terrorists can do to our country. that is why this whole national security concerns me. the terror gap refers to the loophole in national gun laws that allows known or suspected terrorists to buy guns in the united states. the reasoning as to why we have sufficient a policy is beyond me. this is a gap we no is exploited. according to t gao, of the 1453 people found to be on the terrorist list trying to buy guns between 2004 and 2010, 1321 were allowed to proceed with the purchase. that's a success rate of 91% of known terrorists purchasing guns. the result of this gap in security have been serious and deadly. we all remember the tragedy with major nadal hassan. he had been investigated but he was not stopped from buying a weapon. and the fact of the purchase was never shared with the fbi. my colleague from new york representative peter king, the chairman of the home land

security committee has introduced legislation to close the terror gap and i am proud to be a co-sponsor of his bill. my second amendment is modeleded in his proposal and would empower the attorney general to deny the ability of a known or suspected terrorist, someone on the terrorist watch list, for example, who possesses a firearm, deny him the ability to use hr-822 to authorize concealed carry into another state. i would humbly suggest that preventing terrorists from carrying weapons across state line sz a worthwhile goal. i think the bill is a serious mistake, but if we are to consider it on the houts floor, at least i believe members should be able to make improvements. these two amendments provide such improvements. i ask they be made -- >> thank you. >> let me thank the members of the rules committee for their indulgence. quickly i'll just move to my

facts one, two and three, number two having been revised. 38 states do not issue permits to people convicted of certain violent misdemeanors, 36 states require gun stavety training including fire drills and competency with a fire arls that shows distinct differences among states. however, hr-822 calls for one that applies to residents of a state and in a less restrictive standard that applies to visitors from out of states. many many states will be impacted but colorado, california, virginia my state of texas new york massachusetts south carolina florida among those who will be impacted by the differences in this law. i know that many of us have heard the phrase "people kill guns don't". but people used guns to kill and

the ultimate result is that people are dead. my first amendment is a simple process to aid our law enforcement officers who all of us have been citing as who we would like to protect along with our citizens. my amendment ensures that a comprehensive database il mrelted providing a list of individuals from each state with permits and licenses to possess and carry concealed weapons be available to all law enforce the officers at all times. we don't know the mental conditions or the occurrences that happen to people who legitimately have a concealed weapon. if an officer discovered a gun, they'd have to terrible if the state permit is valid. that is of course if the officer stops the car and asks the person for a weapon.

this is a nearly impossible task in a tense situation. some state permits look as simple as a library card that would be easy to forge. reciprocity could also -- the merit including my amendment, amendment number one. amendment number two deals with the issue of providing notice to the designated state agency that an individual is coming into that state and carrying a gun. states must retain their ability to know which individuals are allowed under this newly proposed bill to possess and carry concealed weapons within their borders. this measure would require an individual to notify out-of-state law enforcement 24 hours in advance their intention to possess or carry a weapon into the borders of those state in which those individuals are not licensed. again, it would be the des naitded state agency that would

be notified and that is amendment number two. in my home state, we are mourning the death of mrs. cruz-rojas, a mother of three whose security employed officer, as a security officer. we've heard of the mall cop. that was a friendly person. but this is one of the security officers. came to her dental assistant job, pointed a gun through the glass, fired three shots, jumped over the counter, and then fired more shots at her then-fallen body. three children are orphaned. i make the point because i'm also apologetic for my state. court records show mr. sousa was charged with beating ms ms. cruz-rojas in february 2009, but the misdemeanor assault charge was dropped after he completed domestic abuse class. i'm appalled at that. but he was still carrying a gun. he still had a job and was able

to kill a mother of three children. my third amendment simply says, even though texas has a robust handgun concealed carry law, i would ask that this measure enforce a minimum standard for gun possession. that would be a standard to include that you could not have a concealed weapon if you were convicted of stalking or electronic surveillance. this may be a bipartisan bill with a number of supporters. there obviously is disagreement. many of us do believe that the enhanced number of guns can contribute to the death of innocent individuals. mr. sojas left and stole a boat. i think my amendments are common sense and ask that they be included. >> thank you very much. without objection, mr. hastings' statement will be included in the record.

