DOCSLIB.ORG

Firearm Use by Offenders

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Firearm Use by Offenders U.S. Department of Justice Revised 2/04/02, th Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report November 2001, NCJ 189369 Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities Firearm Use by Offenders By Caroline Wolf Harlow, Ph.D. BJS Statistician Highlights Approximately 203,300 prisoners Percent of prison inmates • During the offense that brought them serving a sentence in a State or Type of firearm State Federal to prison, 15% of State inmates and Total 18.4% 14.8% Federal prison in 1997 were armed Handgun 15.3 12.8 13% of Federal inmates carried a when they committed the crime for Rifle 1.3 1.3 handgun; about 2% had a military-style which they were serving time. An Shotgun 2.4 2.0 semiautomatic gun or machine gun. estimated 18% of State prison inmates Characteristic of • Among inmates in prison for and 15% of Federal inmates reported inmates who Percent of prison Inmates homicide, a sexual assault, robbery, using, carrying, or possessing a firearm carried firearms possessing a firearm assault or other violent crime, 30% of during the crime for which they were Offense State Federal Violent 30.2% 35.4% State offenders and 35% of Federal sentenced. In 1991, 16% of State Property 3.1 2.9 offenders carried a firearm when inmates and 12% of Federal inmates Drug 8.1 8.7 committing the crime. Almost a fourth said they were armed at the time of Public-order 19.1 27.3 of State inmates and almost a third of their offense. Gender Male 19.1% 15.5% Federal inmates serving a sentence for a violent crime had carried a Among all inmates in 1997, 9% of Female 7.3 6.2 handgun during the offense. those in State prisons and 2% of those Age in Federal prisons said they fired a gun 24 or younger 29.4% 19.1% 25-34 16.5 15.5 • 29% of State inmates under age 25 while committing their current offense. 35 or older 14.8 13.6 at the time of the survey were carrying Of violent offenders, 18% of State Criminal history a gun when they committed their inmates and 9% of Federal inmates First-time offender 22.3% 9.5% current offense compared to 15% of discharged a firearm. Less than 2% Recidivist 17.2 18.4 those 35 or older. of inmates serving time for a drug, Percent of State inmates property, or public-order offense fired a possessing a firearm • In 1997 among State inmates gun during the crime that resulted in Source of gun 1997 1991 possessing a gun, fewer than 2% their prison sentence. Total 100.0% 100.0% bought their firearm at a flea market Purchased from – 13.9 20.8 Retail store 8.3 14.7 or gun show, about 12% from a retail Among prisoners who carried a firearm Pawnshop 3.8 4.2 store or pawnshop, and 80% from during the offense for which they were Flea market 1.0 1.3 family, friends, a street buy, or an serving time in 1997, 14% had bought Gun show 0.7 0.6 illegal source. Friends or family 39.6 33.8 or traded for the gun from a store, Street/illegal source 39.2 40.8 pawnshop, flea market, or gun show. • On average, State inmates possess- Percent of prison inmates ing a firearm received sentences of 18 The 1997 percentage who had possessing a firearm acquired their firearm at a retail outlet years, while those without a weapon Use of firearm State Federal had an average sentence of 12 years. represented a significant drop from Total 100.0% 100.0% 21% in 1991. The percentage of Fired 49.1 12.8 • Among prisoners carrying a firearm inmates receiving their gun from family Killed/injured victim 22.8 5.0 during their crime, 40% of State or friends rose from 34% in 1991 to Other 26.3 7.8 inmates and 56% of Federal inmates 40% in 1997. Brandished to – 73.2 46.2 Scare someone 48.6 29.3 received a sentence enhancement Defend self 41.1 24.9 because of the firearm. Revised 2/04/02, th Data for this report are based primarily military-style semiautomatic gun or a Some examples of these firearms are on personal interviews with large fully automatic gun during their current the UZI, TEC-9, and MAC10 for hand- nationally representative samples of offense (table 2). These guns, as used guns; the AR-15 and AK-47 for rifles; State and Federal prison inmates. In in the questions and definitions for the and the "Street Sweeper" for shotguns. the 1997 and 1991 Surveys of Inmates personal interviews with prison Possession