson Lee), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I think that we will spend most of our time here today where facts will be told and then rhetorical conversations will be told, as well.

Fact: The Constitution, in the Second Amendment, does not prohibit the ban on assault weapons.

Fact: H.R. 1808, led by Mr. Cicilline, allows gun owners to hold their guns. This deals with the transfer of guns.

Fact: As we can see, the lives of our children are lost through carnage, bloodshed, and murder--fact--by the hands of an AR-15, an assault-style weapon.

Fact: Our fellow citizens are killed by an AR-15, -14, an assault- style weapon.

Fact: Mass carnage is not done by a knife, a BB gun. It is not done by throwing a water bomb or words. It is not done by taking a bus and running over citizens. It is done by assault-style weapons.

So, I rise today to support H.R. 1808 because I am tired of a fact of doing nothing.

Mayor Bowser has a right to complain about Governor Abbott generating individuals unfairly, unjustly, and wrongly to another jurisdiction. But the fact is that these weapons have killed.

So, without any concern, we are now offering facts. Anyone that suggests that we are taking guns from good gun owners, we are not.

Uvalde Parents, Highland Park Survivors Demand Assault Weapons Ban (By Ellie Silverman)

Kimberly Rubio keeps trying to picture the classroom through her 10-year-old daughter Lexi's eyes, haunted by the different ways that May day could have ended.

What side of the room did Lexi run toward with her classmates, huddling and fearing for their lives? What if Rubio had taken her daughter home earlier after an award ceremony that day? What if the outside door locked properly? What if police had immediately engaged the suspected gunman?

But the one question that lawmakers should ask themselves every morning and night, she posed, was: ``What if the gunman never had access to an assault weapon?''

``We are no longer asking for change,'' Rubio, 33, said to a cheering crowd of about 200 people at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday. ``We are demanding it.''

Rubio was one of several people who spoke at a rally about the ways gun violence had irreparably harmed their lives and demanded a federal ban on assault weapons.

Those gathered wore bright orange shirts and included community members from Highland Park, Ill., where a gunman killed seven adults and injured dozens more during a Fourth of July parade, and parents of children who were among the 21 people killed in May at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Tex.

Rubio's daughter Alexandria Aniyah Rubio, known as Lexi, was one of the children killed.

Many openly grieved at the rally, crying during Rubio's remarks. A mother at the Highland Park parade recounted how she fled, holding her 1-year-old daughter in her arms as she was grazed by a bullet. Parents shared the terrifying questions they're hearing from their young children who survived shootings. And speaker after speaker demanded more sweeping federal action to curb the scourge of gun violence.

Last month, President Biden signed a bipartisan gun-control bill into law, the most significant of its kind in three decades. It expands criminal background checks for some gun buyers, bars a larger group of domestic-violence offenders from purchasing firearms, and funds programs that would allow authorities to seize guns from troubled individuals. However, gun control advocates, and Biden himself, have noted that the legislation does not include everything they hoped for.

During an event on the White House's South Lawn on Monday billed as ``commemorating the historic achievement of the passage of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act,'' the father of a 17-year-old boy killed in the 2018 massacre at a high school in Parkland, Fla., heckled the president. demanding more action to curb gun violence. Biden renewed calls for a federal ban on assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines.

On Wednesday, mothers continued to step up to the lectern near the grassy area by 1st and C streets NE and speak about their children, friends and relatives who died of gun violence and the ways survivors grapple with anxiety attacks, fear and guilt. Democratic lawmakers from Illinois, including Sen. Tammy Duckworth; Rep. Brad Schneider, whose district includes Highland Park; and Rep. Jan Schakowsky, also spoke at the rally before the crowd marched toward the Capitol.

Nubia Hogan, 45, stood among the crowd and held a poster with a photo of her father, Eduardo Uvaldo.

Uvaldo was at the July Fourth parade with Hogan and their relatives when gunfire rained on the crowd. The parade was a family tradition and Uvaldo's favorite holiday, she said.

Hogan said she thought about how when gunfire erupted from a nearby rooftop, she froze. Her son, Brian Hogan, 13, yelled to run and the family tried to flee. A bullet hit Brian in the arm and fragments hit Nubia Hogan's mother, too. Uvaldo was also struck and was rushed to the hospital, where he died two days later.

``I get anxiety really bad. I get nightmares, waking up to hearing `boom boom' like the shots,'' said Nubia Hogan, of Waukegan, Ill. ``These types of guns should not be out there for civilians. These are for the military and for police.''

She plans to continue with activism around this issue, joining the many other people who have channeled their grief into advocacy for change. Thousands of people gathered earlier this summer on the National Mall to join the rally staged by March for Our Lives, the organization founded by student survivors of the mass shooting in Parkland, where a gunman killed 17 people.

Still, more than 115,000 students have been exposed to gun violence on K-12 campuses during regular hours since the Parkland massacre, according to a Washington Post database.

Brett Cross, 39, stood toward the back of the crowd and said he thought about his nephew, 10-year-old Uziyah Garcia, and how the ``system'' didn't protect his family and so many others. The day of the shooting in Uvalde, his wife raced over to the school where Cross said police pushed and blocked parents from entering the building to save their children.

In the first classroom the gunman entered, Cross said, was his nephew, ``Uzi,'' the young boy who was fast, always racing people, and who aspired to make music, be a YouTuber and one day become a police officer to help people.

``Those same cops that he looked up to failed him and his classmates,'' Cross said.

His 10-year-old son and Uzi shared a room together but now, his son doesn't want to be in there. Cross bought a cot and placed it next to his bed, where the two hold hands before falling asleep.

