money trying to get the bill passed. This lobbying is a wicked thing with all of this money and all this activity, and the cities are experiencing it.

If the States and cities will enact legislation on their own, with the Federal Gun Control Act working with them, they can make great progress in this field of reducing crime with guns.

Mr. BURKHART. That is true, Senator, and I think our situation proves the truth of your statement.

I go back to the Detroit riot which occurred in July of 1967. In the 9 months following the riot in Detroit it may interest you to know that one gun dealer in Toledo, one gun dealer sold over 6,000 handguns to nonresidents of the State of Ohio, all of which went to residents of the city of Detroit. I got that information from an agent of the Alcoholic and Tobacco Tax Unit. That dealer since has gone out of business. He did not want to comply with our ordinance, because we require keeping of strict records by dealers and we check them every month and they must be submitted to the police department the first of the month and checked against invoices and against purchases. They must keep the name and address and the social security number of the person and description of the rifle or shotgun or handgun or whatever it may be. Since that time this dealer has been indicted in Cleveland, Ohio, by a Federal Grand Jury for violation of the act of 1968. So he is in plenty of trouble.

Chairman DODD. We are aware of him.

Mr. BURKHART. But that information persuaded us more than anything else we needed some legislation.

Chairman DODD. I was trying to say that we have in our earlier pictures some of the weapons of the dealer you referred to.

Mr. BURKHART. In summing up, I am not quite as enchanted with the new Federal Act of 1968 as the Treasury Department or the Attorney General's Office, because I view that act only as prohibiting and not preventing. The thing you want to do is prevent the handgun getting in the hands of the incompetent in the first place, and the act doesn't accomplish that.

I think legislation is needed on a Federal level to accomplish that very purpose.

Chairman DODD. What do you think of my certification bill?

Mr. BURKHART. I like that.

Chairman DODD. Do you think that will do it?

Mr. BURKHART. That certainly will help.

I also think that information should be funneled into a national office where it can be made available to local people who are trying to enforce gun control ordinances. That is one of the weaknesses in our ordinance.

Chairman DODD. My bill will do that.

Mr. BURKHART. I know it will, and I congratulate you for having it in there.

Chairman DODD. Thank you. I am trying to point out that I think this bill will help.

Mr. BURKHART. You see, the problem is that while we make an investigation under our local ordinance we are limited pretty much to what local information we can find, on an average. We don't have information from people who move out of the State, with a long history

of mental illness. In fact, I was relating to one of your staff a case about mental illness. We have in the ordinance a provision for filing an appeal if you are denied your application for a handgun owner's ID card. So this fellow was turned down and filed an appeal for appearing, and we arranged the time and place for a hearing and he showed up. He was a very distinguished gentleman, well dressed, well mannered, well spoken, and he came in and said that he wanted a handgun and he thought that he was unfairly denied one. Our investigation showed that he was out of the State hospital on a trial visit when he filed the application.

So I said, why do you want handgun, and he said, the Lord appeared to me in a vision and told me to get a handgun and to protect my people.

I said, when did the Lord appear to you in a vision, and he said, about 3 weeks ago in the form of a burning bush.

I said, don't tell me you are St. Paul, and he said, Yes, I am, and if there is indication to me that we did the right thing it was then and there.

Chairman DODD. Well, I know what you are talking about. I haven't met St. Paul, but I have met my share.

Mr. BURKHART. Well, I wish to thank you, sir, and anything that we can help you with or information of Toledo's experience, I will be glad to do so.

Chairman DODD. Thank you very much. For many reasons we appreciate your testimony. This is a very good illustration of what can be done, what needs to be done, what has to be done.

Thank you very much.

(The complete statement of Mr. Burkhart follows:)

STATEMENT OF JOHN J. BURKHARDT, CHIEF COUNSEL, CITY OF TOLEDO, OHIO We wish to thank the Committee for this opportunity to appear before it to express our opinion on the need for new federal legislation which effectively controls the sale and possession of firearms in the United States.

The need for such legislation has for many years past been apparent to every competent law enforcement official in the country who knows the close relationship between the rising crime rate and the readily accessible gun. Crimes of violence have increased so rapidly that the quarterly crime reports issued by the FBI are the most shocking reading in America today. The quarterly crime report of the FBI for January-March, 1969 shows the crimes of murder, forceable rape, robbery, and aggravated assault as a group rose 15 per cent over a similar period just one year ago. This upward trend has continued unchecked for the past several years, and more than anything else, indicates the need for effective gun control legislation.

Federal legislation is necessary because of the reluctance of the states to pass effective gun control laws. In our own state of Ohio, the General Assembly has ignored the pleas of the municipal law enforcement officials to do something in the way of new legislation to keep firearms from the hands of incompetents. It is not enough to pass a law making it a crime for a convicted felon, a drug addict, a habitual drunkard, or a mental defective to possess a handgun; laws are needed which prevent such persons from gaining possession of guns in the first instance. The place to do this is on a federal level, where the law transends state and municipal boundaries, where control is exercised in areas where local officials are reluctant to do so, and where communities which do have effective local controls are protected from their neighboring communities that have no effective gun control laws.

