Summary

The Senate Judiciary Committee holds a hearing on the criminal use of guns.

Source CONUS Archive
Record ID 259418
Story Slug SENATE HEARING / CRIMINAL USE OF GUNS (1997)
Location WASHINGTON, DC
Format TVD
Date 5/8/1997
Archive Time :10
TRT 4:45
Supers 1) Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) 2) Senator Mike DeWine (R-OH) 3) Senator Jesse Helms (R-NC) 4) Walter Holton / US Attorney, North Carolina 5) Kevin DiGregory / Assistant Attorney General, Justice Department
Description The Senate Judiciary Committee holds a hearing on the criminal use of guns.
Script (SUGGESTED TRANSCRIPT OF AUDIO) Unknown Speaker 00:00 To correct misinterpretations. Today we are reviewing the impact on federal drug and violent crime prosecutions of the Supreme Court's 1995 decision and Bailey versus the United States. In that case, a unanimous Supreme Court held that in order to be convicted for a quote using unquote, a firearm and a drug or violent crime under 18 USC 924 C, the criminal must, quote, actively employ, unquote, a firearm. They went on to give examples of the so called Unknown Speaker 00:33 hate our focus today will be on guns and drugs. We're here today to find ways to provide enhanced mandatory minimum penalties for those criminals who use guns, while trafficking in drugs or in the commission of violent offenses. As you have stated, Mr. Chairman, when the Supreme Court handed since that particular court decision, Unknown Speaker 00:58 I cannot imagine a worst time to go soft on crime on criminals of any type, but particularly those who are dealing in drugs which are well on their way toward destroying the fiber of this country. But when the court's decision was announced heinous crime now this legislation will send a clear message to criminals. And that message is if you possess a gun in any way, to further your violent criminal behavior, you get a minimum of five years in the slammer. And if you fire that weapon, it's 10 years minimum. So, Mr. Chairman, with your able assistance in the United States, and I think that we must fight back with the most severe punishment possible for those who terrorize law abiding citizen and enact this legislation, I believe, is a necessary step toward recommitting our government and our citizens, to a real honest to God, war on crime. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your having me here to the Unknown Speaker 02:11 established law that we had before the Bailey decision. And I think we need to as a nation, state, local and federal need to target criminals who are carrying guns and they need this mandatory punishment. And I think if we do it consistently, we they will get the message if they're going to commit their crime, they'll do it without a gun, and less innocent people will be killed as a result. Thank you very much for raising this issue. Unknown Speaker 02:38 If I didn't five were the result of the Bailey case. But perhaps what was more alarming in these statistics is the fact that about one out of every five valid criminals or drug trafficking traffickers convicted in our district prior to Bailey, will be released from prison five years early. In our district alone, we currently have 50. His original sentence was gutted by the Bailey decision. So in conclusion, the Bailey case has been a prosecutors nightmare, diverting valuable resources in our office from current investigations to really re litigating clay cases that had long since been closed, and allowing the early release from prison have a significant number of convicted felons and violent criminals. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Unknown Speaker 03:24 Thank you very much. Mr. T. One is amended to include the term possesses how broadly the term possesses should be applied. We continue to believe that simply by substituting the word possesses for the phrase uses or carries, you will cover virtually all the situations to which the federal courts have applied 924 C prior to Bailey and to both instances of actual and constructive possession. Because in her opinion, Justice O'Connor Unknown Speaker 03:54 think maybe this decision which took place December of 1995, had something Unknown Speaker 04:00 done yet but since they are implicitly instructed us to do what we are doing with this bill, we have done it, and we will get perhaps get it before the Supreme Court again. fighting crime, and I'll wind up fighting crime is and this bill is intended to crack down on gun toting thugs there but for Unknown Speaker 04:25 circuit interpretation of carry has been very broad. I don't know what the Supreme Court will do with it though. Unknown Speaker 04:32 Senator Thurmond, I'm unaware of any conflict with other circuits but I can certainly check for you and get back to you on that matter. Unknown Speaker 04:40 To morning and I'll be brief First, I'd like to ask unanimous consent to enter into the record statements from Dr. Katherine
Not everything listed in the CONUS Archive is necessarily licensable. Reporter sound/image is not licensable
}