7 April 1997
Source: http://library.whitehouse.gov/

See links to assault weapons report


The White House Briefing Room


April 6, 1998

REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN

                           THE WHITE HOUSE

                    Office of the Press Secretary

________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                              April 6, 1998     


                      REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
                     ON THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN
                                  
                           The Rose Garden

10:55 A.M. EDT


	     THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you very much, Secretary Rubin.  
Thank you for your efforts.  Madam Attorney General, thank you.  Mr. 
Vice President, thank you.  And to the members of the law enforcement 
community and Secretary Kelly, Mr. McGaw, Attorney General Miller, 
Congressman Engel, to representatives of hand gun control and the 
victims of violent crime, and to all of you who have come here today, 
I thank you very much. 

	     As the Vice President and the Attorney General and the 
Secretary of Treasury have said, five years ago we made a commitment 
as an administration to recover our nation's streets from crime and 
violence, to provide security for our families and our children.  It 
required a new determination by communities and by government.  It 
took a new philosophy of law enforcement, based not on tough talk, 
which was always in ample supply, but on tough action and smart 
action, a philosophy based simply on what works -- community 
policing, strong anti-gang efforts, targeted deterrence, smarter, 
tougher penalties; a comprehensive strategy that includes all these 
elements and puts community policing at its core.

	     We're well on our way to putting 100,000 new police 
officers on the street, ahead of schedule.  And as the Vice President 
just told us, crime rates are dropping all across America to a 
25-year low.  Violent crime is down.  Property crime is down.  And 
murder is down dramatically.  From the Crime Bill to the Brady Bill, 
from the assault weapons ban to the Violence Against Women Act, our 
strategy is showing results.  And Americans should take both pride 
and comfort in this progress. 

	     But statistics tell only part of the story.  The real 
measure of our progress is whether responsibility and respect for the 
law are on the rise.  The real test of our resolve is whether parents 
can unlock their front doors with confidence and let their children 
play in the front yard without fear.  And the fact remains that there 
are still far too many children in harm's way, too many families 
behind locked doors, too many guns in the hands of too many 
criminals.

	     No statistics can measure the pain or the brave 
resilience of the families shattered by gun violence.  Some of them 
are here with us today, and I would like to acknowledge them -- 
people like Dan Gross, Tawanna Matthews, Brian Miller, Byrl 
Phillips-Taylor.  Byrl's 17-year-old son was killed with an AK 47.  
Tragedies like theirs are a brutal reminder of the task still before 
us.  They are a challenge and a call to action that we as a nation 
cannot ignore, and I thank these people for being willing to continue 
the fight through their pain.  Thank you very much, all of you.  
(Applause.)

	     If we are going to move forward in building a safer, 
stronger America, all of us -- police and parents, communities and 
public officials -- must work together.  We must remain vigilant.

	     Last November, I asked the Treasury Department to 
conduct the thorough review Secretary Rubin has just presented.  That 
is why our administration has concluded that the import of assault 
weapons that use large-capacity military magazines should be banned.  
As everyone knows, you don't need an Uzi to go deer hunting.  You 
don't need an AK 47 to go skeet shooting.  These are military 
weapons, weapons of war.  They were never meant for a day in the 
country, and they are certainly not meant for a night on the streets.  
Today we are working to make sure they stay off our streets.

	     Two successive administrations have acted on this 
principle.  In 1989, President Bush banned the import of 43 
semi-automatic assault rifles.  In 1994, this administration banned 
the domestic manufacture of certain assault weapons.  And in 
Congress, Senator Dianne Feinstein and the late Congressman Walter 
Capps led the fight against foreign gun manufacturers who evade the 
law.  As long as those manufacturers can make minor cosmetic 
modifications to weapons of war, our work is not done.  And we must 
act swiftly and strongly.

	     That is what Secretary Rubin's announcement amounts to 
today.  We are doing our best to say, you can read the fine print in 
our law and our regulations all you want, and you can keep making 
your minor changes, but we're going to do our best to keep our people 
alive and stop you from making a dollar in the wrong way.  
(Applause.)
	     
	     It is our sworn duty to uphold the law, but it is also 
our moral obligation -- our obligation to the children and families 
of law-abiding citizens, an obligation to stop the terrible scourge 
of gun violence.  As parents, we teach our children every day to 
distinguish right from wrong.  As a nation, we must also remember 
where to draw the line.  
	     
	     Today, we draw it clearly and indelibly.  If we do this, 
if we follow the recommendations set forth in this report, we chart 
the right course for America, toward a future more free of fear and a 
new century brimming with confidence and great promise.
	     
	     Again, to all of you who played any role in this 
important day, I thank you on behalf of the people and the children 
and the future of the United States.  Thank you very much.  
(Applause.)

             END                          11:03 A.M. EDT


The White House Briefing Room


April 6, 1998

BACKGROUND BRIEFING BY SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL



                           THE WHITE HOUSE

                    Office of the Press Secretary
_____________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                   April 6, 1998


                         BACKGROUND BRIEFING
                                 BY
                   SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL


                          The Briefing Room


1:03 P.M. EDT


	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  The event today in the 
Rose Garden was -- 

	     Q	  Can I ask a quick question? 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Sure. 