``He said he wanted to go to school that day so that he could have done something,'' Cross said. ``He wants to know why an 18-year-old kid can go buy these weapons, why it took his brother from him.'' ____ [From the CBS News, July 27, 2022]

Gunmakers Made Over $1 Billion in Assault Weapon Sales in the Past Decade, Congressional Report Finds (By Clare Hymes)

An investigation by the House Oversight and Reform Committee found that manufacturers of the firearms used in some of the nation's deadliest mass shootings have made over $1 billion in revenue from military-style assault-rifles in the past decade.

The committee said the industry reaped those profits in part through marketing and sales tactics aimed at enticing civilians into purchasing military-style weapons--especially targeting younger men with opportunities to purchase expensive firearms on credit, and by subtly referencing extremist groups, for instance invoking imagery identified with these groups. The findings were published ahead of an Oversight Committee hearing on Capitol Hill Wednesday on the marketing practices and the profits of the country's top five gun manufacturers.

Committee Chairwoman Carolyn Maloney said the companies market the weapons ``to children, preying on young men's insecurities, and even appealing to violent white supremacists.''

During the hearing, the committee heard from the CEOs of two of those manufacturers, Christopher Killoy, president and chief executive of Sturm, Ruger & Co, and Marty Daniel, CEO of Daniel Defense. A rifle used in the recent mass shooting at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde, Texas, that was used to kill 21 students and teachers was made by Daniel Defense.

Smith & Wesson, President and CEO, Mark P. Smith was invited to testify but ultimately did not appear at the hearing. The committee announced it will be subpoenaing the company for documents.

``A firearm, any firearm, can be used for good or for evil. The difference is in the intent of the individual possessing it, which we respectfully submit should be the focus of any investigation into the root causes of criminal violence involving firearms,'' Killoy told the committee in his opening statement. ``

The committee, which was led by the Democratic lawmakers, produced an investigation into Smith & Wesson, Bushmaster, Ruger, Daniel Defense and Sig Sauer that alleged that the manufacturers engaged in ``disturbing sales tactics'' that targeted young men as a means to ``prove their manliness,'' according to the report.

The committee also noted that despite the rise in gun violence and the pervasiveness of mass shootings, that rifle sales have continued to increase.

Smith & Wesson, the manufacturer of the firearms used at the massacres in Highland Park, Parkland, and San Bernardino, has made at least $695 million in revenue from AR-1-style rifle sales alone in the past decade. Between 2019 and 2021, its revenues more than doubled from all long guns, from $108 million to $253 million.

Daniel Defense tripled its revenues of its AR-15-style rifles from $40 million in 2019 to over $120 million in 2021. Since 2012 Daniel Defense has made $528 Million from AR-15 style rifles.

Ruger's earnings followed a similar trend, tripling from $39 million in 2019 to over $103 million in 2021. Over the past decade its AR-15-style firearm revenue totaled $514 million. Ruger's weapons were used in the massacres at Sutherland Springs that left 25 dead, and Boulder, Colorado, resulting in the deaths of 10 people.

Sig Sauer refused to provide the committee with figures that would detail the revenues from AR-15 style rifles. Its firearms were used in the mass shootings at the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando, which killed 49 people, and at a Las Vegas music festival where 60 died.

Bushmaster only provided the committee with revenue figures for 2021, citing its recent acquisition by another company, and disclosed that it had earned $2.9 million from the sales of AR-15-style rifles. Bushmaster firearms were used in the racially motivated shooting in Buffalo, New York that killed 10 people, and in the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut, where 27 died.

Maloney, said the committee found the manufacturers had engaged in ``dangerous marketing tactics'' as part of their efforts to sell assault weapons.

``None of these companies take even basic steps to monitor the deaths and injuries caused by their products,'' Maloney said. ``That is beyond irresponsible.''

She asked the CEOs of Ruger and Daniel Defense whether they would accept responsibiity for their companies' roles in mass murders that took place in places like Southerland Springs, Highland Park and Uvalde, and whether they would apologize to victims and their families.

``Chairwoman Maloney, these acts are committed by murderers. The murderers are responsible,'' Daniel replied.

``Congresswoman, with all due respect, while I grieve like all Americans at these tragic incidents,'' Killoy said. ``To blame the firearm is [to blame] an inanimate object.''

Earlier this month, advocates from Everytown for Gun Safety filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, asking it to investigate the marketing practices of Daniel Defense, alleging the manufacturer violates the law by ``marketing assault weapons to the civilian market with violent and militaristic imagery'' and ``appealing particularly to the thrill-seeking and impulsive tendencies of susceptible teens and young men who are attracted to violence and military fantasies.''

The FTC declined to comment regarding investigation requests but told CBS News it has not taken any legal action against gun manufacturers. CBS News has reviewed similar complaints against gun manufacturers brought to the FTC since 1996 but has not found any evidence that the agency has ever taken any action against the industry for its marketing practices.

Daniel Defense's marketing has drawn particular scrutiny since the Uvalde shooting for targeting ``at-risk young men.'' Its Instagram account features photos of members of the military holding its weapons, as well as celebrities such as actor Josh Brolin in ``Sicario 2'' and Post Malone wielding its products. Promotional videos from the manufacturer also feature dramatizations of law enforcement and military drills using their weapons.

The committee's report cites Palmetto State Armory's ``Big Igloo Aloha'' AK-47-style assault rifle which is designed with a floral pattern, a reference to the Boogaloo movement, a violent far right, anti-government group which is often associated with wearing floral-print shirts. The committee found that Daniel Defense posted an lnstagram photo in June 2021 of its M4A1 assault rifle that had been accessorized with a similar floral pattern.