of these models meeting in State and Federal Correctional inmates, include the following: criteria specified in Federal statutes Facilities, inmates were questioned can be unlawful. about any firearms they may have used • military-style semiautomatic pistol — similar to a conventional semiauto- when committing a crime and asked to To be understood by inmate respon- specify the type of weapon, its source, matic pistol except that the magazine 3 dents who were asked about their gun and its use in committing crimes. In or clip is visible use, the questions and definitions in addition, inmates were queried about the types of both current and past of- • military-style semiautomatic rifle — the survey reflect terminology com- fenses for which they were sentenced, a semiautomatic rifle with military fea- monly used by prisoners to describe including any weapons offenses. tures such as a pistol grip, folding types of weapons. If questioned by stock, flash suppressor, or bayonet respondents, interviewers read to them Almost a fifth of prison inmates mount the definitions included on pages 14 carried a gun during their crime and 15 of this report. Of necessity, this • military-style semiautomatic shotgun language is similar in concept but may An estimated 18% of State prison — a semiautomatic shotgun with differ in wording from technical descrip- inmates and 15% of Federal inmates military features such as a pistol grip, tions in Federal statutes pertaining to reported that they used, carried, or folding stock, flash suppressor, or firearms. possessed a firearm when they bayonet mount committed the crime for which they The Violent Crime Control and Law were serving a sentence to prison • machine gun — a fully automatic gun (table 1).1 Enforcement Act of 1994 made it which, if the trigger is held down, will unlawful, with certain exceptions, to fire rapidly and continuously. When asked if they had ever been manufacture, transfer, or possess armed while committing a crime, about 3The survey interview included in the operational military-style semiautomatic weapons, a quarter of State prison inmates and a definition of a military-style semiautomatic pistol fifth of Federal inmates reported that the phrase "can hold more than 19 bullets." they had carried a gun while commit- ting at least one crime. Table 1. Possession of firearms by State and Federal prison inmates, by type of firearm, 1997 Almost half of both State and Federal Percent of prison inmates inmates said that they had owned or Armed during Ever armed while Ever used or possessed a firearm at some time in current offense committing offense possessed firearm their lives. Equivalent measures for Type of firearm State Federal State Federal State Federal lifetime gun ownership among adults in Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% the general population are difficult to Firearm 18.4% 14.8% 25.1% 20.0% 46.9% 48.9% find. Personal or telephone interviews Handgun 15.3 12.8 21.3 17.2 36.0 38.6 and polls provide estimates for persons Rifle 1.3 1.3 2.0 1.9 12.4 14.6 in the general population owning a Shotgun 2.4 2.0 3.5 3.0 13.7 15.6 firearm at the time of the survey. An Other 0.5 0.6 1.1 0.9 2.7 2.3 estimated 25% to 29% of the adult No firearm 81.6% 85.2% 74.9% 80.0% 53.1% 51.1% population reported currently owning a Note: Detail do not add to total because inmates may have had more than one firearm. firearm when surveyed.2 According to public opinion polls, members of 4 in every 10 U.S. households have access Table 2. Possession of firearms by State and Federal prison inmates, to a gun. by whether the firearm was single shot, conventional semiautomatic, or military-style semiautomatic or fully automatic, 1997 Less than 2% of inmates reported carrying a fully automatic or Percent of prison inmates Armed during Ever armed while Ever used or military-style semiautomatic firearm Specific current offense committing offense possessed firearm type of firearm State Federal State Federal State Federal Fewer than 1 in 50 State and Federal Single shot 9.9% 7.3% 14.2% 10.6% 31.0% 31.4% inmates used, carried, or possessed a Conventional semiautomatic 7.9 7.7 10.9 9.8 22.6 26.0 Military-style semiautomatic 1For definitions of firearms, see Methodology or fully automatic 1.5 1.7 2.5 2.3 5.6 5.6 on pages 14 and 15. 2Phillip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, Guns in Note: Columns do not add to total percent with firearms because inmates may have America: Summary Report, Washington, DC, possessed more than one firearm. See text above and pages 14 and 15 for definitions. Police Foundation, 1996, table 2.3.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Singapore Country Report
