acting inspector general. . the hearing comes after air force disclosed that it had failed to report domestic violence conviction of a service member and a fire in a church in texas after the church shooting, the air force disclosed dozens of service members convicted of serious crimes were never reported to the federal gun background check database as required.

good morning, everybody. thank you for attending today's hearing. we gather here today in the wake of violent acts by evil man in las vegas and southern springs and those two places get all the attention, but there's lesser number of people have died other places as well. today with the help of our witnesses, we hope to learn more about how those tragedies might have been prevented. and we will discuss various proposals on preventing similar tragedies in the future. then a shooter used bump stocks

to fire more than 1100 rounds into. a crowd of those attending a country music concert. the bump stocks enabled this person to fire ammunition as fast as if he had used an aut automatic weapon. 58 people died. our laws prohibit the manufacture machine guns for decades and decades that has been the case. during the obama administration they determined that bump stocks are legal. a number of member of congress recently rote the atf asked it to revision the decision. two days ago the atf announced it was changing its mind and issued advanced notice of

propose d rule making that woul apply the statutory definition of machine gun to bump stocks and similar devices. it will provide the public and the firearms industry to submit formal kmencomments on the rule making. we do not have any proposed regulatory text before us today, but the committee deserves to know why the atf decided that its classification of bump stocks during the priest administration was incorrect. it's also important for the committee to understand how atf is now proposing to interpret the statutory definition of machine gun. under current case law, the courts may give deference to the agency's interpretation of statutes governing firearms. depending on the interpretation, congress might wish to weigh in. today we will also have a

discussion about the national institute criminal background check system commonly known by the acronym nix. nix is the system used by those licensed to sell firearms to quickly determine whether a buyer is eligible to buy whatever he wants to buy. nix background checks are supposed to prevent prohibitive persons like convicted felons, domestic abusers and those who have been determined to have certain mental health problems from purchasing firearms. every year tens of thousands of prohibitive persons are turn ed away from purchasing weapons. but for nix to keep weapons out of the hands of dangerous individuals, federal and state agencies must swiftly and must accurately report information on prohibitive persons.

unfortunate ly, this does not always happen as it should. the sutherland springs shooting was carried out by an individual who should not have been able to purchase a firearm. while in the air force, devin kelly was court-martialed for domestic violence. he served prison time and was discharged from the air force for bad conduct. but because his information was not entered into nix system as a law requires. kelly was able to purchase four weapons, including the weapon he used in the sutherland springs shooting. kelly killed 26 people attending sunday services at the baptist church in sutherland springs and wounded 20 more. in the days following the shooting, the air force acknowledged its role in failing to report to the fbi. the air force's failure to comply with nix reporting standards is inexcusable. but i do appreciate the way the

air force has moved to accept responsibility for their m mistakes and i look forward to learning more about the steps the air force is taking to make sure that every prohibited person is reported to the the fbi. reports onyx in 1997 and 2015 showed severe reporting problems across the department of defense. 2015 to 2016 more than 30,000 of convictions in the department of defense were not reported to the fbi. other states can also improve their reporting. i was pleased to hear attorney

general jeff sessions ordered a federal review by the fbi and atf to ensure that all federal agencies are reporting all required information into nix. as far as states are concerned, some progress in nix reporting has been made in recent years. but some states, even those represented by members of our committees these states reported fewer records to nix on a per capita basis than most of the oh states. it is clear that this is a systemic problem and that there are many thousands of abusers who are not in the nix system, but absolutely should be in that

system. states to ensure that all records submitted to nix are complete and up to date. all of us wish that the recent tragedies in texas and nevada would have been avoided. nothing we do today in the weeks to come will restore lives from those that were lost in the two cities. we owe it to the victims of those shootings to seriously consider what we should do as policymakers. one of the most powerful tools we possess is legislation. legislative power carefully particularly where it involves the liberties of our republic. the supreme court made it very clear that laws that concern the second amendment right to keep and bare arms is subject to scrutiny. so new laws affecting firearms

and firearms accessories must be tailored to address government interest. we have laws and regulations on the books that require reporting and that regulate automatic weapons. the atf has just issue d a notie that they intend to prom gait a new regulation about bump stocks based on existing law. before we pass new laws, we should make sure that our current laws are being effectively followed and enforced. we should also make sure that existing programs e designed to ensure nix reporting compliance are fully funded and effectively run. i look forward to this hearing and once again, as i will thank you again because witnesses go to a lot of work to appear here, thank you for what you have done to make this hearing and bring light on this subject. senator feinstein. >> thank you, mr. chairman, and thank you for holding the hearing and allowing senator

cortez from the state of nevada so much affected by this issue to testify here this morning. it is very much appreciated. two months ago we witnessed the deadliest mass shooting in las vegas. it was on october 1st, a sole gunman sprayed over 1100 rounds into a crowd of concert goers from the 32nd floor in a hotel room in a matter of minutes. the attack left 58 people dead and over 500 injured. witnesses describe the scene as a war zone. think about that. a war zone at a music concert. this was conducted by one 64-year-old man with a vast arsenal of weapons. how did he exact such

devastation within minutes? he had at least, i understand, 23 guns, thousands of rounds of ammunition and at least 12 of something called a bump. stock. bump stocks allow a gunman with a semiautomatic weapon to mimic automatic gunfire. with a bump stock device attached, semiautomatic weapons can fire up to 7 00 rounds per minute. i'd like to task you to turn your attention to the screens to a video clip that shows how these devices work.

>> machine guns and guns with automatic fire are already banned under federal law. bump stocks are not. the national firearms act was enacted in 1934 to strictly regulate machine guns. it was passed in response to the st. vallen tine's day massacre in 1929 when thompson machine guns called tommy guns, were used in a chicago mass shooting by mobster gang members. the law heavily regulated machine guns but the law was updated in 1986 to ban all

future automatic weapons from private possession. there's no reason to believe that this ban should not also be applied to bump stock devices and other similar devices. while some have argued that the atf can ban or regulate these devices under existing law, the atf has repeatedly stated that bump stocks cannot be regulated because they do not fall within the legal definition of a machine gun. we introduced a straight forward bill to fix this. to street bump stocks and other devices like machine guns specifically the bill bans, quote, the import, sale, manufacture, transfer or possession of a trigger crank, bump device or any part, combination of parts, component, device, attachment or accessory

that's designed or functions to accelerate the rate of fire from a semiautomatic rifle. that's what the bill actually says. several witnesses today including police chief tom manger, the president of the major cities police chiefs association, will discuss how bump stock devices put us all at risk. the witnesses today will also discuss this despicable attack that occurred a month after las vegas after a baptist church in sutherland springs, texas. there a convicted domestic abuser, who was able to pass an fbi background check and obtain four guns, brutally murdered 26 people with victims rangining fm 18 months old to 77 years old. i understand one was a pregnant woman with a boy child. it was an act of pure evil.

we were all devastated and infuriated to find out that the the fbi background check missed the gunman. he should never have been allowed to get those guns. the air force failed to provide the fbi background check system with records indicating he assaulted his wife and infant stepchild while in the air tors. and i must say that i had a very fine call from the secretary of the air force yesterday and she has taken, i think, very effective action, which i think she'll outline later this morning. so this is all unacceptable. i understand that we need to look forward to the future. i also understand that it was almost five years ago to the day that america witnessed the tragic shooting of elementary

children and their teachers at newtown, connecticut. and mr. chairman, i just want to take this opportunity before i end to acknowledge the fact that there are large numbers of people here today in this audience who have been is affected by gun violence. so i would like to ask that they stand and i would like to recognize the representatives from the brady campaign, the newtown action alliance, moms demand action, gabrielle giffords and mark kelly's group, the center for american progress and the coalition to stop gun violence and the national task force to end sexual and domestic violence. if those representatives are here, if you would stand please. we'd like to give you a round of applause and thank you for attending this hearing. [ applause ]

thank you very much, mr. chairman. >> thank you for attending. everybody for attending, but those that have been felt the tragedies particularly. we now turn to the senator from nevada that will speak because of the tragedy that happened in her state and any view she wants to give us. then we'll hear from senator cornyn and senators from texas. we'll do that and go to our second panel. you're our first panel so please go ahead. >> thank you for holding this hearing and for allowing me the opportunity to testify. our subject today is difficult, but it is also incredibly important. on october 1st, 2017, my hometown where i was born and raised in las vegas experienced a tragedy. 58 innocent people were murdered and more than 500 were injured after a gunman rained down fire

at the route 91 harvest festival. this event now has a sad distinction of being the worst mass shooting in modern american history. the human cost of this atrocious crime is is incall cuable. those who survived must not only heal from physical wounds but cope with the mental scars. as members of the senate judiciary committee, you are in a unique position to take the first steps to end these senseless massacres. i ask the senators of this committee to be brave and do what's right for the victims and survivors of las vegas, sutherland springs, sandy hook, aurora and countless communities that want to see common sense reforms. i will never forget the stories i heard walking through our hospitals and meeting with victims and our first responders. entire emergency room and hallway floors stained with blood. a recovery room and one of our

hospitals turned into a makeshift morgue. victim's phone ringing continuously with calls from her father who would soon learn she would never be coming home. there's one life story cut short for each of the 58 people kill ed that night. we have come to learn there's stories of sacrifice, courage and love. we have also learned the thousands of stories from those in the crowd who did not hesitate to help others. they are our true heroes. stories like that of heather who was here today and you'll hear from, but i also want to recognize two other survivors of the october 1st shooting who are here. lives were saved because stranger helped stranger. there were helpers despite receiving a gunshot wound to the neck, he saved the lives of 30 people by leading them out of the venue and aiding them in taking cover. other helpers like tammie, an

iraq war veteran, stayed behind to help victims on the ground. she used her nursing experience to triage those immobile because of their injuries. despite her best efforts, she couldn't save one young woman and had the heartbreaking task of telling a mother that her daughter was dead. tammie said, i'll never forget that girl's face. i had to tell the mom that her daughter had gone. as a lifelong las vegasen, i have never seen such a profound community response as i saw in the hours, days and weeks after the shooting. i continue to be amazed at the strength and spirit that will help us move forward. following this terrible event, i have focused on working with my colleagues on reforms that would stop tragedies like this from happening again. as members of this committee, the mass shooting in my hometown was made more lethal because of a firearm accessory referred to as a bump stock. as you have seen, this is a device designed to turn a

semiautomatic rifle into a deadlier weapon. i welcome the testimony today on these accessorieaccessories. i believe what we hear today will confirm that these devices should be kept off our streets. i am proud to co-sponsor senator feinstein's automatic act, a bill to outlaw bump stocks. i believe we must pass this legislation so the law is clear. bump stocks do not belong in our country. we cannot and should not wait to do this through a lengthy rule-making progress that could take years. the victims of the october 1st massacre and all americans need action now. i also welcome a discussion on the ways we can improve the national instant criminal background system. our wounds from las vegas had not yet healed when we learned of another terrible shooting in sutherland springs, texas. the tragic event drove home that e we must ree evaluate our background check system so those

who should not have a gun cannot buy one. i am proud to co-sponsor the fix nix act to place tighter protocols on government, states and localities to ensure the crucial information of purchasers is jup loaded into the database. i hope the system today will inform our work on this important legislation. as a gun owner myself, i understand the importance of our second amendment rights. hundreds of thousands of law-abiding people own guns. it's part of the culture of our state. but my constituents also understand that there are common sense steps we can take to keep dangerous weapons out of the hands of criminals. this hearing is an important first step to making meaningful change. pi look forward to working with the members of this committee on the next steps we can take to make america safer. every day i think of the victims and survivors of the las vegas shooting and every day i try to honor their legacy.

thank you for the opportunity to share their stories today. >> thank you very much. we usually don't ask questions of our colleagues, so you're free to go if you want to. senator cornyn? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate you and the ranking member gets us together on this topic. texas suffered its own tragedy on november 5th when a deranged gunman shot and killed 26 people worshipping at the first. baptist church in sutherland springs. as senator cruz and i learned, when we went down to sutherland springs issue the gunman shot through the expeer your walls of the church while people were worshipping inside. then entered a side door to shoot the wounded in the head

and otherwise end their lives. it was a horrible, horrific experience. we need to recognize that were it not for the heroic actions of two private citizens there in sutherland springs, even more bloodshed and more deaths would have occurred. he was an nra firearms instructor who heard the gunshots at the church and ran a block away along with his rifle and fired on the shooter and forced him to flee wounding him twice. and with the help of johnny lang b dofr, a neighbor driving past the church, they chased down the shooter and made sure it ended. it is holding this hearing asking what to do about these horrific events. i personally have gotten a little tired of the statements following this tragedy.