The committee began investigating the manufacturers in May after the mass shootings in Uvalde and Buffalo.

None of the five manufacturers immediately responded to CBS News' request for comment.

The House is scheduled to vote on Friday on the first assault weapons ban proposed since 1994. ____

`I Will Not Let my Students Die in Vain': Uvalde Teacher Calls for Assault Weapons Ban in His Town (By Jala Washington)

Uvalde, Texas (Nexstar).--There's now a petition to stop the sale of all assault rifles in Uvalde. Who is the one helping lead this effort? A teacher who watched his students be murdered and wounded himself.

Arnulfo Reyes, posted on his Facebook page on Wednesday saying: ``I meant what I said and said what I meant. I will not let my students die in vain. Now Uvalde back me up. #uvaldeatrong.''

This comes just over two months after he lost his students in the May 24 Robb Elementary School shooting.

The petition is addressed to Randy Klein, the principal owner of the Oasis Outback. It's a bar and grill that also sells ``archery supplies including ammunition, targets, tree stands, fishing rods, reels, and tackle,'' according to its website.

The Oasis is where the accused Uvalde gunman bought the rifle--within days of his 18th birthday--according to investigators.

The petition authors are a group called, ``Uvalde Strong for Gun Safety.'' They wrote:

Mr. Klein,

As you know, on May 24, 2022, a massacre occurred in our community at Robb Elementary School that resulted in the untimely and tragic death of nineteen children and two teachers. It was an assault rifle purchased at your place of business that was used in the shooting. This tragedy will undeniably negatively impact the community at large for generations to come. Therefore, we write to you today with great urgency.

Soon after the murders befell our town, we formed an organization called Uvalde Strong for Gun Safety. Many citizens from Uvalde and the surrounding areas are members of this group, as well as individuals from all over the country. We recognize that Oasis Outback has positively served the community in several ways and performs a vital role in contributing to our municipality's vibrancy. The members of this group feel strongly about our second amendment rights and support your establishment's commitment to selling guns and ammunition. However, we come to you today with a request.

Out of RESPECT for and in support of those affected by this catastrophe, we strongly urge you to cease the sale of assault rifles and the ammunition paired with them. In addition, we ask that you discontinue the handling of gun transfers of this style of firearm from gun retail stores and manufacturers. Doing so will ensure that children across Uvalde County will never have to worry about a new purchase of this type of weapon. We hope you will comply with our request over the next thirty days.

Stand with us! Your support will help us heal as a community. We thank you for your time. Sincerely, Uvalde Strong for Gun Safety.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I urge a ``yes'' vote for H.R. 1808. That is a fact.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 1808, the ``Assault Weapons Ban of 2022,'' that would prohibit the sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices.

Whether we call them assault weapons or AR-15 style weapons, we all know that we are talking about civilian versions of firearms created for the military.

Day after day, mass shooting after mass shooting, we are confronted with the carnage that is inflicted on the human body when these weapons of war are used against elementary-aged children, teachers, parade- goers, high school students, worshippers, shoppers, and on and on.

In America, gun violence is the leading cause of death among children while mass shootings occur ever increasingly each year.

It is no secret that I am adamantly opposed to assault weapons and large capacity magazines--implements designed for war. Neither belong in our communities.

Since the time I first joined my colleagues in the House in 2003 to extend the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994, we have seen innumerable acts of violence and carnage perpetrated using assault weapons and large capacity magazines.

I have hugged far too many grieving spouses and friends, wiped away the tears of too many loved ones left behind to pick up the pieces, and offered condolences to countless communities across the country-- including my own.

There is no debating that when paired together, large capacity magazines and assault weapons perform as they were designed--killing more people quickly and efficiently.

We all know that the parents in Uvalde were asked to provide DNA swabs to identify their murdered children because they were unrecognizable. I am tired of seeing parents bury their children--tired of promising that we in Congress will remove these military-style weapons from our communities--then, returning and doing nothing.

H.R. 1808 will help gradually reduce the number of assault weapons and large capacity magazines available--keeping them out of the hands of criminals--while reducing the number of lives lost to gun violence, and making us all safer, the bill still recognizes that many Americans already own assault weapons and large capacity magazines and provides ways in which they can keep their firearms, transfer them following a background check.

The evidence is clear. Bans work. During the 1994 federal assault weapons ban was in effect, mass shooting fatalities were 70 percent less likely to occur. And, when the large capacity ammunition feeding device ban was in place, there were 77 percent fewer injuries from guns.

In the past decade, gun makers have flooded the market with assault weapons, making over $1 billion in sales, but at a tragic cost to the rest of us.

From 2000 to 2004, the average number of people killed from active shooter incidents per year was 22. But from 2005 to 2021, the average number of people killed from active shooter incidents was 68.7.

We know the common denominator here--assault weapons and large capacity magazines--and H.R. 1808 is the solution. It is time to act.

H.R. 1808 is a necessary measure that will protect Americans and promote public safety. We should all be tired of bracing ourselves for the next attack on another unsuspecting gathering of Americans going about their daily lives or identifying the nearest exits as we sit and try to enjoy time with our loved ones or hearing children tell us about the active shooter drills they participate in at school or camp.

I thank Representative David Cicilline for his leadership on this important measure. Examples of mass shootings involving assault weapons and/or large capacity magazines

Uvalde, Texas--AR-15-style weapon killed 19 children; 2 teachers

Buffalo, New York--AR-15-style rifle killed 10 shoppers

Boulder, Colorado--Ruger AR-556 semi-automatic killed 10 people including a police officer

Dayton, Ohio--AR-15-style weapon equipped with a 100-round ammunition magazine to kill nine people and injure over 25 others in less than 30 seconds at a local bar

El Paso, Texas--AK-47-style weapon killed 22 at a Walmart.