	     Q	  Why does this have to be a senior administration 
official as opposed to identifying you?  You're a prominent, 
respected, knowledgeable person on this issue.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  It was a decision made 
because I'm in the nomination process for Customs Commissioner, and 
it was decided that it would be best, tactically, to do this on 
background. 

	     Q	  But when you come back at Customs Commissioner, 
we're going to get you.  

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Okay.  (Laughter.)  
I'll be ready, maybe. 

	     The event today was the notification by the Secretary of 
the Treasury to the President that he had accepted the findings of a 
panel concerning modified semiautomatic weapons.  And the panel was 
put together at the direction of the President November 14, 1997, to 
examine the issue of whether or not guns that were banned in 1989 
were in fact modified to circumvent the ban, and in fact whether or 
not they met the sporting purposes test.

	     In 1968 the Gun Control Act set up a standard, a 
standard saying that firearms generally could not be imported into 
the country unless they were generally seen as being particularly 
suitable or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.  In 1989 the 
findings were that some 43 guns did not meet that criteria.

	     What happened is manufacturers of those same guns took 
off from the weapons the indicia of -- what were then decided to be 
indicia of military weapons -- bayonet studs, flash suppressors, 
night sights, folding stocks -- and in fact began to export to this 
country in essence the same weapon, the same functioning weapon. 

	     And what this study showed is, number one, that the 
weapons -- we did a fairly thorough analysis and examination of 
questionnaires, of hunting guides, of a literature search, of editors 
of hunting magazines.  This study showed that the guns were not used 
for sporting purposes for the most part, and secondly, that they all 
had large-capacity military magazines -- magazines with a capacity of 
over 11 rounds.  And this was seen to be a fundamental feature of 
military-style weapons.  
	     

	     So what happened is the study looked at five design 
types which encompassed a total of 59 weapons, and all but one of 
those weapons were deemed to be inappropriate because they were, in 
effect, military-style weapons that were not used for sporting 
purposes.
	     
	     That's it in a nutshell.  The report is out.  I think 
it's a very well done report.  It's available to you.  It's also 
available on the Internet.  It's a 38-page report, but it has lots of 
tabs in it and it has pictures of the weapons as they were and as 
they were modified, and you'll see that they look essentially the 
same.
	     
	     Q	  Do you know how many of these weapons -- had all of 
these weapons been licensed and the licenses were on hold, and how 
many weapons actually made it into the United States to be 
warehoused?
	     
	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Since 1991, about 
425,000 of these weapons have been imported.  However, there are 
pending 600,000 -- permits for the importation of up to 600,000 of 
these weapons.  And there are pending applications of about 1 million 
more for permits.  When I say -- the numbers I'm using are the 
maximum numbers for weapons that may be imported.  That's what they 
asked for; it doesn't necessarily mean they're going to import that 
number of weapons. 

	     Q	  Can you tell us, the M-1 replica that was used in 
Jonesboro is not included in any of this; is that correct?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That's right.  These 
only deal with imported weapons.  The M-1 is a domestically produced 
weapon. 

	     Q	  So none of the weapons allegedly used by the two 
kids in Jonesboro would have been covered under any of these new 
bans.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That's correct.

	     Q	  Including the clip, the 30 -- 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, the clips, you 
have to go back to the 1994 assault weapons ban.  That law 
prospectively banned the manufacture of clips of more than 10 rounds.  
I don't know -- 

	     Q	  You don't know whether -- 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Through the media I've 
learned that they may have had some 30-round clips in their 
possession.  I don't know when they were manufactured.

	     Q	  So what does this today do -- Attorney General Reno 
mentioned the tragedy of Jonesboro.  What could Americans look at 
here and say, well, this makes them feel better, this is the right 
thing to do, considering what happened in Jonesboro?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, we have -- and 
you'll see it in the report -- indications that these weapons have 
been used in crimes, and the number of traces that these weapons are 
undergoing, or the number of these weapons involved in traces, has 
been increasing in the last three years.  So I don't know if you can 
draw a direct correlation between the events in Jonesboro, but 
clearly we feel that these weapons have been used in crimes, will 
continue to be -- or would have continued to be used in crimes if in 
fact we didn't take this step.


	     Q	  But weapons of these types can be manufactured here 
in the United States now. 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes, this ruling has to 
do with just imported weapons.  Now, there are weapons -- of course, 
if you look at the 1994 assault weapons ban, that ban affects 19 
specific weapons.  So if they don't fit into -- they're not imported 
and they don't fit into this criteria and they don't fit into the 
ones specific enumerated in the 1994 law, yes.
	     
	     Q	  But, theoretically, if I'm a manufacturer of guns 
in the United States, I could manufacture a gun like the one that's 
been banned for import today.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No.  Well, the 
large-capacity magazines have been banned in 1994.  
	     
	     Q	  You can still build the same kind of gun in this 
country as the ones that you're banning as long as it's 
sports-modified, right?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes.  The sports 
provision really has to do only with the 1968 law.  But again, you 
are limited as far as the magazine capacity in this country.
	     
	     Q	  But my point is, if there is a pent-up demand for 
these kinds of guns, which the 1.6 million applications would assume 
that there is, if there is still a demand, then for a domestic gun 
manufacturer, I mean, now is the time to step in and meet that 
demand, right?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, I guess we'll 
have to see what the Congress's response is if, in fact, that 
happens.
	     