we need to do something. e we need to do something. i think it's pretty clear particularly when it comes to fixing our broken background check system what that something is. and if it we do that something, it will save lives. and every day we let the current disfung in the background check system continue lives are in jeopardy. so i hope we will do something. but that that something will make a difference and save lives. we can do it. i think it's important what the bureau of alcohol, tobacco and firearms is doing to reevaluate the legality of bump stocks. i share many of the concerns that have been expressed. we learned in sutherland springs that the shooter had a significant criminal history of domestic violence and mental illness that should have prevented him from purchasing firearms. he simply lied when he purchased these firearms from a federally

licensed firearms dealer. but because the information had not been uploaded it wasn't available to prevent him from purchasing these guns. i appreciate the sons. they recognize what a problem this is. it's unacceptable when you look across the united states department of defense. and the failure that's required information in the background check system. if anything good comes out of this tragedy, it will be that we finally fix on a bipartisan basis this broken background check system. i believable in the second amendment. i believe we each have an individual right to keep and

bare arms. and legal gun. owners they can help protect the community when the police are not immediately available. but there's no excuse for not enforcing current law. it could have avoid the tragedy the at virginia tech when a person was adjudicated mentally ill. that was not uploaded into the system by virginia and he got a firearm and we know what happened after that. so i am pleased that following this tragedy in sutherland springs, we have decided to do something on a bipartisan basis. there are 25 co-sponsors of the fix nix act. it has one objective and one objective only. to make sure that federal and state agencies are complying with the current law.

i, for one, never want to have to look a mother or a father or a brother or a sister or husband or wife in the face and say, yes, we have could have acted to prevent a tragedy but we didn't. we didn't do our job. it's supported by a number of groups across the political spectrum from groups like the nra and national shooting sports foundation, law enforcement groups like the fraternal order of police and the national sheriffs association and domestic violence groups. so i want to thank my colleagues, all of my colleagues for joining me in this effort. this is something that will save lives. thank you for holding this hearing and highlighting the problems that we have and what

solutions we have available to us to fix the broken background check system and save lives. >> i was in sutherland springs the day after the shooting. i stood in that sanctuary where over 450 bullets had been fired. pews overturned, shattered glass, pools of blood, as those who had come that sunday morning to worship hid in fear and terror while a e deranged lunatic walked down the center aisle of a small country sanctuary and systemically executed every man, woman and

child he saw with a rifle shot to the head. shooting as young as 18 months old. i spent time with the pastor and his wife who lost their 14-year-old daughter, holding them, crying with them, praying with them. spent time with the victims. one individual lost eight members of his family including his parents and wife and unborn child. one little girl who is 7 saw two of her siblings murdered right in front of her. heidi and i have a 7-year-old daughter at home. i don't know how that precious girl moves on from that tragedy. one of the shooting victims when i visited him in the hospital at brooks army medical center had a

ventilator on, his arm was shot up but he could write with his left hand. he wrote in skragly text, don't blame god. this is evil. we saw the face of evil in sutherland sprimngs. it's the most horrific thing i have seen in my life. we also at the same time saw incredible bravery. steven willerford, a neighbor who live d a block away. his daughter called him and said someone is shooting at the church. steven ran to his gun safe and pulled out his rifle, an ar-15, and he ran a block to the church barefooted, didn't bother to put on his shoes. he sheltered behind a pickup truck. the shooter was still in the church and executing people. he had his rifle pointed at one woman. when steven engaged him and brought him outside the church,

what proceeded was a gunfight. the shooter fired repeatedly at willerford. i stood by the pickup truck where he sheltered. behind him the house had bullet holes in the walls and windows. steven was an nra rifle instructor. he shot the shooter twice, once in the side and once in the leg. the shooter threw down his rifle, jumped in the car and sped off. steven waved down a man who he didn't know and said somebody just shot up the church. he jumped in the truck with him and the two of them followed the shooter and called 911 were speak. ing to police directing where the shooter was. the shooter pulled over and took his own life. the day after the shooting i spoke with steven. he's a humble, simple man. he's a plumber.

media has descended upon him. he's not interested in the media attention at all. what he said that next day, he said, look, i'm not a hero. i don't know why people are using words like that. he said i was scared out of my mind. i was terrified. my response, i said, mr. willerford, courage is not the absence of fear. courage is acting in the face of fear. and i'll tell you what a half dozen law enforcement agents told me that day on monday and then i was back there all day wednesday of that week. they said the same thing. had that individual citizen not engaged, not risked his life, many more people would have been murdered that day. now congress in the wake of this natural asks what can we do.

i can tell you what multiple survivors of sutherland springs said to me. over and over again they volunteered, the answer is not gun control. one woman, a mom whose son was in surgery. we all had our guns. we just left them in the car. we left them in the car out of respect for the church. if any one of us had brought our guns in, this madman would have been stopped. the answer, i believe, is not in restricting law-abiding citizens. law-abiding citizens whose heroism saved lives that day, the answer is stopping criminals and madmen from getting guns. the thing that is infuriating is this shooter it was illegal for this shooter to have a firearm. existing federal law it was illegal. the reason he had a firearm is the federal government screwed

up. in 2013 the chairman and i joined together in introducing legislation. voted on in the floor of the senate, got the most bipartisan votes of any of the comprehensive legislation voted on. a majority of the senate voted for grassley-cruz. 52-48. what did it do? it directed the federal agencies go through, review criminal convictions and get them in the next database. make sure the agencies have complied. if it had passed, the air force should have caught this conviction and reported it to the database. it also directed the department of justice prosecute the felons and fugitives who try to ille l illegally buy firearms. if a felon comes in and lies and tries to illegally buy a firearm, put him in jail. in april of 2016 this shooter went into an academy, lied on the form, purchased a gun, and

if grassley-cruz had passed, he should have been prosecuted, put in jail and if it he was in jail, he never would have murdered anyone in sutherland springs. we need to stop criminals from get. ing guns. >> thank you, my colleagues. will the four people on the first panel come forth. before you sit down, i would like to enter an oath and then i will introduce you. do you each -- i'll wait a minute. do you each affirm that the testimony you're about to give before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god? each have affirmed. please be seated. i would like to introduce you before you testify. we have dr. heather wilson, 24th

secretary of the air force. she's responsible for the affairs of that department including organizing, training equipment, providing for welfare of nearly 660 active duty guard, reserve is and civilian forces. dr. wilson is a graduate of the air force academy doctored from university of oxford. this was followed by a distinguished career in the united states air force. thank you for serving your country in that capacity. from '98 to 2002 she served as a member of the u.s. house of representatives representing new mexico. mr. thomas brandon has decades of experience in law enforcement. he currently serves as acting director of bureau of fwok and firearms. been at the agency since '89.

mr. brandon has been part of the senior leadership at atf since 2011 when he was selected as deputy to director while serving as special agent in charge of phoenix field office throughout his time at atf he's also served as chief of the national academy as well as a number of other positions throughout the country. mr. douglas lind kwis serves as assistant director for the fbi criminal justice information service division. the arm of the fbi that overseas the nics program. he's been in his position since march 2017. he's been with the fbi since joining as a special agent in '97. his experience in the fbi has taken him all over the world, including being a member of the rapid deployment team in africa,

legal london and supervisor middle east unit of international terrorism operation in counterterrorism section. mr. glen fine is the acting inspector general for the department of defense. a role he's held since january 10th, 2016. in this position he's responsible for detecting waste, fraud and abuse as well as promoting accountability for the entire department of defense. prior to being active, mr. fine was named as the department of defense principle departmenty inspector general. and we all know him because he previously served as inspector general doj for 11 years. i think i didn't introduce you this way, but we're going to go this way. your entire statement will be

put in the record in the extent to which you can do it in five minutes, i never cut anybody off at exactly five minutes, but when you see the red light, try to summarize. thank you, mr. wilson. >> thank you, mr. chairman. my full statement will be in the record but i'd like to summarize a few remarks to open. what happened in sutherland springs was absolutely awful. a mass murder of people gathered to pray. the morning after the shooting in zsutherland springs, the chif of staff and i directed the rapid investigation to find out what happened, why, and correct it. it was clear very early that mr. kelly's criminal history was not reported and it should have been. in the week since, our review has determined that the breakdown in reporting was not

limited to this case and it was not limited to this detachment at the air force base. the actions that we have taken since then include steps to add steps to case management for both the office of special investigations and also the air force security forces. so that cases cannot be closed just at the local detachment. that higher headquarters must also check off the fingerprint records had been filed. a third check has been added that when the file is actually archived, the file is checked again to make sure that the fingerprints have been put on record. we have also added a requirement that the person working the case, the case investigating

officer not only has to file the fingerprints, they have to check the database to ensure that the fingerprints have been properly recorded and received by the database and print out a screen shot or a record of that check and file it in the air force records so that anyone looking at that record knows that the proper steps have been taken. the air force has updated its training requirements and on the 17th of november we had a worldwide standdown for all offices of the office of special investigation for training and reminding of what the requirements are under dod and air force policy. the security forces in the air force by squadron are doing similar training. after the 2015 report showed that there were problems with

respect to reporting a number of steps were taken by air force osi to correct deficiencies. they were in sufficient. one of the things not done was a review of the cases and the database maintained by the air force to ensure that previous cases not properly reported were properly reported. we have stood up two task forces of 30 people each, one in the security forces and one in the office of special investigations to go through the air force database that goes back to 2002 to ensure that any case that was not properly reported at the time is properly reported. i wanted to thank the fbi and the department of justice for working with us and ensuring that we can make those updates expeditiously. i also wanted to comment brief

ly on accountability and disciplinary action. there are some things that i cannot say today, and i know many of you may have questions about accountability or disciplinary action. when all of the facts are compiled and there's a final report, commanders with the advice of counsel will make decisions about any accountability or disciplinary action. i have to be careful not to prejulk the facts in a way that would amount to undue command influence by the secretary of the air force. there are still things that we have to to do. we believe it will take between four and five months to complete the database review that we have directed by these two task forces. we know that air force security forces we need more electronic fingerprint machines so every detachment of security forces has the modern tools that will make it more likely that fingerprints will be accepted.

we have directed annual audits for compliance including one within the next 12 months to ensure that fixes have been made and are taking hold. we have also directed a 30-day review by the chief data officer of the united states air force. one of the factors in this situation is that we're dealing with four government agencies, no less than ten databases, and five title codes. it is a largely manual system and it is labor intensive. we'd like to know from our chief data officer whether there are ways to improve this system electronically. we are also feeding information to the inspector general's review, which is looking at the department as a whole and cooperating with our colleagues providing information on what we have learned to our sister services. and finally, we have asked the

air force inspector general not just to look at reporting in this way, but what other kinds of reports are required and to make sure that we are complying with those as well. i look forward to answering your questions. >> thank you. now mr. brandon. >> mr. chairman, ranking member feinstein and distinguished senators on the senate judiciary committee. thank you for giving me the opportunity to appear before you today. on behalf of the men and women of atf, i extend heartfelt condo loans to the friends and family of those killed, injured and survived the horrendous attacks in las vegas and sutherland springs, texas, and survivors of all forms of the firearms violence that plagues too many of our communities every day. all of the men and women of atf are aware of the need for constant vigilance fulfilling our mission to combat violent crime. although we are a small agency,

we embrace the challenge of our mission and strive to the best partner possible to our colleagues. delivers investigative and technical experience that drive results. atf is the federal agency primarily responsible for enforcing the provisions of the federal firearms laws, particularly the act of 1934 and the gun control act of 1968. atf's authority to regulate firearms is limited by the terms of those statutes and they do not empower atf to regulate parts or accessories designed to be used with firearms. atf to regulate under these statutes the device in question must fit within the gun controls act's definition of a firearm and fall within one of the specific categories of weapons defined in the national firearms act including machine guns. atf does not have direct authority to regulate or ban bump stocks.

by applying the definitions in the statutes. if a device does not fall within those statutory definition, atf has no authority to regulate the device. the horrible las vegas massacres focus congressional and public attention on specific types of firearms accessories so-called bump stocks. bump stocks are devices that are designed to facilitate a shooting technique known as bump firing. bump firing is a technique in which the shooter uses the recoil energy of a semiautomatic firearm to accelerate the rate of fire by bumping the gun's stock off the shooter's shoulder or other item to reengage the trigger more quickly. but the goal of mimicking automatic fire. some shooters are able to accomplish this technique without using any device or accessory. in 2008 atf received a series of

classification requests for bump stock devices wp pef classified most to be a firearm accessory not subject to regulation either because the devices shot only one bullet or pull of the trigger or because devices did not appear to initiate a full automatic firing cycle. in the aftermath of the tragedy in las vegas, members of congress, including many on this committee and the general public have asked atf to reexamine its past decisions on bump stocks to determine whether existing federal law can be interpreted to include these type of devices within the definition of machine gun. atf and the department of justice have undertaken a review of options. i have directed atf to initiate the process of promulgating a federal regulation interpreting the definition of machine gun to

clarify whether certain bump stock devices fall within that investigation. publication of this anprm will provide the flipublic and the industry to submit comments that will help inform atf's decision regarding further steps in the rule making process. insurance i fully appreciate the desire of the public and congress that this process move quickly. i assure the committee that atf will work tirelessly to complete the process as soon as possible. i am honored to represent atf today and to share this panel with secretary wilson, acting inspector general fine. thank you. >> thank you, mr. brandon.