Gilroy, Calif.--AK-47-style weapon wounded 17 and killed three including a 13-year-old girl and 6-year-old

Thousand Oaks, Calif.--Glock 21 .45-caliber pistol and several high- capacity ammunition magazines killed 12.

Pittsburgh, Pa.--AR-15-style weapon killed 11 worshipers. The deadliest anti-Semitic attack committed against the Jewish community in America.

Parkland, Fla.--M&P15 AR-15 military style rifle; killed 17 students and educators.

Sutherland Springs, Texas--Ruger AR-556 Rifle; killed 26 churchgoers.

Las Vegas, Nev.--Shooter with more than 20 assault style weapons and 12 bump-fire stocks killed 58 people and wounded over 500 others.

Orlando, Fla.--Sig Sauer MCX assault rifle killed 49 and wounded 58. The deadliest incident of violence against LGBT people in our nation's history.

Newtown, Conn.--Bushmaster semiautomatic assault killed 26 people including 20 children.

Aurora, Colo.--Smith & Wesson M&P15 semiautomatic assault-style rifle with a 100-round ammunition drum and other firearms killed 12 people and injured 58.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Garcia), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Dean), a member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Fact: Contrary to Mr. Roy, this bill takes away nobody's weapons because existing weapons are grandfathered in if he would only read the bill.

Escobar), who is a member of the Judiciary Committee.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, contrary to Mr. Roy, I include in the Record a report from Third Way titled ``The Red State Murder Problem''. [From Third Way, Mar.15, 2022] The Red State Murder Problem (By Kylie Murdock and Jim Kessler)

Every news outlet from FOX to CNN to The New York Times to local newspapers has a story with attention-grabbing headlines like ``US cities hit all-time murder records.'' Fox News and Republicans have jumped on this and framed it as a ``Democrat'' problem. They blame it on Democrat's ``soft-on- crime'' approach and have even referred to a New York District Attorney's approach as ``hug-a-thug.'' Many news stories outside of Fox have also purported that police reform is responsible for this rise in murder and have pointed to cities like New York and Los Angeles.

There is a measure of truth to these stories. The US saw an alarming 30% increase in murder in 2020. While 2021 data is not yet complete, murder was on the rise again this past year. Some ``blue'' cities, like Chicago, Baltimore, and Philadelphia, have seen real and persistent increases in homicides. These cities--along with others like Los Angeles, New York, and Minneapolis--are also in places with wall-to- wall media coverage and national media interest.

But there is a large piece of the homicide story that is missing and calls into question the veracity of the right- wing obsession over homicides in Democratic cities: murder rates are far higher in Trump-voting red states than Biden- voting blue states. And sometimes, murder rates are highest in cities with Republican mayors.

For example, Jacksonville, a city with a Republican mayor, had 128 more murders in 2020 than San Francisco, a city with a Democrat mayor, despite their comparable populations. In fact, the homicide rate in Speaker Nancy Pelosi's San Francisco was half that of House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy's Bakersfield, a city with a Republican mayor that overwhelmingly voted for Trump. Yet there is barely a whisper, let alone an outcry, over the stunning levels of murders in these and other places.

We collected 2019 and 2020 murder data from all 50 states. (Comprehensive 2021 data is not yet available.) We pulled the data from yearly crime reports released by state governments, specifically the Departments of Justice and Safety. For states that didn't issue state crime reports, we pulled data from reputable local news sources. To allow for comparison, we calculated the state's per capita murder rate, the number of murders per 100,000 residents, and categorized states by their presidential vote in the 2020 election, resulting in an even 25-25 split.

We found that murder rates are, on average, 40% higher in the 25 states Donald Trump won in the last presidential election compared to those that voted for Joe Biden. In addition, murder rates in many of these red states dwarf those in blue states like New York, California, and Massachusetts. And finally, many of the states with the worst murder rates--like Mississippi, Kentucky, Alabama, South Carolina, and Arkansas--are ones that few would describe as urban. Only 2 of America's top 100 cities in population are located in these high murder rate states. And not a single one of the top 10 murder states registers in the top 15 for population density.

Whether one does or does not blame Republican leaders for high murder rates, it seems that Republican officeholders do a better job of blaming Democrats for lethal crime than actually reducing lethal crime.

If you're tuned in to the media, you'd think murder is rocketing skyward in New York, California, Illinois. But those states don't even crack the top ten.

In fact, the top per capita murder rate states in 2020 were mostly those far from massive urban centers and Democratic mayors and governors. Eight of the top ten worst murder rate states voted for Trump in 2020. None of those eight has supported a Democrat for president since 1996.

The chart below shows the top 10 murder rate states in 2020. Mississippi had the highest homicide rate at 20.50 murders per 100,000 residents, followed by Louisiana at 15.79, Kentucky at 14.32, Alabama at 14.2, and Missouri at 14. The national average was 6.5 per 100,000 residents, but the top five states had rates more than twice that high.

These red states are not generating ``murder is out of control'' national headlines. They seem to generate no headlines at all. The rest of the top ten were filled out by South Carolina, New Mexico, Georgia, Arkansas, and Tennessee--all states rarely talked about in breathless media reports about rampant crime in Democratic strongholds. Notably, New Mexico and Georgia were the only Biden-voting states in the top ten, and they ranked seventh and eighth, respectively.