	     Q	  That would be allowed?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Again, that depends.  
If you look at the magazine capacity, which was prohibited by 
Congress in 1994, magazines of over 10 rounds, if, in fact, they 
manufactured a weapon that looked like this that had a magazine 
capacity less than 10 rounds, it could happen at this point in time.
	     
	     Q	  From a technical standpoint, the weapons that 
you're banning today, mechanically, with the exception of the 
magazines, are very little different from other semiautomatic weapons 
that are allowed on the market, correct?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Mechanically, yes.  But 
the whole issue here is large capacity military magazines.  I mean,  
mechanically, most guns work the same way, so the question is how 
many rounds can you put out in a short period of time.

	     Our view is that these are in essence military weapons.  
You've just taken off some of the accoutrements of military weapons, 
but you still have the same type of functioning weapon, particularly 
if you have a large-capacity magazine.  So if you put out 30 rounds 
in a very short period of time, you've got a military weapon. 

	     Q	  A semiautomatic weapon is a semiautomatic weapon is 
a semiautomatic weapon. 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That's correct.

	     Q	  It's just the magazines that are different. 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That's right.  And 
that's what we're focusing on with this decision. 


	     Q	  Some anti-gun groups say that this is just a 
band-aid, that you're not going far enough, and that within a few 
months or a year or two the same kind of loopholes and circumvention 
will occur that will make these kinds of guns available on the U.S. 
market.  Is the administration planning any steps to prevent that 
from happening? 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I think we have to 
respond to the situations as they occur.  What this decision does is 
add large-capacity magazines to the military characteristics that 
were used in the 1989 decision.  Now, again, it's important to focus 
on the fact that we're only looking at the universe of weapons that 
we were directed to look at.  We're not making this a larger ban than 
the 58 weapons that we looked at.  If in fact something develops akin 
to what you're talking about, then I think we'd have to respond -- or 
we may respond in some fashion, or Congress may respond.  But this 
decision, again, is only focused on 59 weapons. 

	     Q	  So you can have a weapon that takes a magazine.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  A weapon that takes a 
magazine, that's correct.

	     Q	  As long as it's under 10. 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes.  We're talking 
about these weapons now.  These are imported weapons.  So if you had 
an imported weapon -- again, the criteria here is, are they generally 
acceptable and used for sporting purposes.

	     Q	  But I'm trying to distinguish the difference 
between the domestic variety and the imported variety.  If you have a 
domestic weapon that takes a magazine, unless of course you control 
what magazines people have, then how would it be different from the 
imported weapons that you banned today?  In other words, you're 
banning any weapon that can hold a magazine, or only weapons that 
have magazines of larger than 10 rounds, and that's not the weapon, 
that's the magazine.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That's correct.  That's 
right.  Well, these weapons are configured to accept magazines of 
greater than 10 rounds, so that's what we're doing.  We're banning 
these weapons because they can -- first of all, not used for sporting 
purposes based on our survey and, secondly, can accept a magazine 
greater than 10 rounds.  Now, domestically, that's a whole other 
issue. 

	     Q	  So, in other words, if you were an exporter from 
somewhere else, you could send in a weapon here that would only take 
a magazine that would take 10 rounds, and that would be legal.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Correct. 

	     Q	  Do you know what the difference is between the -- 
what is it, whatever it is -- the one that was allowed and the 58 
that were disallowed?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  It doesn't -- it just 
doesn't have the capacity, the capability of taking a large-round 
magazine.  I think it has to do with the aperture where you fit the 
magazine in. 

	     Q	  So can you give us some statistics on how often 
these kinds of weapons that are being banned today are used in 
homicides and other crimes?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I don't know how 
specific we can get.  If you look in this report here, there are a 
couple of charts that talk about crime use and it talks about the 
fact that they're going up as far as the number of traces are 
concerned.  In other words, traces take place when a gun is used in a 
crime -- the crime gun.  You put it into ATF, for instance, and they 
trace the gun as to where it came from.  Those numbers are going up.  
There is some anecdotal information in here about crimes that are 
taking place.  I can't tell you specifically how many of them are 
used for homicides.  Quite frankly, the information is not that 
refined.
	     
	     Q	  And if I understand you correctly, 425,000 of these 
got into the United States and were sold prior to the freeze you 
established.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes.
	     
	     Q	  I'm a little unclear on the magazine issue.  Take 
one of these weapons that's banned now under this order, can you make 
it legal for import simply by clipping a 10-round magazine on it?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  The criteria really is 
the sporting purposes test.  The Secretary of the Treasury has a lot 
of discretion.  If you look again in this report, you will see a lot 
of legislative language and history from the 1968 report.  So what we 
did was, we did a survey that, are these guns being used for sporting 
purposes.  The answer came back:  Certainly not -- some are, but a 
very small number.
	     
	     In addition to that, then you look at the magazine issue 
which is indicia to us that it is a military style weapon.  So the 
criteria is the sporting purposes use and, in addition, the magazine.  
But the controlling is whether or not these are used for sporting 
purposes.
	     