now glenn fein. >> thank you for inviting me to testify about the d.o.d.'s reviews regarding the submission of criminal history for entry into databases. i have appeared before this committee in a prior capacity. today i appear before you again in a different capacity as the head of the d.o.d. oig which i have led since january 2016. unfortunately this hearing arises from the tragic events of november 5th, 2017 when an individual devin kelly killed 24 at the baptist church. also to review more broadly the

policies, practices and procedures regarding when appropriate information is submitted by d.o.d. law enforcement agencies for entry into fbi databases. the oig has begun that investigation and review. we have previously performed several reviews that found serious deficiencies in the d.o.d. submission of required criminal history information to the fbi. our first review in 1997 found significant gaps in the military service's compliance with the requirement to submit criminal history data to the fbi. in addition, other previous d.o.d. oig evaluations examined the handling of specific types of investigations by military service law enforcement organizations such as sexual assault investigations with the handling of specific types of evidence, such as dna. in these reports the d.o.d. also found that the services were not consistently submitting required data from current investigations to the fbi.

in 2015 the d.o.d. completed another investigation and again found noncompliance by the military services in their submission of fingerprint and final disposition reports to the fbi. in february 2017, the oig opened up a review to determine whether they were submitting reports for its members convicted of qualifying offenses. we reviewed these submissions from the period. in our report which we issued yesterday we determined that military services still did not consistently submit fingerprint cards and final disposition reports as required. overall of the 2500 fingerprint cards required to be submitted, 601 or 24% were not submitted. of the final disposition reports required to be submitted, 780 or 31% were not submitted.

the results differed by service. the army, navy and marines failed to submit many such fingerprint cards and final disposition reports. the air force performed better but still had many missing fingerprint cards and final disposition reports. our report made a series of specific recommendations to address these serious deficiencies and ensure that all reports and fingerprint cards be submitted as desired. also to ensure that such compliance is included in military service inspector general inspections. finally, we recommended that the d.o.d. also ensure that other required investigative and criminal history information such as criminal incident data and dna samples has been submitted for inclusion in fbi databases. the secretaries of the army, navy and air force, the deputy chief management officer and the

undersecretary of defense for intelligence all concurred with our investigations. in conclusion, the d.o.d. oig has repeatedly found deficiencies of military services submission of required fingerprints, final disposition reports and other criminal history information to the fbi. we speintend to follow up with these issues to ensure the d.o.d. submits all information to the fbi. >> thank you, mr. fine. mr. lundquist. >> i thank you for this opportunity to appear before you to discuss the fbi's national instant criminal background check system or nics.

the brady handgun act of 1993 requires ffls to use the nics to determine whether the firearm transfer would violate state or federal laws. they conduct a search of available records in three national databases. these national databases are the ncic which contains information on one person's protection orders. the interstate identification index which accesses criminal history records and the nic's indices. since 2010, the nics as experienced a steady increase in the volume of background checks. the last three years have been record setting. this past black friday was the

highest volume day in history. nics processed over 200,000 transactions. an increase of 17,000 over the most recent single day report just last by placing records in the triple i or ncic, the information is there for all criminal justice purposes not just firearm eligibility checks. to encourage and encrease the submission of recor -- increase the submissions the nics program is a dedicated team

providing support to partners to help them assess what records qualify for the nics purposes and provide support for entering and maintaining the information within the nics indices. these efforts have led to a significant increase in the amount of information available to the nics. additionally, the fbi has also partnered with the u.s. courts to receive dispositions electronically for adjudicated individuals under federal supervision. the division conducts teleconferences, provides presentations and holds meetings with state, territory, tribal and federal agencies to provide dispositions, challenges the partners may be having and developing ways to over come those challenges. the fbi works proactively with our criminal justice colleagues

to make resources and information available to agencies working to improve their disposition reporting. recently the attorney general directed the fbi to work with department of defense and atf to increase reporting to the nics. we all want to ensure that the nics has access to accurate and complete information so it can do its job. our fbi and state partners who use the nics every day to make firearms determinations take their work very seriously since they're aware of the potential consequences. our hotel felt condolences go out to the victims of the shootings in las vegas and southern springs, texas. >> thank all of you for staying within the time limits. we'll have five rounds of questions. i'm going to start with director brannon. your agency two days ago started the process of prom gaulgating

definition of machine gun to clarify whether certain bump stock devices fall within that definition. can you confirm that atf has concluded that it now has the authority under existing law to regulate bump stocks? >> mr. chairman, we're pursuing -- there's the possibility that it's possible as we go through the administrator's procedures act, being the first step is the advanced notice of proposed rule making, which is within omb. if that wasn't a possibility at the end, we wouldn't initiate this process. >> okay. many gun owners are concerned that a regulation restricting manufacturer or sale of bump stocks could apply to other firearms or firearms accessories in common use. are you confident that the

regulation if you move forward with the regulation can be written so that it addresses the bump stock issue separately but does not go beyond that? >> well, mr. chairman, thank you for the question. what i promise to you is that atf will follow the process of the administrative procedures act and the formal comments that we receive from the public and the industry members that we use that information to go to the next step. so i can't promise anything other than to follow the rules of the apa and also to evaluate and categorize the comments that we receive. >> i think the answer to my next question is obvious but i'm going to ask it anyway. after you receive comments from your advanced notice of proposed rule making, is it possible that atf will conclude that it cannot regulate bump stocks. >> mr. chairman, i couldn't answer that question at this time until i receive the comments. >> secretary wilson, according

to the most recent doj report, the air force security forces failed to properly report 60% of its cases to nics, whereas air force office of special investigations only failed to report 2%. can you please explain why that discrepancy exists and what steps you're taking to fix the problem? push the button. >> senator, there are two elements of law enforcement in the united states air force, the office of special investigations, which generally investigates crimes that can be punishable for more than one year in prison and security forces, which are security force squadrons on an individual basis. they're organized differently. they have different responsibilities.

my responsibility is to make sure that both of these law enforcement organizations comply. with respect to security forces, there are a number of things that we're doing, global training, making sure that every security forces office has electronic fingerprints capability. we're adding it in as a special interest item on the next air force inspector general inspections. and increased command interest and oversight. we've also promulgated new training for all security forces personnel on not only how to do the fingerprints, but how to file those fingerprints with the national database. as i mentioned in my opening statement we are looking at the database structure with our chief data officer to see if there is a better way to do this that's less manual. >> mr. brandon, bump stocks are not complicated devices.

it's my understanding after study of it that it could be a piece of plastic, so bump stocks could be made by a 3d printer in somebody's garage. if i'm correct on that, given the simplicity -- if i'm wrong, you can tell me, but given the simplicity of manufacturing these devices, how does atf propose to regulate them? >> well, mr. chairman torks the first part of your question with 3d printing there's been rapid advancements in that technology over the last few years. i would imagine that's possible. >> i've got three seconds left. mr. fine, the inspector general for the department of defense

recommended in 1997 and 2015 that d.o.d. needed to take steps to improve its nics reporting and to comply with federal law and d.o.d. regulations and yet in a report issued just two days ago it appears that in 2015-2016 31% of the d.o.d. records were not being reported to the fbi. so why has the department of defense failed to do a better job? >> i think there's a variety of issues. i think there was, as secretary wilson talked about, inadequate training, inadd vat vequate verification. they should have been more conscientious in making sure that everyone knew the requirements and complied with the requirements. there are steps that need to be taken, some of which secretary wilson has mentioned. but there needs to be focused attention on it, there need to be someone responsible for it

and they need to have dedicated effort to make sure this is fixed service wide. >> senator feinstein, i'm going to call on you now. i'm going to step out for a minute. if i'm not pack, would senator cornyn take over. >> atf i've learned over the past 25 years has a very hard job and i thank you and your people for doing it. when atf is given information that a prohibited person has failed a background check and is likely lied on the background check form -- and i'm talking about form 4473 -- what is the process, if any, by which fbi or atf alerts local law enforcement? >> first, again i appreciate your support to atf and also your general concern for public safety. i realize half the victims from

las vegas came from california, as i understand it. so i thank you for that. my understanding is with the fbi through their nics process, it's entered into ncic when someone doesn't pass and is denied. i would defer to my colleague, assistant director lundquist to answer that question regarding notifying local law enforcement. >> i will ask director elindquit to verify that right now. >> i believe it is entered in ncic. >> that's important to me. i just want you to know that. director lundquist, what is the main reason for the large numbers of domestic violence offenders adjudication records not being entered into the ncic

files, the nics files or the iii files? is it that records are not submitted at all? and which states submit the most and the least records? or is it that records are often incomplete for the purpose of conducting a background check? >> ma'am, that's a multipart question. i will try and address those. it is difficult. right now we have about 4.5 million disqualifying mental health entries in the system. >> go slow. you said you had 4.5 million disqualifying -- >> entries according to mental health issues in the nics indices. that's where they're housed. >> so these people who are mentally ill who apply? >> these are people who -- no, not necessarily. they are entered into our system in case there's an application.

those are people who have been adjudicated through the system, in other words a court order has put them into a melt institutio -- mental health stuninstitution. there are probably more records out there that we do not have and that's some of the challenges that we face on a regular basis. the other part of your question, what else is there that i failed to answer at this point? >> well -- >> oh main challenges. it's a complicated loss, particularly on the misdemeanor domestic violence as laid out in the brady act is a complicated matter. it has to be an act of violence or a threat and act of violence. there has to be a relationship established in the record for us to be able to process that. of course it has to be a misdemeanor at that point. otherwise it will be in the other indices of criminal matters.

>> how would you sort that out? >> education is the main way we try and do it, is to try and get that information out to the public. make them aware that we do need that information to be able to process this according to the brady act. >> and you do do that? >> yes, ma'am, we do. >> okay. let me go back to director brandon. year after year members of congress pushed for policy writers to limit atf's ability to make common sense updates to its definitions to require sellers to report suspicious transactions and to properly classify dangerous ammunition. can you describe how these riders impact the atf's ability to protect public safety. >> as you know riders we're particularly sensitive to

because we can't use appropriated fund on things ruled inappropriate. we can't spend any time or resources or energy to do that because we'd be violating the law. >> so what impact have they had specifically, if you can. otherwise i'll ask you in writing. >> no ma'am. i appreciate the questions. i can give probably a full some response to your written request. >> why don't i give you a written request? i'm really interested in this. i've been here 25 years. i've watched it year after year after year. and i've seen your agency in a sense effectively crippled. i think we need to do something about that. i think i'm done. >> senator cornyn.

>> the nics system is what you're referring to, right. one of those subsets is the national crime information center, ncic which has active wants and protection orders in it. >> it's not just convictions. it's actually people with restraining orders and protective orders and domestic disputes and people with mental health commitments. where would those records be refle reflected, in the triple i? >> some of it. criminal history is in triple i. that is people that have been arrested and convicted of crimes. so that information is in triple i. ncic has information that is active wants and warrants. those can be protection orders as well. and if it doesn't fit into either of those categories it

will go into the nics indices. >> what strithat strikes me as complicated. >> it seems that way at first. i've learned to work with this. the 18,000 law enforcement agencies nationwide, the backbone of the system that they use, the trooper or agent that has someone pulled over on the side of the road, the first thing they're checking is ncic so they know who they're dealing with. then they will oftentimes check triple i to know if they have a criminal history. one of the ancillary uses is for our background checks for weapons purchases. >> is there anything that the federal government can do to a state that fails to upload mental health protective orders, criminal convictions into the nics background check system? >> that's a challenge, senator. it's something we're actively

reviewing right now. >> the short answer is the federal government can't compel the state to do it. >> that is correct. >> all we can do is incentivize the state to facilitate that. that's one of the problems we'd ran into with the virginia tech shooter who had been adjudicated mentally ill. but because they didn't upload the information -- secretary wilson talked about the military. mr. fine talked about the d.o.d. which is a huge gaping hole in the nics background check system. but we also have the challenge of dealing with the sovereign states and incentivizing them to provide that information. of course that's part of what we're trying to do in our legislation is not only have the kind of accountability and disciplinary consequences potentially that secretary wilson talked about when a

federal official doesn't comply with federal law. but also we have the corresponding challenge of dealing with the state governments to incentivize them to upload the information. you know, after sandy hook and aurora we tried to look at the mental health issues and we provided additional tools to family members in the 21st century cures bill to try to help family members intercede when they know their own loved one is mentally ill but is not compliant with doctors orders, not receiving treatment. but it seems to me there is no clearer cause and effect between tragedy and the potential prevention of that tragedy than improving the background check system. but as you've described it, it's exceedingly complex because it's not only criminal convictions, it's domestic violence

protective orders in divorce cases and custody disputes and it's mental health commitments. we just simply have to do better. so secretary wilson, i know that you can't comment on the potential results of a pending investigation because of the issue of undue command influence in an investigation there. but what can -- setting this case aside, what can the military do? what can the d.o.d. do to make sure that our commanding officers, the people responsible for overseeing the people who actually implement this process in the air force and the department of defense actually do their job. is it possible for congress to make sure this has a negative impact if their commanding officer doesn't do their job, that they don't get promoted,

that their career can be ended? i think we need to have some means of enforcing this, as you said, accountability and discipline. what would you suggest? >> one of the things that we have put in place is checks at different levels of command so that it is more likely that if there is a failure to file a fingerprint card that the next level of command will be able to see it. as you close the case, you can't just close it at a local detachment. the regional commander has to look at and close that case and say, yes, this has been done. with respect to future accountability or how do we make sure this doesn't happen again and that the system is fixed, i think one of the most important things is making it a special interest item on the inspector general's investigations when we go out to command to do command reviews. and then within the next 12 months, the air force audit agency is going to audit to see

are the results showing up from the actions we've taken. >> senator lehy. >> this hearing is important but doesn't begin to address all the problems. i know i'm glad we're having it. i held four hearings between 2013 and 2014 on gun violence.