Our City of Toledo has done something to control the sale to and possession of handguns by the incompetent. For more than four years, we have sought effective gun control legislation from the Ohio General Assembly, but to no

avail. Finally, having been ignored for so long, and knowing that no relief was forthcoming from our State Capitol, the City Council of Toledo, in August, 1968, passed a gun control ordinance.

Some amazing things have occurred in Toledo since the adoption of an ordinance controlling the possession and sale of handguns. The ordinance requires anyone who possesses a handgun to obtain a "handgun owner's identification card" which is issued only after an investigation of the applicant. It also rigorously controls handgun dealers.

We now have eleven months experience under this ordinance and some amaz ing statistics are now available. A summary of offenses involving the use of handguns has been prepared by the Toledo Police Department in which a comparison is made of the eleven months prior to the adoption of Toledo's handgun ordinance in August 1968 with the eleven month period following the passage of the handgun ordinance. This statistical study shows the following:

MURDERS

From September 1967 through July 1968 there were 34 murders, 20 of which were committed with handguns.

From August 1968 through June 1969 there were 12 murders, 6 of which were committed with handguns.

This represents a decrease in the total number of murders committed from August 1968 through June 1969 as compared with the eleven-month period prior to August 1968 of 64.71%, and also represents a decrease in the number of mur ders committed by handguns as compared with the eleven-month period prior to the passage of the ordinance of 70%.

In the eleven-month period prior to the passage of the ordinance, 58.82% of all murders were committed by handguns. In the eleven-month period following the passage of the ordinance 50% of the murders were committed with handguns.

ROBBERIES

For the eleven-month period prior to the passage of the ordinance in August 1968, there were 1092 robberies, 311 of which were committted with handguns. In the eleven-month period subsequent to the passage of the ordinance in August 1968, there were 715 robberies, 153 of which were committed with handguns.

This represents a decrease in the total number of robberies committed in the eleven-month period subsequent to the passage of the ordinance as compared with the eleven-month period prior to the passage of the ordinance of 34.53%, and a similar comparison shows that robberies committed by handguns decreased 50.85%.

In the eleven-month period prior to the passage of the ordinance, 28.48% of all robberies committed were committed with handguns. In the eleven-month period subsequent to the passage of the ordinance, 21.39% of all robberies committed were committed with handguns.

AGGRAVATED ASSAULTS

From September 1967 through July 1968, the eleven-month period prior to the passage of Toledo's handgun ordinance, there were 391 aggravated assaults, 142 of which were committed with handguns.

Subsequent to the passage of the ordinance in August 1968 through June 1969, a comparable eleven-month period, there were 353 aggravated assaults, 77 of which were committed by handguns. This shows a decrease in the total number of aggravated assaults of 9.72%, and a decrease of aggravated assaults committed with handguns of 45.78%.

In the eleven-month period prior to the passage of our ordinance, 36.31% of all aggravated assaults were committed with handguns. In the eleven-month period subsequent to the passage of the ordinance only 21.81% of all aggravated assaults were committed with handguns.

CARRYING CONCEALED WEAPONS

For the eleven-month period prior to August 1968, when Toledo adopted its ordinance, there were 129 cases of carrying concealed weapons, 98 of which involved handguns.

In the eleven-month period since August 1968 through June 1969, there were 115 cases of carrying concealed weapons, 73 of which involved handguns.

This represents a decrease in the total number of carrying concealed weapons cases of 10.86%, and a decrease of such cases involving handguns of 25.51%.

In the eleven-month period prior to the passage of our ordinance, 75.97% of all carrying concealed weapons cases involved handguns. In the eleven-month period subsequent to the passage of our ordinance, 63.47% of all carrying concealed weapons cases involved handguns.

We think these figures are startling in view of the rising crime rate in every major city in this country. Toledo, which was once known as the "gun center of the mid-west," and as a place where anyone could pick up a gun with no questions asked, no longer suffers that dubious designation. We license and supervise gun dealers under our ordinance and require the keeping of strict records. Coupled with the Federal Firearms Act which became effective in December 1968, and with the tough Michigan Statutes, Toledo's ordinance has stopped the once flourishing gun business across the Ohio-Michigan border to where it is practically now nonexistant.

Many things have occurred in Toledo which have a direct bearing upon favorable crime statistics which we have quoted to you. Toledo's gun control ordinance is but one factor, but an important one.

Over one hundred men have been added to our Police Department since the passage of this ordinance, and we presently have another class of fifty men training in our Police Academy. Toledo has a good community relations program which has done a great deal in keeping the peace and keeping the situation calm in our community. Toledo enjoys an excellent recreational program, employment is high, and we have the services of an outstanding Chief of Police. Toledo enjoys a good Public Administration, and these things coupled with many other factors have resulted in a decrease in the crime rate in our town.