	     Q	  So the answer is clearly no; putting a 10-round 
magazine on any one of these weapons will not make it legal for --

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I wouldn't say it's 
clearly no.  I think there is an appeals process here that will take 
place within the next 30 days, and that might be an argument that 
would be made by a particular manufacturer.  I can't answer that 
question --
	     
	     Q	  The position of the Treasury Department in that 
argument would be that putting a 10-round magazine on one of these 
weapons would not make it legal for import.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Correct.
	     
	     Q	  Are large-capacity magazines and smaller magazines 
the same size, or is it something about the mechanism in the weapon 
that makes it capable of taking more than 10 rounds in rapid fire?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  It's something about 
the aperture and the mechanism of the weapon, because you have to be 
able to have enough power to pump out these number of rounds, is my 
understanding.
	     
	     Q	  In the appeals process, does the Treasury Secretary 
have the right to just move in unilaterally and say, "I'm going to do 
what I'm going to do," or can he be preempted by the courts or 
whatever?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Certainly there's 
always a possibility of litigation.  The appeals process is for 30 
days, but that would not forestall litigation moving forward on 
another front.

	     
	     Q	  So presumably, this could go on for a long time.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  The decision has been 
made by the Secretary, we're going forward as of today, and the 
decision will be in place -- it's in place today.  Now, whether 
someone goes forward in litigation and looks for some sort of 
injunctive relief, I can't predict that.  But the decision is in 
effect today.
	     
	     Q	  How does the appeals process work?  How does that 
move forward?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  There's a 30-day period 
of time in which individuals who feel aggrieved can appeal directly 
to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.  There is a kind of a 
standard process for these appeals.
	     
	     Q	  This is kind of -- would you characterize this as a 
low-level bureaucratic review that kind of got higher profile because 
of the President's interest in the case?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No, I wouldn't 
characterize it as that.  I would say it's a relatively high-level 
review.  There were two committees, as explained in the book here.  
There was a technical committee made up of ATF and people from the 
Treasury, and then there was a committee at a higher level that -- 
oversight.  This is direction from the President to the Secretary of 
the Treasury to do a report under 20 days, and that's what we did.  
It's pretty high level for us.
	     
	     Q	  How long has the report been ready?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Oh, I would say perhaps 
a week, yes, about a week.
	     
	     Q	  Was it stepped up at all because of Jonesboro?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No, sir.  We had a 
120-day time limit.  As a matter of fact, we went over it a little 
bit.
	     
	     Q	  What happens to the guns -- they're what, about 
500,000 or 600,000 guns that are actually warehoused now -- are 
they -- 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No.  There are some 
guns that the Customs Service has, but it's not that large a number.  
It's smaller.  They're in Customs warehouses.  But the 600,000 and 
the million, those two numbers are permits and applications for 
permits.  They don't represent guns that are in the country.
	     
	     Q	  Permits for importation?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes.
	     
	     Q	  When you say 10 rounds are legal, how many bullets 
is that?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Ten bullets.
	     
	     Q	  Ten bullets, without reloading?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes.
	     
	     Q	  If you had the authority, if the government had the 
authority to ban the weapons that are being banned today before now, 
why wasn't the authority used until now? 


	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  This was a process.  
The weapons were, in essence, banned in 1989.  What happened is the 
modifications took place.  It's kind of an incremental basis.  And 
then in 1994 Congress passed the Assault Weapons Ban, and in that ban 
was the recognition that large-capacity magazines are something that 
should be prohibited.  So you take all of that together, moving over 
time, I think this is kind of a natural progression.  I personally 
don't see it as being a problem.
	     
	     Q	  But why wouldn't these have been banned by 
Congress?  Why wouldn't that have covered these weapons, if 
large-capacity magazines --

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No, Congress only 
banned the magazines and then they banned 19 specific weapons by 
model number.  These weapons were not included.
	     
	     THE PRESS:  Thank you.

             END                          1:20 P.M. EDT



The White House Briefing Room


April 6, 1998

BACKGROUND BRIEFING BY SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL


                           THE WHITE HOUSE

                    Office of the Press Secretary
_____________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                    April 6, 1998


                         BACKGROUND BRIEFING
                                 BY
                   SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL


                          The Briefing Room


1:03 P.M. EDT


	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  	 The event today was 
the notification by the Secretary of the Treasury to the President 
that he had accepted the findings of a panel concerning modified 
semiautomatic weapons.  And the panel was put together at the 
direction of the President November 14, 1997, to examine the issue of 
whether or not guns that were banned in 1989 were in fact modified to 
circumvent the ban, and in fact whether or not they met the sporting 
purposes test.

	     In 1968 the Gun Control Act set up a standard, a 
standard saying that firearms generally could not be imported into 
the country unless they were generally seen as being particularly 
suitable or readily adaptable to sporting purposes.  In 1989 the 
findings were that some 43 guns did not meet that criteria.

	     What happened is manufacturers of those same guns took 
off from the weapons the indicia of -- what were then decided to be 
indicia of military weapons -- bayonet studs, flash suppressors, 
night sights, folding stocks -- and in fact began to export to this 
country in essence the same weapon, the same functioning weapon. 

