This article was printed from KeepAndBearArms.com.
For more gun- and freedom-related information, visit
http://www.KeepAndBearArms.com.
----------------------------------------------------------------
|
Letter
to Janet Reno from U.S. Representative John D. Dingell (Michigan) http://www.house.gov/dingell/reno.html Originally
published on this website August 6, 2000 August
1, 2000 The
Honorable Janet Reno Attorney
General Department
of Justice 950
Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Washington,
D.C. 20530 Dear Attorney General Reno: I read with great interest Deputy Attorney
General Eric Holder’s June 4, 2000, announcement regarding the release of two
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) reports on Federal Firearm Offenders and
Background Checks for Firearm Transfers. As you are aware, effective and timely
enforcement of our nation’s federal firearms laws is of tremendous importance
to the Congress. As we continue to look for effective strategies to prevent
firearms from falling into the wrong hands and reduce gun violence, reports such
as these are useful in evaluating the progress of the Administration on this
front. As Mr. Holder notes in his statement, "the
Brady Law has stopped 536,000 felons, fugitives, domestic abusers, and other
persons not legally allowed to have a gun from getting a gun." This is
indeed an impressive record. The National Instant Criminal Background Check
System (NICS) is one of the most effective tools we have to crack down on gun
criminals and prevent crime. However, stopping the sale of a firearm to a
prohibited person is only one component of an effective strategy to reduce
violent criminal behavior. Prosecuting those felons, fugitives and domestic
abusers who attempt to purchase a firearm is the other half of the equation. The BJS report on Firearm Offenders states that
an average of 6,700 defendants were charged with a firearm offense in U.S.
district courts between 1992 and 1999. On its face, that number of prosecutions
seems incredibly low given the number of prohibited persons stopped by the
instant check system. An analysis of the BJS reports confirms that the number of
federal prosecutions is severely inadequate. As you are aware, 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(6) makes the
attempted purchase of a firearm by an individual who knowingly provides false
information on a firearm transfer application (ATF Form 4473) a federal felony
offense. In simple terms, it is a federal felony, punishable for up to ten years
in prison, for felons, fugitives, domestic abusers or any other category of
prohibited person to attempt to purchase a firearm if they knowingly falsify the
purchase application. Of the 204,000 attempted purchases stopped by
NICS in 1999, the BJS report states that 71 percent of the rejections were for a
felony conviction or indictment, 12 percent were for a disqualifying domestic
violence conviction and three percent were rejected because the applicant was a
fugitive from justice. Thus, 86 percent (approximately 175,440 persons) of those
rejected by the instant check system had de facto committed another felony by
falsifying ATF Form 4473. However, federal firearm prosecutions in aggregate
totaled only 6,728. Although the report indicated the statistics for 1999 are
preliminary data, that is a prosecution rate of only 3.29 percent. To put it
another way, for every thirty rejected applications for a firearm transfer,
there was only one prosecution. If we are to concern ourselves with 1998, the
latest year for which we have final data, the record is demonstrably worse. Of
the rejected applications, totaling 90,000 in 1998, a mere 102 cases were
federally prosecuted. That equates to a prosecution rate of less than one
percent. Thus in 1998, for every 882 rejected applications for a firearm
transfer there was only one federal prosecution. And while some have made the
case that these cases are difficult to prosecute, I would note the statement of
former federal prosecutor Andrew McBride of the Richmond office, now in private
practice, that such cases are as easy to prosecute as "picking change up
off the street." Needless to say, these statistics are less than
impressive. It is not hard to understand why this Administration has been
criticized for being lax in enforcing existing federal firearm laws. In an
effort to better understand why the Department of Justice is not doing more to
prosecute violations of 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(6), I would appreciate your answers to
the following questions: However, of the 204,000 individuals denied
the purchase of firearm "nearly 3 out of 4 rejections for firearm
transfer occurred because the applicant either had a felony conviction or was
under felony indictment." Therefore, it follows that over 150,000
individuals committed a federal felony by falsifying ATF Form 4473. Yet, a
February, 2000 General Accounting Office report on the Implementation of NICS
showed that in FY 1999, U.S Attorneys filed only 278 cases involving alleged
false statements of 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(6) and 316 cases were pending at fiscal
yearend. Please explain the lack of federal prosecutions for false statements
on ATF Form 4473. Also explain towhat degree "weak evidence"
contributes to the unwillingness of U.S. Attorneys to prosecute 18 U.S.C.
922(a)(6) violations. In November 1998, EOUSA [Executive
Office for U.S. Attorneys] provided Brady Act prosecutive guidance . . .
The guidance stated that thousands of potential Brady false-form cases
would likely reach ATF field offices annually, and that the system
"would grind to a halt if ATF investigated all the denials." The report goes on to say that the EOUSA
guidance recommended that U.S. Attorneys should "make every effort to
increase the number of Brady false-form prosecutions (from the current
annual level of 50 cases)." The GAO audit also states that in deciding
which false form violations to forward to U.S. Attorneys, ATF’s policy is
to refer those cases where the "denied purchaser’s criminal history
has records of violent felonies, serious drug trafficking, or prior firearms
convictions." Yet the GAO report indicates that over half of the
referrals of violent criminals were closed without investigation or
prosecution. In light of these GAO findings, I would
like answers to the following: A. Why were half of the referrals of violent
criminals closed without investigation or prosecution? B. What efforts has the Department of Justice
undertaken to increase the number of false form prosecutions? Has EOUSA
issued any additional guidance regarding 18 U.S.C. (a)(6) violations? C. Since November 1998, how many 18 U.S.C.
(a)(6) violations have been referred to U.S. Attorneys by ATF field
offices? D. How many 18 U.S.C. (a)(6) false form
prosecutions have U.S. Attorneys undertaken since the November 1998 EOUSA
guidance? E. I do not believe that violent felons, upon
learning they are disqualified from firearm ownership, give up their
search to obtain a firearm. Please explain why U.S. Attorneys are
unwilling to enforce 18 U.S.C. (a)(6) even for violent felons who attempt
to purchase firearms? Your attention to this matter is greatly
appreciated. I look forward to your response. If you have any questions about
this matter, please have your staff contact Michael Hacker of my office at (202)
225-4071. With
every good wish, Sincerely, John
D. Dingell Member
of Congress To Get Your Letters Printed Here |
||||||||