no matter how tough our laws are, it's easy to evade them on gun shows, private seller online. we see criminals look to straw purchasers. we've seen people come to my state and elsewhere, buy guns and then go to criminal gangs. there's no background check. we can talk about tightening up our background check. i understand the straw purchaser armed san bernardino shooter couldn't be charged with firearms trafficking even though he knew the shooter was planning a terrorist attack, but he didn't know what specific attack. 14 people died.

the legislator wouldn't close that loophole at all. i'm a gun owner. i've competed in shooting matches in college, helped pay my way through college. i actually have a pistol range at my home, as all liberal democrats do. [ laughter ]. >> but the point i'm making, i believe these laws should be tightened. i know you worked on gun cases in the field for a number of years. what are some of the challenges bringing firearms trafficking charge? >> thank you for your question. i'm a gun owner too. i have often said i have friends that are democrats and republicans. i say raise your hands if you're in favor of gun violence. i never see a hands g go up. to answer your question,

knowingly transferring a firearm that would be in the commission of a violent crime or a drug related crime, it is a harder element to prove. we have traditionally relied on the paper cases, trying to perfect firearms trafficking cases. we use the appropriate laws that you have given us and tried to enforce them to the best of our ability to reduce violent crime. one of the charges i have put out across atf is sometimes cases are simple, sometimes they are complex but they all should be good. good means they have an impact on reducing gun violence. that's taking the statutes that you all have begin us and trying to do the best we can with them to go after what i call the two ts, the trigger puller and the trafficker. it's the person pulling the trigger and shooting people and it's the person giving that trigger puller the gun.

that's where we've been focusing our efforts to reduce gun violence. >> let's talk about the laws that we have. the law is that you have to record the sales of guns entirely on paper. to go back to how that came through, those are saying, well, we have to do this because there's a conspiracy. if it's electronic, there would be a nationwide seizure of guns. and there are people including people who actually believe that bologna. so we insist that gun sales be tracked exclusively on paper. the atf has to search through boxes in a warehouse. good lord. if you have a recall on your car because there's something wrong with the brakes, it's all done electronically. but if you're going to go after a gun that kills people, better

check it out on paper. this seems to me like a hell of a burden on law enforcement. >> it's the law. and we comply with it. >> senator kennedy. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the incidents that we have talked about today are tragedies and i don't want anything that i say today to be construed as undermining that fact. let me ask you, have you seen a lot of waste in government? have you seen a lot of stupidity in government? >> yes. >> can we agree that training is

expensive but bad employees are more expensive. >> your mike isn't on. >> yeah. >> sorry. >> thank you. >> federal problems -- >> director lundquist, all things being equal, when it comes to the right to own a gun and whether to own a gun, who do you think is better able to make that decision, the people who are governing or the people who are governed? >> i would defer to this body for the fact that we are -- you are governing those that have elected you to do so. so it is representation. so we're trying to do dhthat. we're trying to enact the laws that you all as a body have put out there and we're trying to do that to the best of your ability.

>> no disrespect but that was a nice dodge. let me offer a thought. there's some people in this world who are not confused and they're not sick and their conduct is not determined by the fact that their mother or father didn't love them enough. they're just plain damn bad. now, i don't know why that is. if i ever make it before the good lord, i'm going to ask him or her. when a radical islamic jihadist abducts a young girl and turns her into a sex slave, we are told not to judge the actions of

all muslims by the conduct of one. do you agree with that? >> i have heard that, senator. i know that from my work in counter terrorism cases and working violent crime cases, most recently in el paso, texas, as the special agent in charge i've seen evil. i know what that is. >> but do you agree with my statement? >> i have heard that, yes, sir. >> well, i agree with it. do you think it is appropriate to blame 90 million gun owners in america because of the actions of certain evil people? >> nobody is. >> sir, i know we're trying to enforce the system as it is written. >> i'm just asking yes or no. i'm sorry to be abrupt, but i've got other questions. >> you're right 90% of the transactions we process are law-abiding citizens and they get their weapons that they're

entitled to have. >> all right. let me ask director brandon. have you ever heard the expression you can't fix stupid but you can fire it? >> no, sir, not until just you said it. >> would you agree with it? >> uh, without giving it deeper thought, it sounds like a catchy phrase. >> you're pretty good at dodging too. what do you think is the best way -- clearly some people within the state and federal bureaucracy who are supposed to report data to nics, are not doing it. surely you'll agree with me on that. >> sir, i believe that all the information could get to nics that is accurate and complete because any system -- >> all right. i understand. i get it.

okay. let me try this way. what do you think is the best way to enforce the requirement this information be turned into nics, to turn to the bureaucracy at the state and federal level and say pretty please with issur on top and we'll give you extra money if you do it? or how about we get out of la la land and say if you don't do it, you're fired. nobody around here ever gets fired, madam secretary. >> what's that mean? >> i'm done. >> senator blumenthal. >> mr. chairman, with your permission i'm going to yield to my colleague, senator whitehouse because he had an obligation on the floor. >> thank you. i appreciate that courtesy. my questions are going to be for

director brandon. let me just say that in my years as rhode island's u.s. attorney i just thought that the atf office there was terrific. you made big cases with a small office. you were low maintenance and high performance and it was terrific. so i just want to express my appreciation to may colleagues from that office back then and to the atf generally now. >> if i may say, thank you for that, because right now there are men and women all around the country for atf serving warrants, high risk warrants. i know they'll hear what you said and it will really help their morale. sincerely i say thank you. >> it's sincere on my part. we're here because of the general proposition that a database is only as good as the data that actually enters into it. if you search a database for data that's never been entered, it's going to fail.

i'd like to ask you a few questions about another one the database for ballistics information. what is your view as the acting director of the atf as to how effective the collection is of data of crime guns, weapons and cartridges and bullets that goes into this system? do you think we're operating effectively at catching the data so we aren't having the kind of data slips that in the nics system this hearing is about? is that an example that we should use of better collection, or is it an area where we need to provide a little bit of attention to make sure there aren't data gaps in that system as well. >> niban stands for the national integrated ballistics network. where niban is working well,

it's where the police chief establishes policy and also changes culture. culture will chew up policy all day long. it's quite effective. the reason it has been, we at atf actually took an assessment of ourselves and we turned it into a leads generator instead of a scientific confirmation. as an example, i had the assistant chief of cincinnati pd came up to me at the international association of chiefs of police in san diego and said i have to stop and just want to compliment. we had a shooter shoot at our headquarters, miss our officer. within 12 hours we emptied that casing that was left at the scene and it went through a national niban training center down in alabama. within 24 hours we had a match to three other shootings. he said his detectives and the atf agent had three guys locked up in 72 hours.

niban is quite effective. >> it's lead to the arrest of serial carjackers, a triple murder, the murder of a police officer, significant gang arrests, it's opened cold cases. it's a valuable tool. my question is, and you can take it for the record because i know this wasn't a specific focus of this hearing, is in the universe of data that should be coming into niban to populate that database so the searches like the one you described can be effective and generate those quick leads, of that universe of data that should be coming in, how much of it do you think now is? >> i'll say of the sites that we have that it has improved. i will get pack to yback to you >> i appreciate your service. just make it a question for the record. >> thank you, senator.

>> senator tillis. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you all for being here today. mr. brandon, i want to go back to the timeline for looking at the regulations that could be promulgated regarding bump stocks. can you give me an idea for the length of time this could take before you could promulgate a rule? >> thank you for the question, senator. i was told that once the anprm would be approved from omb there would be a 30-day comment period. that i don't want to guess because we could have tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of response and we have to look at each one and categorize that. so i would be happy to report back to the committee after that was announced to give a time frame to your question. >> but we are probably talking about months, though.

>> yeah. >> it seems reasonable just based on the way apa normally plays out, this is a months long proposition minimally. do you think that's a fair characterization for me to make, not you? >> yes, sir. >> it's an area -- and then you did respond, i think, to the chairman's question that the end result of this could be that perhaps you don't have the authority to regulate bump stocks. is that a possibility for what could occur after some months long review of this process? >> that is a possibility. >> so it raises a question about whether or not -- the apa is in place to allow rules to be pr promulgated to get public comment. i think it's something we should all look at rather than wait several months and find out we may have to act to specifically focus on the bump stock issue.

secretary wilson, you mentioned in your opening testimony that there were some ten database and manual processes that you're looking at as a part of your investigation. is that within the air force or the whole of d.o.d. or a little bit of both? >> it's both. it's across four agencies, air force, d.o.d. and those at the fbi. >> as you're going through this investigation, you're looking at the specifics of what occurred recently in texas and how we put a gun in the hand of somebody who shouldn't have had one. are we doing a more wholistic view to find the systemic problems. it's one thing to take a look at who made mistakes, the individuals who made mistakes in this particular case. but there seems to be a number of other of these processes that we're going through that just thank god have not resulted in the kind of outcome that we saw

in texas. does your investigation focus on the specific matter, or are we looking more broadly at a lot of people potentially not doing what they should be doing. >> senator, we found both a problem at that local detachment but also a more systemic problem. our review has not just looked at the root causes in this particular case but also one of the systemic problems and things that need to be fixed. >> when we're looking at the whole of d.o.d., there may be some rational basis for more than one database. i don't know that the nature of the database, how else they may be used. but have we done any work to make recommendations about how we consolidate, streamline and automate these processes? >> we have looked at that in general. there is enormous information technology systems within the d.o.d. there's differing systems.

that is a problem with the.edu. there needs to be more sta standardization. there does need to be in our view a broader look at the systems. in this case in response to your question to secretary wilson, we are looking at the policies, practices and procedures all throughout the d.o.d., not just in the air force but in the army, the navy, the defense agencies. this is a critical problem all throughout. i would also say it's not only a problem in the d.o.d., it's not only a problem in the state and local governments. i'm quite certain from my experience it's a problem in other federal agencies as well whether it's the department of homeland security or the tre treasury department. >> i actually think we recollected take a look at a whole of government with respect to this challenge, a whole of government approach. i will say in deference to senator kennedy, often times we're going to have people come before this committee and point at dumb that may be going on in

an agency or bad decisions. but my guess is some of the promulgation of these databases and processes relate to dumb past decisions of congress that have not properly funded or instructed the whole of government tor d.o.d. to modernize. there are some things we need to do to properly resource and properly focus the agencies and we own that problem. it's not something you can fix. and the majority of the people who are working in the agencies. >> senator cookuhns. >> i want to express my thanks to you and the ranking member for holding this very, very important hearing. and my colleagues from nevada and texas for their very heart felt and moving statements.

i can tell them as we approach the fifth anniversary of sandy hook that they will continue to look in the eye the families and loved ones of victims who died in those massacres for years to come and feel the same sense of heartbreak and grief. but also the families and loved ones of victims of gun violence who die one by one in our communities, on our streets, in neighborhoods across the country and every community in this country. 90 every day still as a result of gun violence. and that's why i want to thank particularly the groups that are represented here today and the individuals who have come because they reflect and represent the victims across the country who know from their personal experience the toll

that gun violence takes and how preventible, truly preventible it is. and that's why i have joined with senator cornyn and others on the nics fix legislation, with senator feinstein on bump stock legislation, but also generally to extend background checks to purchases that are uncovered now, 40% or more of all gun sales around the country as well as other measures, these are just the beginning that can make our neighborhoods and streets safer. mr. lundquist would you agree with me that the state reporting of convictions and other dispositions is abjectly inadequate currently? >> it is lacking, yes, senator. >> and something should be done

immediately and urgently to fix a broken reporting system, would you agree? >> there are fixes that need to happen. there are many states that are doing what they're required to do and entering these dispositions and final adjudications in the system and that's very helpful to us. >> how many states are failing? >> there are a number. i don't have the exact number in front of me. >> would you agree with me that it, in fact, is a majority of states? >> i don't know if it's a majority of states by number. it might be a majority representative of the population. >> in one way or another it's putting people in danger. >> yes, it is. >> and it's putting law enforcement in danger. >> yes, it is. >> has the department of justice as far as you know taken a position on the nics fix

legislative proposal? >> i don't believe we have as yet. we are still looking at it. >> would you personally agree that it should be passed? >> i haven't read the entire thing but as i see it it has a lot of benefits to it. >> thank you. mr. fine, i am struck by the failure of the department of defense to comply with the law year after year and after repeated evaluations. do you have any explanation for it? >> i think it's a variety of factors. i think it's inadequate training, lack of verification, the fact that they didn't make this an item on their inspections. what gets number einspected get. there's really no excuse for it. it should have happened. >> your report, as i understand

it, says that the department of defense should go back to the years 2015-2016 to make sure that convictions are entered. >> when you say go all the way back 20 years to at least 1998. we looked at 2015 and 2016 and found significant problems. we think there are problems all the way back and we recommend they go back to at least 1988. >> do you think there should be greater accountability, namely stern and strict discipline for the failure to do adequate reporting? >> i do believe accountability has to occur. i think there has to be first training, and make sure people learn their responsibilities. when that doesn't happen, there ought to be accountability. >> would you agree secretary wilson that the uniform code of military justice should be

aamended to include a specific article on domestic violence? in other words specific f punnicment as a felony. >> there is a proposed revision to the ucmj manual for court martial that has announced penalties for assault against a family member. i think that has been published and is pending. the question is whether we need to change the statute or whether the enhanced penalty is sufficient. >> would you agree with me that specifying an article on domestic violence would send a mental to t message to the military men and women that domestic violence will not be tolerated?