	     And what this study showed is, number one, that the 
weapons -- we did a fairly thorough analysis and examination of 
questionnaires, of hunting guides, of a literature search, of editors 
of hunting magazines.  This study showed that the guns were not used 
for sporting purposes for the most part, and secondly, that they all 
had large-capacity military magazines -- magazines with a capacity of 
over 11 rounds.  And this was seen to be a fundamental feature of 
military-style weapons.  
	     
	     So what happened is the study looked at five design 
types which encompassed a total of 59 weapons, and all but one of 
those weapons were deemed to be inappropriate because they were, in 
effect, military-style weapons that were not used for sporting 
purposes.
	     
	     That's it in a nutshell.  The report is out.  I think 
it's a very well done report.  It's available to you.  It's also 
available on the Internet.  It's a 38-page report, but it has lots of 
tabs in it and it has pictures of the weapons as they were and as 
they were modified, and you'll see that they look essentially the 
same.
	     
	     Q	  Do you know how many of these weapons -- had all of 
these weapons been licensed and the licenses were on hold, and how 
many weapons actually made it into the United States to be 
warehoused?
	     
	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Since 1991, about 
425,000 of these weapons have been imported.  However, there are 
pending 600,000 -- permits for the importation of up to 600,000 of 

these weapons.  And there are pending applications of about 1 million 
more for permits.  When I say -- the numbers I'm using are the 
maximum numbers for weapons that may be imported.  That's what they 
asked for; it doesn't necessarily mean they're going to import that 
number of weapons. 

	     Q	  Can you tell us, the M-1 replica that was used in 
Jonesboro is not included in any of this; is that correct?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That's right.  These 
only deal with imported weapons.  The M-1 is a domestically produced 
weapon. 

	     Q	  So none of the weapons allegedly used by the two 
kids in Jonesboro would have been covered under any of these new 
bans.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That's correct.

	     Q	  Including the clip, the 30 -- 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, the clips, you 
have to go back to the 1994 assault weapons ban.  That law 
prospectively banned the manufacture of clips of more than 10 rounds.  
I don't know -- 

	     Q	  You don't know whether -- 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Through the media I've 
learned that they may have had some 30-round clips in their 
possession.  I don't know when they were manufactured.

	     Q	  So what does this today do -- Attorney General Reno 
mentioned the tragedy of Jonesboro.  What could Americans look at 
here and say, well, this makes them feel better, this is the right 
thing to do, considering what happened in Jonesboro?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, we have -- and 
you'll see it in the report -- indications that these weapons have 
been used in crimes, and the number of traces that these weapons are 
undergoing, or the number of these weapons involved in traces, has 
been increasing in the last three years.  So I don't know if you can 
draw a direct correlation between the events in Jonesboro, but 
clearly we feel that these weapons have been used in crimes, will 
continue to be -- or would have continued to be used in crimes if in 
fact we didn't take this step.

	     Q	  But weapons of these types can be manufactured here 
in the United States now. 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes, this ruling has to 
do with just imported weapons.  Now, there are weapons -- of course, 
if you look at the 1994 assault weapons ban, that ban affects 19 
specific weapons.  So if they don't fit into -- they're not imported 
and they don't fit into this criteria and they don't fit into the 
ones specific enumerated in the 1994 law, yes.
	     
	     Q	  But, theoretically, if I'm a manufacturer of guns 
in the United States, I could manufacture a gun like the one that's 
been banned for import today.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No.  Well, the 
large-capacity magazines have been banned in 1994.  
	     
	     Q	  You can still build the same kind of gun in this 
country as the ones that you're banning as long as it's 
sports-modified, right?


	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes.  The sports 
provision really has to do only with the 1968 law.  But again, you 
are limited as far as the magazine capacity in this country.
	     
	     Q	  But my point is, if there is a pent-up demand for 
these kinds of guns, which the 1.6 million applications would assume 
that there is, if there is still a demand, then for a domestic gun 
manufacturer, I mean, now is the time to step in and meet that 
demand, right?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Well, I guess we'll 
have to see what the Congress's response is if, in fact, that 
happens.
	     
	     Q	  That would be allowed?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Again, that depends.  
If you look at the magazine capacity, which was prohibited by 
Congress in 1994, magazines of over 10 rounds, if, in fact, they 
manufactured a weapon that looked like this that had a magazine 
capacity less than 10 rounds, it could happen at this point in time.
	     
	     Q	  From a technical standpoint, the weapons that 
you're banning today, mechanically, with the exception of the 
magazines, are very little different from other semiautomatic weapons 
that are allowed on the market, correct?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Mechanically, yes.  But 
the whole issue here is large capacity military magazines.  I mean,  
mechanically, most guns work the same way, so the question is how 
many rounds can you put out in a short period of time.

	     Our view is that these are in essence military weapons.  
You've just taken off some of the accoutrements of military weapons, 
but you still have the same type of functioning weapon, particularly 
if you have a large-capacity magazine.  So if you put out 30 rounds 
in a very short period of time, you've got a military weapon. 

	     Q	  A semiautomatic weapon is a semiautomatic weapon is 
a semiautomatic weapon. 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That's correct.

	     Q	  It's just the magazines that are different. 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That's right.  And 
that's what we're focusing on with this decision. 