Five of the largest Biden-voting states by population, and those often in the news when it comes to crime, had much lower murder rates. New York at 4.11 per 100,000 residents, California at 5.59, and New Jersey at 3.70 were each well below the national average. Pennsylvania (7.22) and Illinois (9.20) were higher than the national average. But Mississippi's murder rate was nearly 400% higher than New York's, more than 250% higher than California's, and about 120% higher than Illinois's. In fact, the five states with the highest murder rates, all Trump-voting states, had rates at least 240% higher than New York's murder rate and at least 150% higher than California's, the homes to some of the largest cities featured prominently in the ``crime is out of control'' narrative.

Beyond the top 10, we looked at the 2020 murder rates in the 25 states that voted for Donald Trump and compared it with the murder rates in the 25 states that voted for Joe Biden. The 8.20 murders per 100,000 residents rate in Trump states was 40% higher than the 5.78 murders per 100,000 residents in Biden states. These Biden-voting states include the ``crime-is-out-of-control'' cities of Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, Portland, Baltimore, and Minneapolis, among other large cities.

Among the 50 states, murder rates were often well above the national average in many Republican-controlled states and cities. Jacksonville with 176 homicides and a murder rate (19.776) more than three times that of New York City (5.94) has a Republican mayor. Tulsa (19.64) and Oklahoma City (11.16) have Republican mayors in a Republican state and have murder rates that dwarf that of Los Angeles (6.74). Lexington's Republican mayor saw record homicides in 2020 and 2021, with a murder rate (10.61) nearly twice that of New York City. Bakersfield (11.91) and Fresno (14.09) each have Republican mayors and murder rates far higher than either San Francisco or Los Angeles.

Of course, some cities controlled by Democrats have alarming murder rates, like Chicago (28.49) and Houston (17.32). But we hear about these and other Democrat-run cities all the time. We aren't getting the whole picture.

In 2020, murder rates increased nearly everywhere. But they increased more in Trump-voting states than Biden-voting states, albeit slightly. The average increase in murder rate across all Trump-voting states was 32.2% compared to 30.8% in Biden-voting states.

Three out of the five states with the highest murder rates in 2020--Mississippi, Missouri, and Alabama--didn't have reliable 2019 data available, so they weren't included in this analysis.

Three of the five states with the largest increase in murder rate were Trump-voting Wyoming at 91.7%, South Dakota at 69%, and Nebraska at 59.1%. These states are decidedly rural and do not conform to the chaos-in-the-city meme that has overtaken the crime debate. Biden-voting Wisconsin came in at the number three spot at 63.2% and Minnesota came in fifth at 58.1%. Out of the top ten states, six were Trump- voting states--with the additional three being Kentucky, West Virginia, and Kansas. The remaining states in the top ten were Delaware and Washington. Only one of the top ten states in murder rate increases, Delaware, was among the top twenty in population density.

Again, California, New York, and Illinois aren't in the top ten. California's murder rate increase was 31.1%, or about the national average. Both New York (45.8%) and Illinois (38.2%) were above the national average.

The current narrative around crime and murder is convenient and wrong. Whether you're watching CNN or Fox News, or getting news online or from a traditional newspaper, you would think that the increase in murder is a phenomenon found mostly in liberal cities. Many have tried attributing this increase to Democratic policies, specifically police reform. Republican lawmakers and ad makers have contributed to this narrative through clever messaging and strategies.

But the data clearly paint a different story. The increase in murders is not a liberal cities problem but a national problem. Murder rates are actually higher in Republican, Trump-voting states that haven't even flirted with ideas like defund the police. Eight of the ten most lawless, high-murder states are not only Trump-voting states, but GOP bastions for the last quarter of a century. A more accurate conclusion from the data is that Republicans do a far better job blaming others for high murder rates than actually reducing high murder rates.

We sought 2019 and 2020 murder data from all 50 states. Our primary source was the annual crime reports released by state governments, more specifically from their Departments of Justice or Public Safety. We chose state data because we found it's more comprehensive than FBI data which is often compiled later. For example, ``the FBI estimated crime statistics for Mississippi are based on data received from 113 of 251 law enforcement agencies in the state that year.'' 37 states had crime reports for the years 2019 and 2020: Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Nevada, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. For the remaining states we pulled data from published public sources: Alabama--US News, Georgia--US News, Hawaii--The Center Square, Indiana-- Hartford City News Times, Louisiana--US News, Maryland--Ocean City Today, Mississippi--US News, Missouri--US News, New Mexico--US News, Ohio--Axios, Oregon--KOIN, Vermont--WCAX, West Virginia--The Center Square. In seven states, the public sources only provided murder per capita rates, so using the rates and census population data, we estimated the number of murders in that state. Data and sources are attached above.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Wasserman Schultz).

Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this assault weapons ban to reclaim our streets, churches, schools, and synagogues.

Assault weapons are killing machines and the weapon of choice for mass murderers. In my own county, in Parkland, a lone teenager slaughtered 17 people by himself all because he had an assault weapon. This deranged individual tragically, brutally killed and then overturned the lives of those families and forever changed our entire community.

But this is no isolated case. Similar mass murders haunt Las Vegas, El Paso, Buffalo, Uvalde, Orlando, Pittsburgh, and too many other communities for me to list here today.

No parent should fear seeing a child off to a mall, movie theater, or school knowing that a killer wielding a weapon designed to kill as many people as possible and as fast as possible may lie in wait for them.

We need a whole-of-government solution to this health epidemic, including enforced ammunition background checks.

Let's take these killing machines off our streets and end this fear that one person with one assault weapon in one moment can tragically tear countless lives apart.