>> it does send a message. i would like to work with you on some things our attorneys have indicated are unintended consequences as well. >> i hope you'll support the proposal. >> i'd like to thank the panel. i'd like to thank everyone who has come here today to remind us of the millions of families across our country who have been touched in some way by gun violence. i'm from the small city of wilmington in delaware. we are currently struggling with a spate of gun violence that exceeds any previous records. we are a small city but we've had 160 shooting incidents so far this year and 30 homicide victims and 191 shooting victims. we have looked to and received great assistance from atf and fbi. our struggling with a community as how to address this ongoing wave of violence. i think we're just one small

window into what we see nationally. the mass shooting incidents described earlier and then the routine, tragically daily, plague of gun violence through the whole country. i want to pursue a line of questioning if i night that senator feinstein began earlier about nics denials. it is a crime to try and by a firearm if the law prohibits you from having one. >> yes, sir. >> how many of these try and buy crimes are prosecuted every year federally do you think? >> i don't know the answer to that, senator. >> you would agree with me that if a person tries to buy a firearm but is denied because of a failed background check, they are likely to go somewhere else to try and get a gun. >> that's possible.

>> possible or likely? >> i don't know the answer to that. >> it certainly would be a good protecte predictor. would it be helpful to federal law enforcement if they knew about that person and their illegal attempt to gain a weapon even thoughi being a person prohibits before they succeed in getting a gun another way? >> it can be helpful, yes, sir. >> a recent fbi report found that last year alone, there were 4,000 instances where individuals were permitted to purchase a firearm despite their nonbeing kplecleared by the background check process. that's a ten-year high, if i understand correctly. why are the numbers increasing so much? >> i don't know the exact reasons. my supposition is the fact that

the number of background checks have increased phenomenally. since 2010 we had 14 million background checks in the nics is system. year was the record number. it's nearly can you believed in that time frame. it's a tremendous strain for those people who do that work for the fbi and the point of contact states across the nation. the three-day background check, that sometimes gets stretched with those volumes like that. that's the only reason i can think of off the top of my head that would lead to those purchases being allowed. in other words, the firearms dealer after three days, that they can sell that firearm according to the brady act. so that firearm can be sold. at that point if we get the kwis -- disqualifying information, we immediately get that back out. >> request by the fbi to recover

an unlawful firearm are particularly dangerous because we're asking an atf agent to confront a person prohibits who is known to nowagree with me th failures and the attempt to re-dress them in the field are particularly dangerous in the law enforcement field. >> thanks for the question. my executive team and i in 2015 made it a priority of retrieving delayed denials. in fact y have a monthly briefing where we track every division, and we see how it's trending up and down. the comment about the volume of sales, you know, you're going to have more people delayed denial. i will shed some light on it. it may be the perception that all these people are violent felons. they're prohibited and so forth. and sometimes, though, it will come back that they're not prohibited. so we have to do a thorough investigation, but my affirming to you, senator, that it's a

priority to atf, and we own it. and so i have an expression. it's pure atf, one atf, working on pure atf, and delayed denials get our full attention. >> it seems to me if i might in closing say this is an area where i think i hope there's broad bipartisan agreement that we should be providing the resources you need. in fbi and atf and state and local law enforcement to make sure that people who should not have access to firearms under our current laws don't. that we are coordinating and reporting between federal agencies and state and local law enforcement, and in particular, that where someone who is prohibited is denied an opportunity to purchase a firearm, that that information is shared in a way that is appropriate and actionable, because the best way to stop gun violence is to make sure that those who under our current law are not allowed to have firearms do not easily get access to them. so thank you very much for your testimony. thank you, mr. chairman, ranking member, for today's hearing. i think this is an important

issue for us to work on. >> senator hirono. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i thank all the panelists for coming today. i along with many of my colleagues have supported reasonable measures to prevent the ongoing gun violence in our country, including the restricting or banning of bump stocks, assault weapons, high-capacity magazines. i would like to follow up on a question that was asked by senator blumenthal because i do have a bill that the department of defense is not objecting to, that would close the loophole in reporting to the nix system. that has to do with the fact that in 2012, devin kelley, who was the texas church shooter, had been convicted in a general court-martial on assault charges. there is no specific charge in the ucmj for domestic violence in the ucmj, so my bill, and

this is for secretary wilson and mr. fine, my will will close that loophole by making a very specific charge, not just under a general assault charge. so do you think that such a specific charge for domestic violence, that would include dating partners, do you agree that a measure like that would bring clarity to the reporting process? secretary wilson, mr. fine. >> senator, this case should have been reported and was not. the disposition of this case is actually clearly marked as a crime of domestic violence. so it should have been reported and was not. with respect to how it would help or hurt the reporting and databases, i'm afraid i can't answer that question for you now. i would be happy to take it and look at the legislation and take the question for the record. >> well, the fact that it should have been reported but it was not i think can be cleared up if

there is a charge, a very specific charge for domestic violence, and there is no such specific charge. you can categorize or describe a general assault charge as involving domestic violence, but there is no separate charge. i think that would be a very reasonable way to clarify that situation. mr. fine, would you like to add? >> i haven't looked at this in detail, but it seems to me there's a disconnect between the qualifying offenses in uniform code of military justice and the disqualifying offenses for obtaining a firearm, which does prevent people who have committed a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence from obtaining a weapon. there is no specific charge in the uniform code of military justice for assault or crime of domestic violence. so that may be something that could insure that those crimes are more accurately coded, noted, and provided to nix. on first blush, it does seem to

be a reasonable step that could help because we have seen, and we're going to analyze this, but we have seen not many crimes of domestic violence are reported as such. they're reported in a general category of assault. that could be a problem. >> that is my point exactly. that if there is a specific charge then, whoever is bringing the charge has to think about it and to make a determination. and that is not left to someone down the line trying to, you know, describe what constitutes a charge of assault. so as i said, the department of defense has indicated to me that they would not object to such a clarification. there is a connection between domestic violence and gun violence, and for all of the panelists, why is it important that those convicted of domestic violence crimes be prevented from owning a firearm? would you care to opine? any of you.

you acknowledge there is generally a connection between domestic violence and gun violence? there are many studies to that effect. >> ma'am, i'll take the question. you know, if we have information that someone has a firearm and they have a conviction for domestic violence, and that becomes a priority to us because, again, it shows that usually a close partner or a loved one could be at danger, and our whole job is to prevent that, to prevent gun violence from happening. >> so is that a priority for the military also? mr. fine? >> it is. domestic violence, sexual assault, any kind of assault is a priority for the military. it's an issue that needs to be addressed and addressed fully. >> there are a lot of members of the military who do own weapons. so i would think that it would be a very high priority that should there be any kind of an assault in the background of these individuals that you are

fully apprised of the need to protect the potential victims. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i have one question. senator blumenthal has two questions, and then we'll be done with this panel. i'm going to ask mr. linquist and mr. fine, when dod inspector general issued a report in 2015 showing that the department of defense had serious nix reporting issues, what did the obama administration do in response? either one of you. start out, and then both of you answer it. >> well, i don't go what the obama administration did. we made the recommendations to the services, and it's quite clear that the services did not take appropriate action to follow up on those recommendations. >> mr. linquist. >> i don't have that answer in front of me, senator. i came into office here in april, so i didn't look back

that far to see what was taking place there. >> would you answer in writing? >> we can, yes, sir. >> then i have two questions i'm going to submit to the panel for answer in writing. senator blumenthal. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i will be very brief because we have a panel afterward, but i would like to pursue questions in writing with all of you subsequent to this hearing. let me just say, in listening to the testimony from this panel, an excellent panel this morning, i am reminded of all of the work that i have done and i know other former u.s. attorneys and attorney general have done with the fbi and atf, and i just want to express my thanks to you and to the men and women who are out there every day literally putting their lives on the line. i can remember well one of the highlights of my service as u.s. attorney, which was a trial that

i did with the atf. involving an agent who worked undercover at extraordinary personal danger to himself. and i think americans should be extraordinarily grateful for your service and sacrifice. mr. brandon, i want to ask you a quick question about this advanced notice, anticipated notice of rulemaking. you have been asked about the time that could be taken by this process. it could be months. but it could be years, because there could well be a challenge after the rule, if there is a rule, is in fact promulgated, correct in. >> that would be true, sir. >> there would be a challenge in court, and in fact, the challenge in court could use the previous statements that have been made by the atf.

i have one in front of me dated june 7th, 2010. i would ask that it be made part of the record. >> without objection. >> which says about the bump stocks that they're not regulated as a firearm under the gun control act or the national firearms act because they are accessories. there are a number of statements like this one, correct? >> correct. >> and in fact, you, i think, personally told a meeting in philadelphia very recently that federal law to bar bump stocks would probably require a new statute to be effective, correct? i'm not quoting directly, but i think you said in effect that present law doesn't cover it. >> senator, thank you for the question. if i recall correctly, what i

was saying is that, you know, they are lawful. however that i have asked for attorneys outside of atf to take a fresh look at it. because i took seriously the letters i received from the senators and from the congress men and women on both sides to keep an eye, open mind, and to do something. those lives lost really hit everybody hard. and so with whatever capacity we have with atf that we kept an open mind to do whatever we could do, and that's this advance notice of proposed rulemaking. so i'm not in the legislative branch to make a law. but whatever we could do, and to the people sitting behind here, i have been at scenes with gun violence. you know, and throughout my career as an atf agent, and it hits hard. so i take this, to answer your question, whatever we could do,

trying to do. >> and i appreciate that, sir. i hope this body will act more quickly than the months or years that might be taken for you to do what you would like to do to better protect the public. i thank you for your sincere desire to do so. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. thanks to had panel. and i think we give about a week for people to submit questions, so since there's a lot of absenteeism, maybe expect questions from people that weren't here. thank you all very much. while they're going with the other panel please hurry and come? and i'm going to let you sit down, and while you're -- while you're being seated, i'm going to introduce you to save time. on october 1st, you were working

at the route 91 harvest country music festival, las vegas, when stephen paddock began firing on the festival from the 32nd floor of mandalay bay hotel. when the firing began, this witness did not flee but instead helped move injured individuals out of harm's way. she then helped comfort a fatally wounded man. she stayed with the man for hours after the shooting, notifying and comforting friends and loved ones. mr. david slaten is the administrative director of the texas courts. he's been in that position since 2012. in this role, mr. slaten is responsible for directing the operations of the office of court administration and serves as the director of the texas

judicial council, an organization tasked with continuously studying the organization procedure of texas courts and methods of improvement. mr. slaten is past president of the national association of court management and was formerly secretary on the board of directors of the texas association for drug court professionals. he has worked in the texas judicial branch in various roles since '98. mr. hallbrook is a senior fellow at the independent institute, a think tank based in oakland, california. he's also taught legal and political philosophy at george mason university, howard university, and tuskegee institute. mr. hallbrook has argued cases before the supreme court, author of several books on second

amendment and gun control. one of those books is titled "the founders' second amendment, origins of the right to bear arms." and another one that every man be armed, the evolution of constitutional rights. his writings have appeared in several legal journals. chief jay thomas anger has been chief of police in montgomery county, maryland, since february 2004. he began his law enforcement career in 1977, fairfax county, virginia, police department. ultimately becoming chief of police in '98. during his distinguished career in law enforcement, the chief has received multiple awards, including the james s. brady law enforcement award, the community champion award for law

enforcement, community champion award for youth leadership foundation. and montgomery county victims' rights foundation public safety award. additionally, this chief is currently the president of the major cities chief association. and he also knows very well the chief of police of cedar rapids, iowa, my home state. david is a research director at the independent institute in colorado, an associate policy analyst for cato, and the adjunct professor of constitutional law, denver university sterms college of law. author of several books on second amendment. one entitled "truth about gun control." and "no more wackos, what's wrong with federal law enforcement and how to fix it." mr. kopel has also been featured on national media programs and