	     Q	  Some anti-gun groups say that this is just a 
band-aid, that you're not going far enough, and that within a few 
months or a year or two the same kind of loopholes and circumvention 
will occur that will make these kinds of guns available on the U.S. 
market.  Is the administration planning any steps to prevent that 
from happening? 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I think we have to 
respond to the situations as they occur.  What this decision does is 
add large-capacity magazines to the military characteristics that 
were used in the 1989 decision.  Now, again, it's important to focus 
on the fact that we're only looking at the universe of weapons that 
we were directed to look at.  We're not making this a larger ban than 
the 58 weapons that we looked at.  If in fact something develops akin 
to what you're talking about, then I think we'd have to respond -- or 
we may respond in some fashion, or Congress may respond.  But this 
decision, again, is only focused on 59 weapons. 

	     Q	  So you can have a weapon that takes a magazine.


	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  A weapon that takes a 
magazine, that's correct.

	     Q	  As long as it's under 10. 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes.  We're talking 
about these weapons now.  These are imported weapons.  So if you had 
an imported weapon -- again, the criteria here is, are they generally 
acceptable and used for sporting purposes.

	     Q	  But I'm trying to distinguish the difference 
between the domestic variety and the imported variety.  If you have a 
domestic weapon that takes a magazine, unless of course you control 
what magazines people have, then how would it be different from the 
imported weapons that you banned today?  In other words, you're 
banning any weapon that can hold a magazine, or only weapons that 
have magazines of larger than 10 rounds, and that's not the weapon, 
that's the magazine.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  That's correct.  That's 
right.  Well, these weapons are configured to accept magazines of 
greater than 10 rounds, so that's what we're doing.  We're banning 
these weapons because they can -- first of all, not used for sporting 
purposes based on our survey and, secondly, can accept a magazine 
greater than 10 rounds.  Now, domestically, that's a whole other 
issue. 

	     Q	  So, in other words, if you were an exporter from 
somewhere else, you could send in a weapon here that would only take 
a magazine that would take 10 rounds, and that would be legal.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Correct. 

	     Q	  Do you know what the difference is between the -- 
what is it, whatever it is -- the one that was allowed and the 58 
that were disallowed?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  It doesn't -- it just 
doesn't have the capacity, the capability of taking a large-round 
magazine.  I think it has to do with the aperture where you fit the 
magazine in. 

	     Q	  So can you give us some statistics on how often 
these kinds of weapons that are being banned today are used in 
homicides and other crimes?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I don't know how 
specific we can get.  If you look in this report here, there are a 
couple of charts that talk about crime use and it talks about the 
fact that they're going up as far as the number of traces are 
concerned.  In other words, traces take place when a gun is used in a 
crime -- the crime gun.  You put it into ATF, for instance, and they 
trace the gun as to where it came from.  Those numbers are going up.  
There is some anecdotal information in here about crimes that are 
taking place.  I can't tell you specifically how many of them are 
used for homicides.  Quite frankly, the information is not that 
refined.
	     
	     Q	  And if I understand you correctly, 425,000 of these 
got into the United States and were sold prior to the freeze you 
established.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes.
	     
	     Q	  I'm a little unclear on the magazine issue.  Take 
one of these weapons that's banned now under this order, can you make 
it legal for import simply by clipping a 10-round magazine on it?


	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  The criteria really is 
the sporting purposes test.  The Secretary of the Treasury has a lot 
of discretion.  If you look again in this report, you will see a lot 
of legislative language and history from the 1968 report.  So what we 
did was, we did a survey that, are these guns being used for sporting 
purposes.  The answer came back:  Certainly not -- some are, but a 
very small number.
	     
	     In addition to that, then you look at the magazine issue 
which is indicia to us that it is a military style weapon.  So the 
criteria is the sporting purposes use and, in addition, the magazine.  
But the controlling is whether or not these are used for sporting 
purposes.
	     
	     Q	  So the answer is clearly no; putting a 10-round 
magazine on any one of these weapons will not make it legal for --

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  I wouldn't say it's 
clearly no.  I think there is an appeals process here that will take 
place within the next 30 days, and that might be an argument that 
would be made by a particular manufacturer.  I can't answer that 
question --
	     
	     Q	  The position of the Treasury Department in that 
argument would be that putting a 10-round magazine on one of these 
weapons would not make it legal for import.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Correct.
	     
	     Q	  Are large-capacity magazines and smaller magazines 
the same size, or is it something about the mechanism in the weapon 
that makes it capable of taking more than 10 rounds in rapid fire?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  It's something about 
the aperture and the mechanism of the weapon, because you have to be 
able to have enough power to pump out these number of rounds, is my 
understanding.
	     
	     Q	  In the appeals process, does the Treasury Secretary 
have the right to just move in unilaterally and say, "I'm going to do 
what I'm going to do," or can he be preempted by the courts or 
whatever?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Certainly there's 
always a possibility of litigation.  The appeals process is for 30 
days, but that would not forestall litigation moving forward on 
another front.
	     
	     Q	  So presumably, this could go on for a long time.

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  The decision has been 
made by the Secretary, we're going forward as of today, and the 
decision will be in place -- it's in place today.  Now, whether 
someone goes forward in litigation and looks for some sort of 
injunctive relief, I can't predict that.  But the decision is in 
effect today.
	     