Republicans take note: the Supreme Court clearly allows limitations on weapons in their decisions. Repeating a falsehood doesn't make it true.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a letter of endorsement of the assault weapons ban from the Major Cities Chiefs Association, a professional organization of law enforcement executives representing the largest cities in the United States. Major Cities Chiefs Association, July 20, 2022. Hon. Jerrold Nadler, Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Jim Jordan, Ranking Member, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.

Dear Chairman Nadler and Ranking Member Jordan: I write on behalf of the Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA), a professional organization of law enforcement executives representing the largest cities in the United States and Canada. Thank you for including H.R. 1808, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2022, in today's markup. The MCCA was proud to endorse this legislation when it was introduced earlier this Congress.

The MCCA has long advocated for sensible firearms and gun safety policies. In 2018, the Association adopted a Firearms Violence Policy that consists of several common-sense reforms, including banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Many law enforcement officials have closely studied assault weapons and firearms with high-capacity magazines and determined they have no reasonable sporting or hunting purpose.

Assault weapons and high-capacity magazines also represent a significant threat to law enforcement officers responding to violent crimes. For example, the suspect who murdered NYPD Officers Jason Rivera and Wilbert Mora in January 2022 used a firearm with a high-capacity magazine that allowed his gun to hold 40 additional rounds. Earlier this month, Detroit PD Officer Loren Michael Courts was killed by a suspect with an AK-47-style pistol that would have been banned under H.R. 1808.

The MCCA encourages all Members of the Committee to support the Assault Weapons Ban of 2022 and report it favorably during today's markup. Sincerely, Jeri Williams, Chief, Phoenix Police Department, President, Major Cities Chiefs Association.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I include in the Record a report from the Violence Policy Center entitled, ``Target: Law Enforcement, Assault Weapons in the News.'' Section One

Introduction: Background on Assault Weapons and Federal Attempts at Their Regulation

Assault weapons. Semiautomatic assault weapons are civilian versions of automatic military assault rifles like the AK-47 and the M-16. The civilian guns look the same as their military brethren because they are identical functionally, except for one feature: military assault rifles are machine guns. A machine gun fires continuously as long as its trigger is held back--until it runs out of ammunition. Civilian assault rifles, in contrast, are semi-automatic weapons. The trigger of a semiautomatic weapon must be pulled back separately for each round fired. Because federal law has banned the sale of new machine guns to civilians since 1986 and heavily regulates sales to civilians of older model machine guns, there is virtually no civilian market for military assault weapons. Nonetheless, civilian semiautomatic assault weapons have proven every bit as deadly as their military counterparts.

Regulation of assault weapons. The regulation of semiautomatic assault weapons has been a contentious subject for more than two decades.

In the 1980s foreign manufacturers (principally China) began dumping semiautomatic versions of the Soviet-designed AK-47 military assault rifle--a ubiquitous staple of the world-wide small arms trade--onto the U.S. civilian firearms market. Colt Industries, a domestic manufacturer, was also marketing the AR-15, a semiautomatic version of its M-16 machine gun, the standard U.S. military infantry rifle. The gun industry introduced these semiautomatic versions of military assault weapons in order to create and exploit new civilian markets. More particularly, the industry found in assault weapons a product to compensate for a slump in handgun sales. Importers and manufacturers rushed copycats and new models to market. By the end of the decade, a roster of semiautomatic assault weapons had become household words, boosted into daily language as much by their glamorization in entertainment media as by their deadly toll on America's streets. These guns included, among others, assault pistols like the MAC-10, MAC-11, and TEC-9, the Ruger Mini-14 rifle, and several versions of the Israeli Military Industries UZI.

No comprehensive statistics were available about the misuse of the hundreds of thousands of assault weapons pouring onto the Nation's streets. But by 1988 police departments and other law enforcement agencies were often on the receiving end of assault weapons firepower. Many of them demanded that the federal government take action to stringently control or ban semiautomatic assault weapons. In February 1988, for example, Prince George's County (Maryland) Police Chief Michael J. Flaherty stated, ``The real issue is the safety of our officers.'' Holding up a TEC-9 assault pistol, he added, ``It's not used for hunting, and it's not used for sporting events. In my opinion, they should not be sold in the United States.''

In 1989 the federal government took a modest regulatory step. At the urging of William J. Bennett, the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President George H. W. Bush, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) barred the import of a handful of specific models, including AK-type and UZI assault rifles. The move was based on a federal statute that effectively limits the import of firearms to those that are ``generally recognized as particularly suitable for or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.'' This ``sporting purposes'' test does not apply to domestically manufactured firearms, however. Law enforcement officials quickly complained that the putative ban did not reach many of the most dangerous weapons they faced, including semiautomatic assault pistols made in the United States (e.g., the MAC-10, MAC-11, and TEC-9, among others). Although the Bush Administration claimed to have been conducting a wide review with the goal of further regulation, strong opposition by the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the firearms industry squelched any further regulatory moves by the Administration. Within a year, Bennett announced himself opposed to any further regulation, declaring his opposition at a February 1990 Senate hearing, stating, ``I don't know a damn thing about guns!''