his work has been published in several legal journals, and we're going to go in the same way that i introduced you. so ms. gooz, is that how you pronounce your name? please proceed. >> chairman grassley, ranking member feinstein and members of the committee, thank you so much for inviting me to speak here today. my name is heather, and october 1st, 2017, i was in las vegas, nevada. also there were christine and heather from las vegas and reno, who are here sitting behind me today. before i tell my story, i feel i need to disclose something to the committee. i am not someone who is anti-gun. i'm very pro-second amendment. but i support senator feinstein's bill to ban bump fire stocks. these devices are not for hunting, they're not for target practice. they're for hurting people and they have no place in our general society. i hope that my story will make you understand why. the three-day route 91 harvest

country music festival has been going on for four years. this year was my second year landing a highly coveted bar tending job, and the first year at house of blues. people come from all over the world for this event. at around 10:00 p.m. that night, the first round of gunshots peppered the festival grounds. i remember hearing a loud noise and thinking about, it's just feedback from the speakers or maybe fireworks. people were still dancing. then everyone started to rush in all directions, trampling the bar and pushing through the back doors. at first, i thought i group was trying to swarm the vip area above the bar until i started to hear the screams. shooter, gun, help me. this was followed by a second round of gunshots. there were people covered with blood all over their bodies. my own night of terror continued with me helping frightened concertgoers go through the back doors, hoping they would be safe. as people tried to hoist others over the fence out back, i joined about 20 others to push the fence over so they could run out. i went to the vip to check on

the other bartenders. that's when another set of gunshots rang out directly in front of my bar. my coworker ryan was only spared by hiding behind an atm. he saved another bartender in the process by pulling her behind the same atm. the woman next to them got hit by the raining bullets. i then ran down the stairs and got pulled under the bathroom trailers. i had a moment to call my mom and sister. i told them both in separate phone calls that they're going to hear really scary things on the news and that most of it was true, but that for now, i was okay. the fourth set of shots started pinging off the metal around us and we tried to be as quiet as possible. throughout this entire ordeal, at any point i expected to look up and see a gunman standing in front of me ready to shoot. after that round of gunfire, everyone scrambled for the gates. for whatever reason, i ran back into the bar. the first thing i saw was a woman bleeding down her leg who said that it hurt. i asked if she had fallen. she said no.

i looked down and i saw my first bullet hole. i asked a man running through the bar to help carry her out back. but then someone else came in, dragging a man by his fingers. he had been hit in the thigh and then broken his leg falling. i grabbed an arm and helped pull him through and behind the bar. at this point, there were six to eight already injured there. as bodies and wounded continued to grow, i ran to the medic's tenlt for help. every two minutes, somebody else was running in. there was one group carry aggirl who had been shot in the back. i helped them adjust her on a route 91 banner and found out later after looking at pictures that that girl hadn't made it. i ran back to the bar and told everyone that help was on the way. strangers started pulling up in trucks and cars, volunteering to drive the injured to the hospital while myself and others carried them to the makeshift ambulances. at one point, i got called over to hold a jean jacket against a victim's head to try to stop the bleeding. we shouted for him to wake up. he was breathing but he wasn't conscious. as a car pulled up to load the

injured, injacket fell and i was left plugging the hole in the victim's head with my fingers. the man's name was chris. he died the next day. then i met the victim who would become a main part of my story. he had been laid on a maintenance ladder used as a makeshift stretcher. three men called me over to grab a ladder corner. i held it with one hand and touched his hand and his fingers lightly touched mine. when our group reached the sidewalk area deemed safe from whoever was shooting, they put the ladder down. the man asked if i was okay as i was covered in chris' blood. i told him it wasn't my blood. they ran back to the festival grounds to continue helping. and i kept holding this unnamed man's hand, and then his hand stopped holding mine. i shook him, strangers checked his chest. there was nothing we could do. they asked how they could help, but what do you say? he was now doa. someone draped a t-shirt over his face and then a tablecloth. for some reason, i felt compelled to stay and sit with

the body. i felt attached. i saw other bodies laying alone. i didn't want this man to be left alone. i was still holding his hand. about an hour later, his phone rang. the person on the other end of the line asked who is this? why are you answering my friend's phone? i asked, who are you? where are you calling from? the other voice said i am trying to reach jordan. i had to tell him jordan died. i told him to call his parents. pulling out jordan's wallet, i took a picture of his i.d. and sent a picture to his facebook friends list. and then came a call from jordan's mom, and i found his girlfriend amber was also at the festival. we got ahold of her, and she asked, is he okay? and i said no. she asked if he got shot. i said yes. she said, he's breathing, right? i said, amber, he's not breathing. he's dead. she said, are you sure? he's the love of my life. i said he's gone.

i made a promise that i would stay by jordan no matter what so amber would know when the emergency personnel took him away. i told her i wouldn't leave his side because at that point there were only two of us there who knew who he was. i called jordan's mom back. she asked if jordan was okay, and i realized we never told her he passed. i had to tell her he died. i had to tell her from a complete stranger in another country, that her only child had been murdered. i kept my promise not to leave jordan's side, staying with him for over four hours during that night. when police and emergency personnel arrived, i told them about jordan. i said i promised not to leave until i knew they had his girlfriend. it was about 3:30 in the morning when police got ahold of amber and got her out of lockdown. covered in blood, exhausted and crying, i made it home still not believing or understanding what had just happened. when i asked myself in the days following why i had stayed with a stranger's body, i could only answer that i hoped someone

would do the same for me. i didn't want jordan to be a john doe. his death mattered and i wanted him to be remembered. i don't know why i didn't run. i had more than one opportunity. i still don't know. i'm not that strong. i'm not that special. i'm not a hero or an angel. but something wouldn't let me run that night, and something compelled me to help chris and jordan and others whose names i still don't even know. as i mentioned a moment ago, i may have stayed because i hoped someone would do the same for me. i did it because i wouldn't want to be forgotten. but the truth is is that none of us want to be forgotten, and i ask that the committee not forget all the lives that were lost that day, all of the lives affected that day, and all the lives that could be affected in the future. thank you. >> thank you. you're a brave person. mr. slaten. >> chairman grassley, ranking member feinstein, and senators, thank you for allowing me to

testify today on state court reporting to nix. my name is david slaten and i'm testifying on behalf of the conference of state court administrators. i'm the current administrative director of the texas office of court administration. cosca who has a state administrative officer for each state and territory is dedicated to the improvement of court. they're responsible for implementic policy. they handle 98% of all judicial proceedings in the country. i would like to share with you about texas' reporting to nix. in texas, information about arrests and prosecutions for various criminal offenses are entered by law enforcement, jails, prosecutors, and courts into the criminal justice information system. those entries populate the ncic and system tz that have been previously mentioned. to be clear, insuring that records are accurately and

properly entered into the various databases takes concerted effort by all of those who contribute to the system. this is due to the complesty of the justice system and the various stakeholders who must contribute records. many records are paper based and need to be converted. some states including texas do not have a single automated computer system that contains these records across jurisdictions and may require automate upgrades to fully comply with the standards. as you know, the nix database is only as good as the reports it contains and we feel that texas has made great strides in improving the reporting of mental health and domestic violence disqualifiers to it. this is in large part due to funding received by the federal government that enabled texas to concentrate its efforts on improving the records available to nix. in 2012 and 2013, the court of administration received a nix act record improvement program grant from the united states department of justice to develop a plan for improving reporting and to assist clerks in

reviewing cases to identify mental health records to be recorded. mental health records from texas increased 60% between the time we received the grant and last friday. in addition to the efforts made on mental health records, they have been working to make sure records related to domestic violence are entered into the systems. in fiscal year 2013, they received another grant from doj to improve reporting of domestic violence related records in the database. oca established a task force to study the issue and make recommendations. they developed five training modules to assist recording to the databases and improved timeliness. those became texas law that now requires court clerks and law enforcement to transmit violence orders within three to four business days after the order is entered. they were silent in the timeframe they were to be provided to law enforcement or

entered into the system. without the federal funding for these projects, the significant improvements in texas likely would not have occurred. perhaps the greatest challenge facing state courts today that want to report records is the issue of resources. most courts have few resources to devote to developing improvements in the transmission of these records. thanks to senator cornyn for his bill to fix the legislation, this bill reauthorized the program i previously described. it provides good authorization funding levels and we ask that congress fully fund an appropriation for the grant programs. because of the particular challenges state courts have in automated and transmitting records, we ask that the state courts be including at the federal and state level as to how to improve reporting at the state basis. because the system queries records from three databases, it's difficult for state courts and other agencies to verify the number of records.

the instability to determine the number anticipated limits the ability for state reporting. we suggest that states get access to reports that would allow the state to verify the number of records available in the system. in closing, i want to express my appreciation for the judiciary committee's recognition of the state court's role in improving nix. we look forward to working with the committee to develop legislation that addresses the shortcomings in the current system and considered the varied needs of state courts around the country. we commend the committee for insuring that our judiciary and courts be part of the solution. thank you for the opportunity to testify on these important matters and i look forward to answering any questions you may have. >> mr. hallbook. >> chairman grassley, ranking member feinstein, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to be here. as a attorney in private practice, i have done significant litigation on the brady act and nix law on

technical firearms issues, technical firearm definitions in the gun control act, and i was privileged to represent a majority of members of both houses of congress in the amicus curie brief filed in d.c. versus heller. everybody here is on the same page in terms of we deploy the violence that has taken place, and we sympathize with the victims. i think the problem is what are the solutions. one thing i think everybody is on the same page about, particularly, is the nix fix nix act, excuse me. what's incredible is there's been a duty all these years ever since nix was initiated in 1998, that these records be reported from federal departments and agencies. the nix improvement act from 2008 directly stated departments and agencies had to report the record, and yet there's been no oversight. we had so many new laws being advocated to make life harder on

gun owners, and we don't have enforcement of what's on the books. i mean, demoting people or firing them is what you do to discipline employees. and instead, we're to the point we have to threaten that political employees will not get bonus pay if they don't report these records. there are some improvements that could be -- take place with this fix nix bill, and particularly involving where denying agencies initiate the correction of records directly with initiating agencies. we have nix appeals when people are wrongly denied. there's a problem with putting the onus on the person who is denied and not doing things that the nix system could do directly to verify and correct records using the pacer system and state equivalents of that. it's kind of a complex issue. i have it in my written testimony, so i'll move on to

the automatic gunfire prevention act, which doesn't apply to automatic gunfire. states that it does not refer to the conversion of semi-auto rifles and machine guns. i think the language that is disturbing in this legislation is it would ban any part that is designing or functions to accelerate the fire of a semiautomatic rifle. if you understand anything about firearms, you understand that trigger pull has a lot to do with rate of fire. you could have a ten-pound trigger pull, and if you put in another part or have a gunsmith change that part so it's a three thre three-pound trigger pull so it's more efficient, more reliable and more accurate, you're going to increase potentially the rate of fire. there are several other aspects about trigger pull, how smooth they can be, again, these are gunsmithing terms, the word trigger creep, the more you

decrease that, potentially the higher the rate of fire. that raises the question that you could ban any semiautomatic rifle based on a good gunsmithing job. we're not talking about bump fire stocks. we're talking about simple mechanisms of semiautomatic rifles. the heller case held that the second amendment protects firearms that are commonly possessed by law abiding people for lawful purposes, and the majority of firearms are se semiautomatic. there's also a vagueness problem with that definition. how would one know, for example, if you have a trigger pull done -- a trigger pull job done that instead of taking 1.4 seconds to pull the trigger, it might take 1.2 seconds. you would need specialized equipment. you would need specialized knowledge to even have any idea of that. and particularly, when we start talking about the penalties

here, we have ten years incarceration with no willfulness requirement. the same thing you get if you're a felon in possession of a firearm. moving on to the other concept, the trigger crank and the device, we don't even have a definition of those in this legislation. as the atf acting director noted, some people can learn how to do a bump fire on a rifle without any special device on it, so you have to have a definition. it's not a conversion kit. you had some discussion about proposed rulemaking. we have to keep in mind, we always like clarification from atf, but if it needs to be an interpretive rule because this body makes criminal laws, not an agency. i'll close just by mentioning that all previous gun control legislation, you either have a grandfather clause or amnesty for registration.