	     Q	  How does the appeals process work?  How does that 
move forward?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  There's a 30-day period 
of time in which individuals who feel aggrieved can appeal directly 
to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.  There is a kind of a 
standard process for these appeals.
	     
	     Q	  This is kind of -- would you characterize this as a 
low-level bureaucratic review that kind of got higher profile because 
of the President's interest in the case?


	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No, I wouldn't 
characterize it as that.  I would say it's a relatively high-level 
review.  There were two committees, as explained in the book here.  
There was a technical committee made up of ATF and people from the 
Treasury, and then there was a committee at a higher level that -- 
oversight.  This is direction from the President to the Secretary of 
the Treasury to do a report under 20 days, and that's what we did.  
It's pretty high level for us.
	     
	     Q	  How long has the report been ready?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Oh, I would say perhaps 
a week, yes, about a week.
	     
	     Q	  Was it stepped up at all because of Jonesboro?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No, sir.  We had a 
120-day time limit.  As a matter of fact, we went over it a little 
bit.
	     
	     Q	  What happens to the guns -- they're what, about 
500,000 or 600,000 guns that are actually warehoused now -- are 
they -- 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No.  There are some 
guns that the Customs Service has, but it's not that large a number.  
It's smaller.  They're in Customs warehouses.  But the 600,000 and 
the million, those two numbers are permits and applications for 
permits.  They don't represent guns that are in the country.
	     
	     Q	  Permits for importation?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes.
	     
	     Q	  When you say 10 rounds are legal, how many bullets 
is that?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Ten bullets.
	     
	     Q	  Ten bullets, without reloading?

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  Yes.
	     
	     Q	  If you had the authority, if the government had the 
authority to ban the weapons that are being banned today before now, 
why wasn't the authority used until now? 

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  This was a process.  
The weapons were, in essence, banned in 1989.  What happened is the 
modifications took place.  It's kind of an incremental basis.  And 
then in 1994 Congress passed the Assault Weapons Ban, and in that ban 
was the recognition that large-capacity magazines are something that 
should be prohibited.  So you take all of that together, moving over 
time, I think this is kind of a natural progression.  I personally 
don't see it as being a problem.
	     
	     Q	  But why wouldn't these have been banned by 
Congress?  Why wouldn't that have covered these weapons, if 
large-capacity magazines --

	     SENIOR ADMINISTRATION OFFICIAL:  No, Congress only 
banned the magazines and then they banned 19 specific weapons by 
model number.  These weapons were not included.
	     
	     THE PRESS:  Thank you.

             END                          1:20 P.M. EDT



The White House Briefing Room


April 6, 1998

PRESS BRIEFING BY MIKE MCCURRY

[Excerpts on weapons ban]



                           THE WHITE HOUSE

                    Office of the Press Secretary

_____________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release                                   April 6, 1998


                           PRESS BRIEFING
                           BY MIKE MCCURRY

                          The Briefing Room


1:25 P.M. EDT
	     
     
	     Q	  Mike, on the import gun ban, why hasn't the 
Administration asked Congress to stop domestic manufacturers from 
making these same type of weapons?
	     
	     MR. McCURRY:  You had a good person who could have 
answered that question here a minute ago.  I'm not aware that the 
issue we're facing today dealt with the import ban which arises out 
of the 1989 decision by President Bush, and in a way sort of follows 
up implementation under the '94 act, but I'd have to check and see 
what contact there has been with domestic manufacturers or what 
restrictions exist.  I just don't know.
	     
	     Q	  I'll follow up on Dave's question in a different 
venue.  For the cameras, the NRA says that this is just another way 
of going to the eventual total ban of guns.  How does the White House 
respond?
	     
	     MR. McCURRY:  I think the scope of this decision is 
quite clear and the existing statute is quite clear, and that's not 
something that has been advocated by the President or is under 
consideration.



http://www.usia.gov/current/news/latest/98040607.tlt.html?/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml

06 April 1998

THE UNITED STATES BANS MORE THAN 50 TYPES OF IMPORTED WEAPONS

(Another step to keep guns out of hands of criminals)  (560)

By Wendy S. Ross

USIA White House Correspondent



Washington -- The Treasury Department has determined that 58 types of
modified semiautomatic assault rifles that accept large capacity
military magazines cannot be imported into the United States,
President Clinton announced April 6.


Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, who oversees the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco and Firearms (ATF), made the determination following a 120-day
review by the Treasury Department and ATF of import permit
applications for foreign-made guns.


President Clinton last November asked for the review to ensure that
the foreign-made guns imported into the United States are used only
for sporting purposes.


"As everyone knows, you don't need an Uzi to go deer hunting," the
President said. "You don't need an AK-47 to go skeet shooting. These
are military weapons, weapons of war. They were never meant for a day
in the country, and they are certainly not meant for a night on the
streets. Today we are working to make sure they stay off our streets."


Under the ban, about a million and a half of the weapons covered
already were on order and will be affected by this decision, White
House officials said.


Also speaking at the Rose Garden event were Rubin and Attorney General
Janet Reno.


Rubin said that since taking office one of President Clinton's highest
priorities has been to make America's streets and communities safer.
"Great progress has been made on this score," he said, as evidenced by
the reduction in the United States of violent crimes over the past
five years.