thank you. mr. deutsche's statement without objection will be included if in the record. mr. johnson and then ms ms. maloney. without objection, it will be included in the record. would you take the microphone there. >> amendments have remained an issue that needs to be addressed. more than likely we'll have support of this. nra supports it. illinois is the only state in the union that would be uncovered by this bill. this clarifies that illinois will be covered by this bill. i think it's a simple, rights and privileges of our state, which unfortunately, i'll apologize for my state, we don't have a law. nonetheless this puts us in a situation as any other state, provides for uniform laws. i think it's extraordinarily important to buttress the bill with this amendment and ask for its adoption. >> let me say for the record i

don't like everything that's done there, but i never apologize for california. ms. maloney. >> only in the limited context of failure to act do i apologize for my great state of illinois. >> mr. chairman and members of the committee, i request a unanimous consent he to place my full -- >> included in the record. >> i specifically want to point out one of my amendments that would prohibit an individual convicted of a felony whose gun rights have been restored in his or her state of residence from getting reciprocity in another state. on the front page of today's "new york times" they highlight the ease with which felons are able to regain gun rights in certain states, and it points out that in some cases it has led to violent repeat actions that have hurt people. and we simply cannot allow violent criminals to travel

freely between states with concealed weapons. so i respectfully request that this aemendment be placed in order, and i say that the people of my home state of new york have every reason to believe that our gun laws work considerably better for us than those of other states. and i go back to the statement of mrs. slaughter earlier on arizona, which has some of the most permissive gun laws in the country. according to one report, there were 15 gun deaths per 100,000 people in arizona while in new york there are only 5 gun deaths per 100,000 persons. that's a pretty stark difference. so my state and certainly other states may not want felons that have a record of violence he, of murder, of killing, of other felony actions to be able to come into our state. i think that's a reasonable request. i also as one who represents

families that lost 500 loved ones on 9/11 speak in support of mr. nadler's amendment which would prevent known or issed terr -- suspected terrorists from carrying concealed firearms across state lines. we should not let known terrorists carry firearms across state lines. to have that checked with the central area is very important. and i want to point out that earlier when we passed the 9/11 terrorist attacks screening bill, the one that provided health care and monitoring to those who are sick and dying because of 9/11, there was an amendment that said that all of these survivors and victims should be checked against the 9/11 terrorist attacks list. so if you're going to check the police and fire who went in to protect each other, to protect our citizens against the terrorist attack list, let's

check other known terrorists against the terrorist attack list and not let them freely walk across state lines where they are known to have danger and harm to american citizens. >> thank you very much. >> i have others that really talk to the need to hire more police officers. if you're going to be having people coming in with concealed weapons it that can be terrorists, that can be felons, we will need more police officers on the street. and other amendments address that and the fact that we need to really look at the unemployment problems we confront. >> thank you very much, ms. maloney. are there any questions of the witness wies here? if not, thank you all for being here. >> can i enter this article in the paper? >> yes he. the article will be included in the record. that will conclude the hearing for consideration hr-822. and the chair will be in receipt

of a motion. excuse us, if our clerk could get to the desk here, mr. nadler, ms. jackson lee. thank you both for being here. >> mr. chairman, i move the committee report a structure rule for hr-822, the national right to carry reciprocity act of 2011. rule provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the company shall be considered as original text with the purpose of amendment and shall be considered as read. rule waives all points against committee's amendment -- the rule in the rulz committee report. each such amendment may only be offered in the order printed and the report may only be offered by a member des naited in the report and shall be considered as read. shall be debatable if in the time specified, opponent shall not be subject to amendment,

shall not be subject to demand or division of the question. rule waives -- finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or without -- >> you've heard the motion in general. obviously as we've seen today, this is an issue that brings out strongly held beliefs. we this rule, we are proposing to make an order ten amendments, eight amendments offered by democrats, two amendments offered by republicans. >> thank you very much. the vote occurs on the mcgovern amendment, those in favor aye, those against no. >> mr. woodall no. mr. nugent, no. mr. scott, no. mr. webster, no.

ms. slaughter. mr. mcgovern, aye. mr. hastings aye. mr. pole is aye. mr. hair i men no. >> three ayes and 8 nos. >> mr. chairman, i offer as one motion the amendments of number 12 by mr. nadler and/or the number 8 by mr. bishop and i believe the committee members know what they are. and i won't offer any words in support of sail. >> vote occurs on the hastings amendment. those in favor say aye. those against no. clerk will call the roll. mr. sessions, no. ms. fox, no. mr. bishop, no. mr. woodall, no. mr. nugent, no. mr. scott, no. mr. webster, no. ms. slaughter. mr. mcgovern, aye. mr. hastings aye.

mr. polis, aye. mr. chairman no. >> and the clerk will report the total. >> three