the nsa has passed in 1934, amended in 1968, you had an amnesty so people could register newly defined objects or firearms that would be illegal after that date. even the so-called assault weapon legislation had a grandfather clause. so when you're talking about incarcerating people for ten years with no willfulness requirement, we need to be some kind of -- have some kind of discussion about what do you do with all those that are out there, and you know, with machine guns, you have a grandfathering. you have those that are registered or continue to be lawful. you're going to take something that's not even a weapon and give these draconian penalties. there's got to be some way to em eemiameliorate that situation. >> chairman grassley, ranking member feinstein, thank you for holding this hearing. i know it's a very politically sensitive issue, but it's an

important one that we need to talk about. i'm here representing local law enforcement. i'm here representing the nation's largest police agencies around the country. and i'm here to speak for the men and women who respond to gun violence every day. i'm here to speak for the victims of gun violence and to speak for the officers who have been killed by gun violence. on behalf of american law enforcement, it's our greatest hope that democrats and republicans can come together and adopt issues to protect the public from harm because public safety should not be a partisan issue. gun violence continues to be the number one threat for homicides in major cities. worse yet, our nation has witnessed a number of devastating mass murders, as the shooting in sutherland springs and others we discussed today have demonstrated. we need to come together to protect the public. a device that results in a military attack equivalent to a full automatic firing must be

stopped. bump stocks and similar devices have no legitimate sporting or hunting purpose. likewise, the screening process for individuals looking to purchase a firearm or ammunition has had many loopholes for far too long, and the nix system must be strengthened. heather's testimony was profound. the attendees at this music festival in las vegas experienced a horrific hail of gunfire. 1100 rounds in a matter of minutes. the worst mass murder in the history of our nation. the shooter fired more than 1,000 rounds because of a device that you must prohibit, a bump stock. 12 of the 23 guns that he had in his hotel room were outfitted with the bump stock accessory that you're considering today. he was able to fire approximately 90 rounds every ten seconds. 90 rounds every 10 seconds into the crowd below. this deadly device has only one purpose, it enables a gunman to

fire rounds at a speed equivalent to that of an automatic firearm without ref mo removing his finger from the trigger. while it's illegal to possess fully automatic weapons, bump stocks are legal under current federal law. the sole purchase is to accelerate the rate of fire to equal fully automatic firepower. exactly what congress has attempted to stop with previous legislation that bars fully automatic weapons. to prevent such horrific mass murders in the future, the major city chiefs organization strongly supports the proposal to ban bump stocks in similar devices. today, i'm also entering into the record a letter from sheriff joe lombardo from las vegas where he likewise calls for action from congress. the tragedy in sutherland springs, texas, exemplifies a broad systemic weakness in the nix system. a 26-year-old gunman entered the first baptist church where he

murdered 26 individuals and injured 20 others. the shooter entered the church wearing tactical gear and carrying an ar-15 ruger 556 semiautomatic rifle. he walked up and down the aisles of the church firing into the pews. law enforcement later reported they found 15 empty ar-15 rifle magazines, each one capable of holding 30 rounds. this hearing today, as is demonstrated, this killer should have been barred from the purchase of firearms or ammunition because of his mental health history and prior criminal convictions. he was charged with assaulting his wife and fracturing his child's skull. he openly made death threats against the superior officers who charged him and he was caught sneaking various firearms on the air force base where he worked. this case also raises a broader question for the committee. does the current nix law adequately cover mental health and domestic violence. the sutherland springs shooter was admitted to a mental health care facility in new mexico after his threats against others

and himself. he escaped from the facility, was apherended, brought back for court marshal, later found he used computers at the facility to order numerous weapons and tactical gear. testimony today has explained the loopholes and failures in nix, allowing a prohibited person to purchase multiple weapons despite his military court-martial and discharge. that's why we strongly support senator cornyn's proposal to strengthen nix. a fix nix act of 2017 is a major step to strengthen communications, communication efforts to insure federal agencies and states will produce nix implementation plans and correct current deficiencies that result in persons being cleared who should not be allowed to purchase firearms. houston's police chief strongly supports the measure introduced from his senator from texas and goes further to call on congress to expand background checks. sheriff joe lombardo of las vegas calls on congress to swiftly adopt this long overdue measure to strengthen nix.

these incidents that have given rise to this hearing are only the most recent reminders of what we have already known. we knew it after charleston, south carolina, where nine parishioners were killed by a white supremacist, or when gabby giffords was shot by a deranged shooter. 13 other people injured, 6 people killed. blacksburg, virginia, 32 people shot by a mentally ill person who slipped through the process. so today, the committee is focused on cases where nix should have barred a gun purchase from a licensed dealer. but the committee surely recognizes that this is incomplete and only part of the problem. a man in morgantown, west virginia, was able to buy a gun and murder four people. he had a previous conviction of a felony kidnapping and sentenced to ten years in prison for abducting a former girlfriend. this should have preventing him from being able to purchase a firearm or ammunition, as a background check would have been flagged with his felony convictions, but he was able to buy a .9 millimeter handgun

through a purchase on facebook. as chiefs of police, we ask the committee why does congress require background checks for some gun purchases but not all of them? you should not consider strengthening nix without also considering how background checks may be expanded to cover all gun purchases. in a letter submitted by houston's police chief regarding the recent houston shoot, he notes even if the killer had been barred from buying from a licensed gun dealer, he could have purchased the weapon elsewhere. this is not a controversial topic. in a recent gallup poll, 91% of americans said they would vote for a measure requiring criminal background checks on all gun sales. so i'll close where i began. a call for a bipartisan coalition to curb gun violence. we ask that you today make today the beginning of a comprehensive dialogue to strengthen legislation to curb gun violence. the two measures before the committee will take us down a path to meaningful reform and protection of the public.

and they should also be the first steps toward reducing gun violence. and i will tell you that the chiefs and sheriffs of this country will be with you every step of the way. thank you. >> thank you, chief. now david. >> thank you, chairman. >> press the red button. >> thank you, chairman grassley, ranking member feinstein. i most recently represented the national sheriff's association in the u.s. supreme court in the surpetition of the case of colby versus hogan. asking to overturn maryland's excessive arms prohibition laws. i represented law enforcement, a large law enforcement coalition led by the international law enforcement educators and trainers association. the main body -- the law enforcement officers who train the rest of law enforcement. i represented them in the supreme court in mcdonald versus chicago, and district of columbia versus heller, and i have represented colorado's sheriffs and many other law enforcement organizations across the country in support of second

amendment rights. on the evening of october 1st, before the tv coverage began, a twitter user provided a video showing the hotel tower and the crowd. to me, the audio sounded like automatic gunfire. there's still much we don't know about the crime. we know the criminal used bump stocks that allowed him to fire his ordinary semiautomatic guns as fast as a full automatic. under current federal law, the laws for automatics are very stringent. in district of columbia versus heller, the supreme court suggested that such guns are not protected by the second amendment. if a device makes an ordinary gun capable of sustained automatic fire, it should be regulated similarly to an automatic itself. under the 1934 national firearms act, many devices that make a fi firearm fire like an automatic are already highly regulates. they ruled bump stocks are not

within the scope of the present statute. congress, not the atf, has the authority to change the law. any realistic new law must account for people who already own the items in question. when there are tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands such people, being realistic is especially important. unfortunately, 1916 has no provision for grandfathering. it takes effect 180 days after enactment, so current owners have 180 days to destroy their property. some will, but others will be driven underground, pushed outside the lawful system. a better policy and precedent have been adopted by the atf which items are reclassified. for example, in 1994, the atf decided three particular models of shotguns were covered by the 1934 national firearms act and had to be federally registered. because atf was changing its mind about guns that previously had been bought and sold as ordinary guns. not special items, atf offered a seven-year registration period. the atf also waived the $200 tax

per gun that can have been imposed. this kept more arms in the legal system than a more draconian approach would have. if a law provider for grandfathered registration subjected more new sales to the stringent system of the national firearms act, it would likely pass constitutional muster with the courts. heller indicates that full automatics are outside the scope of the second amendment, and besides that, bump stocks degrade accuracy, making it less suited for self defense or hunting. they are lawful use has been as novelties and not self-defense items. unfor unfortunately, the bill's definition doesn't define a bump stock, but it prohibited anything that is designed or functions to accelerate the fire of a semiautomatic rifle but does not convert it to a machine gun. this is insane, extremely overbroad. one thing that functions to accelerate the firing of a

semiautomatic are gun tools. when you remove the debris, you make the parts move together better, as with any mechanical tool, cleaning it makes it work faster. certainly, the sponsor didn't intend to outlaw gun cleaning tools, but that's how far the law's poorly written language goes. likewise, if you change the truger pull on a gun from six pounds to four, say because your hand strength isn't as strong as the average person's, that would be prohibited. and in fact, all the people have had trigger jobs done in the past, their arms would be retroactively outlawed, and they would become ten-year federal felons. other things that function to accelerate the rate of fire of a semiautomatic rifle include better grips such as replacing a forward grip that came from the factory with a molded grip that fits the person's hand. that helps the person stabilize the rifle, and therefore, be able to fire faster. indeed, anything that helps with

stability, that reduces shoulder pain, advil or things that reduce the recoil that a user feels, help the user stabilize the firearm and therefore help in effect function to accelerate the rate of fire. guns operate by the expanding of gas energy. some of that gas energy goes forward to push the bullet through the gun and out the muzzle. some of it comes backward to the user is felt recoil, and some of it dissipates elsewhere. anything that improves the operation of the gas system, the efficiency of the gun, will accelerate the rate of fire. these changes might only be acceleration of the rate of a few thousandths or hundreds or tenth of a second, but they're all captured by the generic catch-all language. the bill would be significantly improved if it were only about bump stocks and not about other items. thank you very much. >> question. i think probably what i just

heard here, you have answered it, but i'm going to ask it anyway about senator feinstein's bill being criticized as overly broad. in your opinion, would such a law survive constitutional scrutiny, mr. holbrook? >> if it was limited only to bump stocks or if it included any part that -- >> right now, i'm asking the question on the way it's written. >> the way it's written, i think it violated the second amendment because it would ban commonly possessed semiautomatic rifles. that was the heller test in the supreme court case. >>. >> yes, and this goes back to a tennessee supreme court case from the 1870s that's been very influngs ngsal. andrews versus state. it said of course, part of the right to arms includes gun repair and taking from a place for repair. so by out lawing ordinary repairs and similar

modifications, this would seriously violate the second amendment. >> okay. and a follow-up more generally, is there a danger that a law regulation restricting firearms or accessories based on their rate of fire could be used to restrict semiautomatic weapons, and that would be to the two of you as well? >> it would potentially ban any semiautomatic rifle that applies specifically to semiautomatic rifle parts and any kind of part that's used that's more efficient than some slower part would be encompassed in this language. >> yes, semiautomatics, there's a big difference between a full automatic and a semiautomatic, just as if i said somebody is a wit, it is different than calling them a half wit. it makealize the difference. there's been too much of an effort, sometimes to conflate semiautomatics which fire only one round when the trigger is

pulled with automatic guns, which fire continuously. but bump stocks are something that takes things over the line and turns a normal gun into something that effectively fires as fast as a full automatic. so legislation which respects due process but restricted bump stocks would not violate the second amendment, and i think would be reasonable. >> okay. to the two of you again, on atf announcing that they are going to see if they can issue regulations and whether or not they're going to issue regulations, in your analysis, how might bump stock fit in the current statutory definition of machine guns? well, i should let you answer that question. >> well, there's two types of opinions that atf has set forth. a bump stock that doesn't use any mechanical device like a special spring would not be a machine conconversion kit.

there's an atf ruling, i cite the number in my testimony, where atf found because of the use of a spring that makes the mechanism work more in an automatic way, that type of bump stock would be accomplished in the machine gun language, but when you look at the atf letters about approving other bump stocks that do not have any such function where you end up with a manual movement that's required for every shot, equivalent to a single pull of the trigger, so that's why the word bump stock itself is ambiguous. >> do you have anything to add? >> yes. the national firearms act of 1934 as amended defines a machine gun as something that fires two or more rounds by a single function of the trigger. that's the statute that atf has to apply. it doesn't seem that a bump stock fits within that. it doesn't -- you're still getting -- it doesn't make one

trigger pull fire multiple rounds. so i'll be intrigued to see if -- how atf works its way through that statutory language. given the high level of chevron deference used by the courts. sometimes very imaginative readings of statutes have been upheld on judicial review. >> again, to the two of you, what should be done if bump stocks, with them, that have already been purchased by consumers. and that will be my last question. >> well, there's two choices that we have precedence for in the gun control act in the historical origins of it. number one, you could allow bump stocks to be registered and grandfathered, as was done multiple times by this body. in 1986, you had more an expansion of the machine gun

conversion kit definition, for example, and you had a grace period in which they were allowed to be registered. any after that date could not be manufactured. or you could have complete grandfathering of those that were in existence on the date of enactment or that the effective date, as was done with magazines and semiautomatic rifles that were banned under the 1994 legislation. so you could have a grandfather clause that's completely -- the ban doesn't apply to anything made before that date, or you could have a registration system as with the nfa, where you register items up to that point. >> you have anything to add? >> if there's no grandfathering, then the items get driven into the black market, which could make things more dangerous. >> okay. senator feinstein. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i want to point out that california has had a law in effect since january 1, 2012, which essentially says a manual

or power driven trigger activating device constructed and designed so that when attached to a semiautomatic firearm, it increases the rate of fire of that firearm, and that is prohibited. and there has been no case brought in court against it. i'm not wed to any language. what we tried to do was make this simple, direct, and understandable. and anything in it can be changed. but the point is that it's unlawful for any person to import, sell, manufacture, transfer, or possess a trigger crank, a bump fire device, or any part combination of parts, components device attachment or accessory that's designed or functions, and here's the key, to accelerate the rate of fire in a semiautomatic rifle.