A key element of the President's strategy to fight crime has been his
action to make it harder for criminals to get guns, particularly
semi-automatic assault weapons, Rubin said.


In 1989 ATF prohibited the importation into the United States of a
series of semi-automatic assault rifles which had specified military
features, he said. The 1989 decision along with the 1994 Assault
Weapons Ban have made it harder for criminals to obtain semi-automatic
assault weapons. "But neither measure prevented rifles with the
ability to accept large capacity military magazines, which fire large
numbers of bullets in a very short time frame without reloading, from
entering our country," Rubin said. "Today we are taking steps to stop
the flow of these deadly rapid firing weapons by prohibiting the
importation of designated semi-automatic rifles that have the ability
to accept large capacity military magazines."


This decision, he added, will in no way affect the importation of true
sporting firearms but will prohibit the importation of dangerous
weapons that are attractive to criminals.


"Mr. President, today you take another very, very important step for
making this nation a safer place for all of its citizens," Reno said.
She said the findings of the Treasury Department report titled
"Department of the Treasury Study on the Sporting Suitability of
Modified Semiautomatic Assault Rifles" released April 6 "are vitally
important." A ban on the importation of assault weapons that have no
legitimate sporting purpose will go a long way towards achieving a
reduction in gun violence in the United States, Reno said.


Attending the Rose Garden event were US law enforcement officials,
members of gun control groups, and family members of victims of gun
violence.


06 April 1998

FACT SHEET: BANNING THE IMPORTATION OF MODIFIED ASSAULT WEAPONS

(Clinton says Treasury concludes 50 kinds not importable)  (470)

(The following Fact Sheet on Banning the Importation of Modified
Assault Weapons was issued by the White House on April 6, 1998)

(begin White House Fact Sheet)


THE WHITE HOUSE

Banning the Importation of Modified Assault Weapons

April 6, 1998

Announcement: Today, in response to a previously issued memorandum,
the President announced that the Treasury Department has concluded
that more than 50 kinds of modified assault weapons are generally not
importable because they accept large capacity military magazines. Up
to 1.5 million rifles whose importation had been temporarily suspended
may be affected by this decision.

-- On November 15, 1997, in his radio address to the nation, President
Clinton announced that the Treasury Department would temporarily
suspend the importation of certain modified assault weapons to review
whether these weapons should be allowed to enter the country. Today,
the Secretary of the Treasury informed the President that most of the
weapons studied should be generally banned from importation.

-- Under current law (the 1968 Gun Control Act), the Treasury
Department has the obligation to restrict the importation of firearms
unless they are determined to be "particularly suitable for or readily
adaptable to sporting purposes." After taking several months to review
the weapons in question, the Treasury Department has concluded that
modified semiautomatic assault rifles that accept large capacity
military magazines -- or LCMM rifles -- do not meet the sporting
purposes test and are generally not importable.

-- Since passage of the 1968 Gun Control Act, Administrations of both
parties have repeatedly invoked this authority to ensure that only
legitimate sporting weapons are brought into the country. In 1968, the
Act was used to ban the importation of Saturday Night Specials and
other small and inexpensive handguns; in 1984 and 1986, it was used to
ban the importation of the Striker-12 and USAS-12 riot control
shotguns; in 1989, it was used to ban the importation of 43
semiautomatic assault rifles; and in 1993, its authority was invoked
to propose a ban on the importation of certain assault pistols, though
the Assault Weapons Ban of 1994 made this executive action
unnecessary.

-- The more than 50 models of firearms affected by today's decision
are modified versions of military assault weapons that were banned by
the Bush Administration in 1989, or by the Assault Weapons Ban of
1994. Most of these models are based on the AK 47 assault rifle, but
some are variants of the Uzi, FN-FAL, HK 91 and 93, and SIG SG550.

-- Up to 1.5 million firearms whose importation had been suspended
during the review may be affected by this decision. Importers will be
notified in writing and given an opportunity to respond.

(end White House Fact Sheet)


Source: http://www.atf.treas.gov/pub/assault_rifles/index.htm

DEPARTMENT OF
THE TREASURY
STUDY ON
THE SPORTING
SUITIBILITY
OF MODIFIED
SEMIAUTOMATIC
ASSAULT RIFLES

APRIL 1998


REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT ON THE ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN

Department of Treasury Press Release

The following files are in PDF format and are best viewed with Acrobat 3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
See bottom of page to download the entire report as one file
 
Page

 

Executive Summary 
Background  
Defining the Type of Weapon Under Review 
Scope of "Sporting Purposes"  
Method of Study  
Suitability for Sporting Purposes  
Determination
1
4
16
16
19
21
36

 

Exhibits:

White House Memorandum: Importation of Modified Semiautomatic Assault-type Rifles
Study Rifle Models
Study Rifles
ATF Form 4590, Factoring Criteria for Weapons
Military Configuration
Memorandum to File From First Meeting of Firearms Advisory Panel
State Fish and Game Commission Review

Appendix:

Summary of Externally Gathered Information for the Study on the Sporting Suitability of  Modified Semiautomatic Weapons

Download the complete report


 
This file was last modified on April 06, 1998.

[End ATF page]