In 1994, President William J. Clinton signed the 1994 federal assault weapons ``ban.'' The law defined assault weapons in two different ways--by a list of specific firearm types, and by a generic description. Thus, the law specifically named 19 types of guns (e.g., ``Norinco, Mitchell and Poly Technologies Avtomat Kalashnikovs'') as assault weapons covered by the putative ``ban.'' It also generally defined as assault weapons semiautomatic firearms that could accept a detachable magazine and had any two of a list of specified design characteristics (e.g., bayonet mount, folding stock). The 1994 law was deeply flawed. At the outset it exempted millions of semiautomatic assault weapons by ``grandfathering'' all such firearms legally owned as of the date of enactment. For these guns, it was as if the law had never been passed. They continued to be bought and sold, many at gun shows where no questions are asked of prospective buyers in nominally ``private'' sales. Moreover, some of the design characteristics by which new production or imports were to be defined as banned assault weapons were simply a laundry list of superficial cosmetic features that had nothing to do with the weapons' most deadly functional features. The gun industry quickly and easily evaded the 1994 law by making slight, cosmetic changes to the supposedly banned firearms. Gun manufacturers and importers soon openly boasted of the ease with which they could circumvent the ban. By the time the 1994 law expired (sunset) in 2004, there were actually many more types and models of assault weapons legally on the civilian market than before the law was passed.

In April 1998 the Clinton Administration attempted to staunch the flow of cosmetically redesigned foreign assault weapons by strictly interpreting the ``sporting purposes'' test for imports. The action--taken independent of the 1994 law and intended to close the cosmetic redesign loophole for imports--was reported to have blocked 58 types of assault weapons, including in one swoop importation permits pending at the time for as many as 1.6 million guns. Since this administrative determination and action has never been rescinded, it should have survived the expiration of the broader 1994 assault weapons ban. However, there is substantial evidence--including extensive gun industry advertising--which compels the conclusion that the George W. Bush Administration either ignored or effectively gutted through administrative artifice the 1998 Clinton import controls. This evidence includes the following facts.

There are numerous companies that appear to be importing AK-47 and other assault weapons of the type clearly prohibited by the import ban. The Russian American Armory Company offers the Saiga rifle, an AK-47 variant that was one of the guns specifically excluded from import under the 1998 Clinton rule. The Fabrique Nationale Herstal PS90 assault rifle, a favorite of Mexican drug cartels, is manufactured in Belgium and imported by the company's U.S. subsidiary, FN USA, according to the company's catalogs and promotional materials.

There seems to have been a substantial increase in the past few years of assault weapons made primarily from imported parts that skirt the import ban by incorporating a small, minimum number of US-made parts into imported assault weapons (27 C.F.R. Sec. 478.39 prohibits the assembly of a semiautomatic rifle or any shotgun using more than 10 enumerated parts that are imported if the assembled firearm is prohibited from importation under 18 USC 925(d)(3)).

ATF has further weakened the prohibition on imported assault weapons by placing certain extremely problematic assault rifles on the ``curios or relics'' list. Inclusion on the ``curios or relics'' list makes a shotgun or rifle automatically eligible for importation (18 USC Sec. 925(e)(1)). The most problematic of these are certain SKS assault rifles manufactured in Yugoslavia and Albania. The SKS type assault rifle is the ``rifle most commonly encountered by law enforcement'' according to ATF and is frequently used to kill police officers. The Clinton Administration specifically banned SKSs from China and Russia from import through trade agreements because they are so frequently involved in crime.

There are examples of firearms being imported that seem to clearly fall outside of the ``sporting purposes'' test articulated in 925(d)(3). For example, J&G Sales advertises ``Romanian AK Pistol[s]'' along with Romanian and Hungarian AK-47 assault rifles.

For all practical purposes, it thus appears that the federal government has abandoned all attempts to regulate commerce in assault weapons into and within the United States. As a result, an unknown but certainly substantial number of foreign assault weapons poured into the United States during the Bush Administration and continue to under the Obama Administration. This is in addition to the enormous number of firearms exempted from, or manufactured in easy evasion of, the 1994 law. The only meaningful attempts at regulating this flood of killing machines exist at the state level. One outstanding example is California's assault weapons ban, which has been hammered into an effective ban after the now-predictable gun industry attempts to evade the intent of the original law. Even California's law, however, is undermined by the lack of a strong and effective federal ban, allowing for out-of-state assault weapons to be illegally trafficked into the state.

The current study. This study is a snapshot of the effect of America's laissez-faire policy toward assault weapons. Based on reports of assault weapons in the news over a two- year span, it makes clear that assault weapons are frequently used in crime and confiscated from criminals. Moreover, it demonstrates that the number of incidents in which law enforcement officers are reported to have been confronted with assault weapons rose dramatically in the two-year period monitored. Section Two Sources for This Analysis

The dearth of data. Firearms enjoy the dubious distinction of being the only consumer product not subject to federal public health and safety regulation. Moreover, there is no national database tracking deaths and injuries from specific types and models of firearms. And only the most rudimentary, summary information is collected at any level about criminal use of firearms. As a result, public policy analysts, legislators, and public health and safety administrators must make do with crude data and anecdotal analysis. This is neither an accident nor a product of inattention. It is the deliberate result of a coldly calculated long-term policy of strangling information about guns and their public health effects designed by the National Rifle Association and its major client, the gun industry, and implemented by an all- too-pliant Congress. The firearms industry and gun lobby know that if as much data were available to the public about death and injury resulting from firearms as is available about, for example tires, toys, or Tacoma pick-up trucks, the gun lobby would lose the public debate.

The Tiahrt Amendment. A blatant and crucial example of this iron curtain surrounding information about the carnage and criminality caused by firearms is a federal spending prohibition known as the ``Tiahrt Amendment.''

For the past six fiscal years (2004 through 2010), legislation making appropriations for ATF has contained language severely restricting release of information about guns traced to crime scenes contained in the agency's Firearms Tracing System database. This restriction has become known as the ``Tiahrt Amendment,'' after its principal sponsor, Representative Todd Tiahrt of Kansas.