but not convert the semiautomatic rifle into a machine gun. so i can certainly change the language. but i think that this is worthy. it was drafted by attorneys who know their stuff. so we will see. but chief, i wanted to thank you, and i wanted to thank your organization. you always have been stand-up, and it's really appreciated. everything in this area is tough to get done. and it's just an amazing thing, as i sit here and i see what happens in this country, and it gets worse and worse and worse. and the bodies can't step up and do anything about it. this is one small thing that could be done, that could make a change that hopefully could keep these things off the market. but i really want to say

something to you, heather. i have had occasion just in a small way to find a colleague of mine that had just been shot to death. i know a little bit about what it's like. but on a microlevel in comparison to what you experienced. you are one strong woman. i want you to know that. i want you to feel it. i want you to hold your head high. what you did, most people could not. and i am just so proud of you. and so i want to say on behalf of all of us, thank you. thank you. thank you. thanks, mr. chairman. >> thank you. mr. durbin, senator durbin. >> let me join the chorus, heather, because i know you're a native of illinois. grew up there. and thank you for telling your

story. i'm sorry that you had to tell it. but we need to see that these gun tragedies are real human beings. who are dying in front of us, and we need to do more to stop it. two tragedies here. we have the tragedy in las vegas, the tragedy in texas, which have been referred to. in two different circumstances. a little bit different circumstances. in one, the man in texas never should have had a firearm. the system failed. but the system is not perfect, nor is it designed to be even close to perfect. there are loopholes in the system. there are ways to avoid a background check to buy a gun. i know that. 40% of the crime guns used for murder in the city of chicago come from adjoining jurisdictions. and gun shows, where there's no background check. so to say we're going to fix nix, the only way to really fix nix is to make sure it applies to every firearm sale. otherwise, we're going to say tsa, just check every other

airline passenger. that will be good enough. we would never say that. when it comes to the sale of guns, we say that in america. the other thing, though, is just the nature of the weapons involved. assuming the second amendment constitutional right to bear firearms, does anyone imagine, and i'm sure everyone realizes what i'm saying is an exaggerati exaggeration, that our founding fathers gave an american citizen a right to own a firearm that discharged 480 rounds in that church in texas and 1100 rounds in texas? how does that fit in to the notion of self-defense or the use of firearms for sport or hunting? it doesn't. and i think future generations may take a look at this hearing and play it back and say, my goodness. they were walking around the obvious. there are weapons there that have only one purpose -- mass killing. that's what it's about. doesn't have anything to do with

shooting ducks or deer. if you needed that kind of weapon to shoot a deer, you ought to stick to fishing. that is a fact. and we seem to have agreed, nobody argues with the notion of banning automatic the notion of banning automatic weapons, no one said that's unconstitutional. at least i don't think so. we accept that. but when you can take a semiautomatic weapon and make it virtually an automatic weapon now we've got a big debate here as to whether that's banning advil, as mr. cope hill used an analogy i'll remember that one for long time in terms of whether or not you can have repetitive use of a firearm. i don't get that argument. i don't get it at all. i tell you something else, today it's bump stocks. tomorrow it will be something else. i was on the assault weapons bill, when was that?

>> 1939. >> i thought that was good enough, but they invented around the bill. and they will find a way around bump stocks. we have got to come the grips with reality here. as the chief said to us, when 91% of the american people say for goodness sense use common sense when it comes to firearms and background checks, we can't hear it in congress we are not paying close enough attention to hear and it do something about it. chief there is a measure about concealed carry. right now every state sets its standard. people in the nra and others argue we have got to do away with that. we have got to say if you are allowed to carry a concealed weapon in one state you can carry it into another with impunity. what do you think of that proposal? >> i think it's misguided and i think it's dangerous for the community and dangerous for my

police officers. there are -- you know, senator cruz and senator cornan talked about the two gentlemen that intervened in that case. and i will tell you that they did help in that situation. but there are many, many more, hundreds of times more situations where someone with a gun inserts themselves into a situation thinking that a firearm will solve a problem. i have been a cop for 40 years. i know from firsthand experience that there is only a rare occasion when the use of a gun is lawful, appropriate, and necessary. and sutherland springs may have been one of those situations but the presence of a gun in my view only increases the danger to the community and to my police officers. >> thank you. thanks mr. chairman. >> senator gomez. i think you will be the last one. >> thank you chairman grassley,

ranking member feinstein and i want to thank this panel of witnesses for their testimony and particularly heather for your testimony and for the insight that you give all of us and everybody who is watching about what the horrific experience of being a victim of gun violence and around those who are struggling to survive an incident like this go through. as you may know i'm from wilmington, delaware, we've had a great deal of gun violence in our little city for the last few years. i have met with families of victims of gun violence. none of the incidences as massive or as tragic or as overwhelming as the one you survived. are there things you would like us as members of congress to know about your experience that you haven't had the opportunity to share? or is it best if i just thank you for your testimony today and move on? >> well, thank you for thanking me. again, i don't feel like -- everybody who was there did what they had to do. >> right.

>> but at any point you expected to turn around and see this guy or men or women running through here with machine guns. that's what it sound like to us. and just from listening to what everybody has said, again, automatic weapons are -- are not allowed. so why is a piece of equipment that turns a semiautomatic into an automatic allowed? because now it's an automatic weapon. that's just what i've gotten from listening to everybody. and it doesn't matter if it is a one on one gun or somebody shooting from the 32nd floor, you know, into a crowd of 22,000 -- it affects all of us. you know, we become members of this family, this community that none of us want to be a part of, and we're in it for the rest of our lives. and it affects us for the rest of our lives. none of us will ever get over it. but if there's anything that we can do to stop this from

happening next week, next month, next year, if we can stop somebody from walking into a festival, into a church, into a school then we need to do everything possible the make this not happen ever or as often as it is. >> thank you for that passionate reminder that the struggle to turn loss and suffering into positive forward motion is one of the most inspiring common features of everyone who has had this kind of an experience. chief, if i might, you may or may not know i was county executive before becoming a u.s. senator and was honored to have the opportunity to serve alongside a county police force of 480 sworn officers. i asked a question on the previous panel about officer safety and how we are putting atf agents at risk by asking them to go and try and logt and secure weapons that may have been inappropriately secured. i would be interested in hearing

more from you about how if the fix nix act passes what other gaps are there that would allow dangerous individuals to acquire firearms? and what are the main challenges facing law enforce whent when working with federal agencies to prosecute illegal firearm purchases? >> do you think it would enhance public safety if more illegal firearm purchases were prosecuted? and do you think it would enhance officer safety if local law enforcement was notified when there was a failed background check? >> to your last two questions, the answer is yes. i think the biggest gap we have is the gun show loophole. i mean if we can fix fiction, but if people are still allowed -- if we do not accompany that with universal background checks, a background check done on every single gun purchase, then there is a huge gap in what we need to do. i think firearm violence is

probably one of the most challenging things for cities around this country, especially the major urban areas. and anything that we can do -- and i will tell you, the atf has been phenomenal working with local law enforcement. if u.s. attorneys offices from around the country have worked closely with federal prosecutions, which are tremendously effective, often times more effective than what we can do at the state level. so i think that the relationship is there, and it is effective. so i'm -- you asked me several questions, i think i hit on all of them. >> i appreciate your testimony to the effect that it would help promote officer safety and help promote the cooperation between state and federal law enforcement if failed background checks produced notification to state and local law effort inment and if more illegal firearm purchases were

prosecuted. i do think, you know, there is a big divide between most members of our two major political parties on whether we should do things that outlaw particular devices or styles of weapons. but what i hear from gun owners and from police officers and from civic activists in my home state and my home city is why can't we start by strengthening the background systems we have, by strengthening the resources for federal state and local law enforcement, and by doing our best to make sure those who do not have access to weapons don't inch the two tragic instances that have been the focus of this hearing today, we had one individual who absolutely should not have been able to purchased weapons who tragically did and murdered many. and another who modified legal weapons in a way that made it deadly effective in a way that i think should be illegal. so chief, thank you for your service, and thank you for your testimony today. and i'd like to thank the entire

second panel and senator blumenthal for your leadership on this important issue. thank you. >> thanks senator coons. i seem to be the last senator here. and even though i'm not a member of the majority, i've been asked by senator grassley to ask my questions, and i think at that point we are probably in a position to adjourn. and i just want to thank all of you for being here today. both of these panels have been really excellent and have given us both facts and perspectives that are extremely valuable. and i particularly want to thank you, heather goose, for the courage and strength to be here today knowing from other families who have been before this panel the kind of fortitude that it takes not only to do what you did, but then to relive it as you are doing now. so my thanks, i think from all of us on this panel.

and i want to if i may ask mr. slaten, you mentioned the importance of resources, and i'm wondering if you could give us some specifics in amounts of money that were necessary for texas to improve its system. and also exactly why that's important. is it computer software? is it people? if you could give us some more specifics. >> thank you senator. in texas, the resources that -- the grants that we received from the federal government were -- i can get you the specific amounts but it was somewhere less than half a million dollars over a couple of years that we received. we used the funding to be able to literally hire staff to go out and review records as was mentioned earlier by one of the

panelists we went back 20 years to review all the records that should potentially be in the nix system and made sure they were. we assisted the counties and jurisdictions and clerk's offices across the state in finding the records and entering them into the nix system where appropriate. so that's one thing issy using resources of staff who can literally go out and be a task force or a force to go out and sort of work through those historical records. going forward from that, one of the things we found helpful is of course providing training and ongoing training to make sure that individuals who were responsible for these functions understand exactly what it is they needed to be doing, wlo whether that be online training or face to face training and making sure manuals and task forces are in place. from that perspective, that's one of the issues. the other side of the coin is the issue of automation. when people are involved and having to do this on a manual basis it produces the risk of someone missing something.

if we can use an automated system that can truly identify these and put them up on the system automatically that works better and certainly that takes money to make that happen in many jurisdictions. >> we've had some questions about domestic violence and the relationship between domestic violence and gun violence. and i think the statistic that i've heard repeated many times is that a woman is five times more likely to die if there is a firearm in the home during an incident of domestic violence. i don't know what the basis for that number is, but would any of you disagree that gun vie lens is far more likely -- or i should say domestic violence is far more likely to be deadly and far more injury yous if there are guns involved? chief. >> senator, we are -- many of

the homicides that occur in this country are domestic related. there have been studies, he is tensive studies done about what were the red flags that folks might have been able to see when you start off with, you know, two folks just arguing or getting in fights to progressing to a homicide? and what these studies taught us, we have put together what's called al lethality assessment tool. every time one of my cops goes to a call for domestic violence there is a checklist of about a dozen questions. and they ask things like has the person ever threatened your children? has the person ever choked you? one of the questions is do they own a firearm? the reason that question is in there is because that has been determined to be -- under certain circumstances -- been determined to be a red flag. so there is definitely -- you can connect the dots between some behavior, domestic violence, and the possession of

a firearm that would increase likelihood of there being a homicide at sol point in the case. >> i appreciate your answer, and i agree with your conclusion. that's one of the reasons why i have sponsored a measure called lorie jackson domestic violence protection act. lorie jackson was a woman in connecticut who was killed by her estranged husband while he was under a temporary protective order. not a permanent one, but a temporary one. and women are killed, principally women, by their intimate partners while under temporary protective orders which are issued in the first ten days or two weeks, during the time when the level of rage is greatest. in other words, the danger to the woman is highest, and they are least protected. so the lorie jackson victim's

protection act would extend that coverage to victims of domestic violence who were protected by temporary orders. the law now applies only to permanent orders. likewise, another loophole in the current law is the 72-hour exception. i'm sure you are familiar with it. if a background check suspect completed within 72 hours, the purchase can go forward. even if the purchaser is ineligible under the current federal law. it's a loophole. i've called it the charleston loophole because dillon roof in charleston was able to purchase a firearm only because of that loophole. he would have been -- he was ineligible under the current laws. so there are loopholes even under the current non-universal background check system that would make enforcement of the current law more effective.

and more broadly, beneed universal background checks is my personal believes is well as other measures, common sense measures that will help prevent gun violence. my time has long expired, and i want to thank the chairman for his indulgence. and again for his holding this hearing which i think shows the ability of this panel to disagree -- and we do disagree, but still want to explore and elicit all the facts that are important and all the perspectives. thank you all. >> at the end here, i thank you, and i suppose most of us in congress don't appreciate all the work you have to do to get prepared for this, but thank you. and we're going to continue to consider this issue very much. thank you all for your being here. hearing adjourned.

live now to the white house to hear from president trump on recognizing jerusalem as israeli's capital. >> when i came into office, i promised to look at the world's challenges with open eyes and very fresh thinking. we cannot solve our problems by making the same failed assumptions and repeating the same failed strategies of the past. all challenges demand new approaches. my announcement today marks the beginning of a new approach to conflict between israel and the palestinians. in