One other factor should be mentioned. The Municipal Court of our City has entered into the spirit of this ordinance. There have been approximately fifty prosecutions, all of which have resulted in convictions or dispositions other than "not guilty." Arrests were made only upon proper foundation and in situations warranting prosecution. The Courts, upon convictions, have dealt harshly with the offenders. The average penalty is 90 days in jail and $150.00 fine, plus court costs. This is something that is needed to make the ordinance work, and we are very grateful to the Court for its attitude.

The ordinance is presently under attack in a law suit which, at the trial stage, resulted in a decision for the City, sustaining the constitutionality of the ordinance. The case is now pending in our District Court of Appeals, but we have every hope that we will be sustained there also.

The effect of Toledo's ordinance was the subject of an editorial which appeared in the Toledo Blade on Monday, July 21, 1969:

"HEALTHY RECOIL"

"Three points stand out in the report on the impact of Toledo's gun ordinance enacted last year which John Burkhart, the city's chief legal counsel, will make to a U.S. senate committee.

"First of all, the dramatic reduction in the number of murders and other crimes committed with guns during the first 11 months of the new law justifies the general contention that gun controls are beneficial to society. It is perfectly true that Toledo's gun ordinance may not be the only reason for the reduction in gun-sparked bloodshed, since the total number of murders and robberies in this city declined in the same period. But when murders involving use of guns drop from 20 to 6 in less than a year, and armed robberies from 311 to 153, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that there is a correlation between easy availability of guns and violence.

"Secondly, Toledo's gun control ordinance combined with recent federal gun legislation and Michigan's strict policing of gun traffic-has done much to erase this city's reputation as the gun capital of the Midwest. There never could be any justification for permitting or encouraging a business that-without a twinge of conscience-funneled thousands of guns annually into the hands of criminals, drunks, the emotionally disturbed, drug addicts, and the like, with no questions asked. "Lastly, even though the local ordinance does impose a requirement that gun owners obtain identification cards, the fact that 15,000 such permits have been issued in 11 months shows that the law does not make it too difficult for responsi

ble adults to own or acquire guns for hunting, target shooting, or collections. That is one of the favorite myths offered by gun enthusiasts in opposing gun controls.

"Toledo's gun ordinance, in short, has not produced any of the dire results predicted by those who opposed it last year. What it has done apparently is contribute to some degree to a lower loss of life from gunfire as well as to a lessening use of guns in other crimes. As such, it should be a model for needed gun controls at the state level where those benefits would only be magnified.”

Toledo's ordinance stops at the City limits. We have no control of gun dealers in our surrounding municipalities, and we can point to instances where guns were purchased outside Toledo with which to commit crimes within the City when such weapons were unavailable in Toledo.

This points to the need for federal legislation, and a good place for Congress to start is to repeal that portion of the Gun Control Act of 1968 which permits states to enact legislation exempting themselves from its provisions. The General Assembly of Ohio is presently considering a bill that would exempt our citizens from certain of the provisions of the 1968 Act, and this is a step backward instead of forward.

Laws making it a separate offense to use a gun in the commission of a crime are needed, and we are sure they will have a deterrent effect upon the commission of crimes, but only if they are strongly enforced. Such laws, however, must be accompanied by other new laws which prevent firearms from coming into the hands of incompetents. In our opinion, new federal statutes, such as called for in the bills now for hearing before this committee, would accomplish this desired end.

Chairman DoDD. Our next witness is Mr. Woodson Scott.

Mr. Scott is the president of the National Rifle Association and has been an active member of that organization for 40 years. He is a lawyer and is in a very large and well known firm in New York City.

He has also been a member of the Officers Reserve Corps of the U.S. Army for 34 years, where he obtained the rank of colonel.

Mr. Scott has been a member of the board of directors of the National Rifle Association since 1963 and was elected president in March of 1969.

We are delighted you have come, Mr. Scott, as you are the president of this organization. I invite you to give us your views and tell us anything that you may wish to.

STATEMENT OF WOODSON D. SCOTT, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION

Mr. Scorr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman DODD. Is General Orth here? We did send an invitation to him. I don't know whether he is here or not.

Mr. SCOTT. He is not here at this time, sir.

Chairman DODD. Very well. I want to give him an opportunity to come forward if he is here.

Mr. Scorr. Thank you, Senator Dodd.

Mr. Chairman, my name is Woodson D. Scott. I am president of the Nation's oldest and largest sportsman's organization, the National Rifle Association of America. By profession I am a practicing attorney with the New York City law firm of Lord, Day and Lord.

My testimony is largely based on the knowledge I accumulated through my experience in the armed services, where I learned first hand that soldiers trained and confident in the use of their rifles are still the basic ingredient of most military operations.