For many years, crime gun tracing data was publicly available under the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). It was an imperfect but extraordinarily useful surrogate for a badly needed, but nonexistent, national firearms and public health database and tracking system. Crime gun tracing data was routinely used by city officials and law enforcement agencies to determine the sources of illegally trafficked firearms and to identify corrupt gun dealers and the types of guns most often traced to crime. The ``Tiahrt Amendment'' cut off even this basic data. It prohibits ATF from releasing any data contained in the database, except in a limited fashion to individual law enforcement agencies. There is also a prohibition on use of the data in civil litigation.

Proponents of the ``Tiahrt'' restrictions claim that the release of tracing data could interfere with ongoing law enforcement investigations. However, prior to implementation of the ``Tiahrt Amendment'' exemptions to the FOIA enabled ATF to withhold any information that could interfere with law enforcement investigations. The FOIA explicitly protects from disclosure any information that would interfere with enforcement or reveal confidential information. Moreover, ATF compilations of tracing data (e.g., top 10 crime guns) bore no conceivable relation to the compromise of any investigation. The ``Tiahrt Amendment'' simply represents an unwarranted and cynical restriction on public access to information, enacted in the interest of protecting the gun industry and acquiesced to by a Congress frightened by the NRA.

The ``Tiahrt Amendment'' also serves to hide the source of assault weapons used in crime--including those detailed in this study. For example, it is impossible to document the sources of the assault weapons used in California, where the sale of such weapons is banned, although experience suggests that these weapons are illegally trafficked from states with lax gun laws such as Nevada and Arizona.

Surrogate data sources. In the absence of a responsible national firearms information policy, researchers, public policy analysts, and policymakers have sought out information in various interstices of public life, such as public polling and media reports. While none claim that these surrogate sources of data are comprehensive or ``scientific,'' they represent the best information available in the stark aridity of data about guns and their effect on public health and safety in the United States.

The current report. This report was developed in response to a number of stories in the news media, as well as Violence Policy Center staff conversations with law enforcement personnel, from which it appeared that: (1) assault weapons continue to be the source of many deaths and injuries throughout the United States; and, (2) law enforcement agencies have become concerned enough about the frequency of their encounters with assault weapons that many are issuing assault rifles to their patrol units as a way of ``evening up'' the firepower. In short, as has so often been seen in the past three decades, the gun industry first increased the level of firepower available to criminals by marketing enhanced lethality, and then persuaded the law enforcement community that it needed to ``arm up'' in order to keep pace with the criminals.

The information described in the following pages is based on a compilation derived from multiple searches using a variety of terms (``assault weapons'' and ``assault rifles,'' for example) of reports published in U.S. news media and included in the commercial database Nexis between March 1, 2005 and February 28, 2007. Stories that recounted firearm- related events outside of those date ranges were discarded. For example, if a story within the date range reported an appellate decision or trial of a shooting that occurred prior to the date range, that story was eliminated.

No claim is made that the information compiled here is exhaustive, much less complete. It is a fair conclusion from common experience and examination of police records that many more crimes of violence occur than are reported in the news media on any given day. Recognizing this, the numbers cited in this study most likely represent the floor, not the ceiling, of assault weapon incidents, and are best suited to determining overall trends, not whole numbers or rankings. Inspection of the stories themselves indicates that in the vast preponderance of cases they are based on law enforcement reports. Accordingly, the use of terms such as assault weapon or assault rifle in these cases is usually derived from police descriptions.

MR. HIGGINS of New York. Mr. Speaker, no technology advances more quickly in our society than the technology of killing. Every day, weapons of mass destruction are being made and manipulated to kill more people more quickly.

In Buffalo, New York, May 14, one shooter, a racist shooter, went into a supermarket on Jefferson Avenue and shot 13 people, killing 10 of them. The shooting started and was completed in 2 minutes and 3 seconds; one shooter.

I often heard it said that the best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. There was a good guy with a gun in the store that day that was working security; a retired 30-year-veteran of the Buffalo Police Department. But he was helpless because he was outgunned by the bad guy with the gun who had an assault rifle.

I thank Mr. Cicilline for his leadership on this issue, for his thoughtful approach to this, and I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Chu).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Titus).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. DeLauro), the Chairman of the Appropriations Committee.

The previous speaker on the Republican side said that citizens must be able to meet the government with equal arms. The United States Government has hydrogen bombs. Does he think that every citizen ought to have a hydrogen bomb?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Schakowsky).

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Kaptur).
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on each side?

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. NADLER. Mr. Speaker, I am prepared to close, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, it is no surprise that assault weapons are the weapon of choice for mass shooters and those who target law enforcement. They are designed for ruthless efficiency, killing the most people in the shortest amount of time.

The gentleman from Ohio is right, I did say in the committee, ``Spare us the BS.'' I meant the Republican BS about the Constitution, about the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment is designed not to allow people to fight the government.

Do they want to take up arms against American troops? Is that what they say?

That is what they say. You saw what that did with the insurrection we had recently, and that was a mild case.

No, the Second Amendment is designed to allow for a well-regulated militia, which is to say in our day the National Guard.

The assault weapons ban would take the weapons of war off our streets and save countless lives, and that is why it is supported by all associations of police, the American Federation of Teachers, the American College of Physicians, the American Public Health Association, the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence, the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives, the Major Cities Chiefs Association. They know what they are doing.

The assault weapons ban would take these weapons of war off our streets. It would prevent more of the Uvaldes, more of the Parklands, more of the Tree of Life synagogues.

Mr. Speaker, I urge all Members to support this important legislation, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source