    SALW Guide Global distribution and visual identification Singapore Country report https://salw-guide.bicc.de Weapons Distribution SALW Guide Weapons Distribution The following list shows the weapons which can be found in Singapore and whether there is data on who holds these weapons: AR 15 (M16/M4) G HK MP5 G Browning M 2 G IGLA (SA-16 / SA-18) G Carl Gustav recoilless rifle G Lee-Enfield SMLE G Daewoo K1 / K2 G M203 grenade launcher G FN FAL G Remington 870P G FN Herstal FN MAG G RPG 7 G Sterling MP L2A3 FN High Power U G FN P90 G Explanation of symbols Country of origin Licensed production Production without a licence G Government: Sources indicate that this type of weapon is held by Governmental agencies. N Non-Government: Sources indicate that this type of weapon is held by non-Governmental armed groups. U Unspecified: Sources indicate that this type of weapon is found in the country, but do not specify whether it is held by Governmental agencies or non-Governmental armed groups. It is entirely possible to have a combination of tags beside each country. For example, if country X is tagged with a G and a U, it means that at least one source of data identifies Governmental agencies as holders of weapon type Y, and at least one other source confirms the presence of the weapon in country X without specifying who holds it. Note: This application is a living, non-comprehensive database, relying to a great extent on active contributions (provision and/or validation of data and information) by either SALW experts from the military and international renowned think tanks or by national and regional focal points of small arms control entities.
    [Show full text]
  • Thompson Brochure 9Th Edition.Indd
    9th Edition Own A Piece Of American History Thompson Submachine Gun General John T. Thompson, a graduate of West Point, began his research in 1915 for an automatic weapon to supply the American military. World War I was dragging on and casualties were mounting. Having served in the U.S. Army’s ordnance supplies and logistics, General Thompson understood that greater fi repower was needed to end the war. Thompson was driven to create a lightweight, fully automatic fi rearm that would be effective against the contemporary machine gun. His idea was “a one-man, hand held machine gun. A trench broom!” The fi rst shipment of Thompson prototypes arrived on the dock in New York for shipment to Europe on November 11, 1918 the day that the War ended. In 1919, Thompson directed Auto-Ordnance to modify the gun for nonmilitary use. The gun, classifi ed a “submachine gun” to denote a small, hand-held, fully automatic fi rearm chambered for pistol ammunition, was offi cially named the “Thompson submachine gun” to honor the man most responsible for its creation. With military and police sales low, Auto-Ordnance sold its submachine guns through every legal outlet it could. A Thompson submachine gun could be purchased either by mail order, or from the local hardware or sporting goods store. Trusted Companion for Troops It was, also, in the mid ‘20s that the Thompson submachine gun was adopted for service by an Dillinger’s Choice offi cial military branch of the government. The U.S. Coast Guard issued Thompsons to patrol While Auto-Ordnance was selling the Thompson submachine gun in the open market in the ‘20s, boats along the eastern seaboard.
    [Show full text]
  • 50 CALIBER (12.7MM) HEAVY MACHINE GUN Reliable, Accurate, Effective
    M2HB .50 CALIBER (12.7MM) HEAVY MACHINE GUN Reliable, accurate, effective SPECIFICATIONS s General Dynamics Ordnance and Tactical Systems produc- Caliber .50 caliber / 12.7mm (NATO) es the .50 Caliber M2 Heavy Barrel (M2HB) machine gun, Weight (complete gun) 84 pounds (38.2 kg) a belt-fed, recoil operated, air-cooled, crew-served weapon Length 65.13 inches (1,654mm) capable of right or left-hand feed. The weapon’s lethality, durability and versatility make it ideal for offensive and Width 9 inches (230mm) defensive operations. Cyclic rate of fire 450-600 rounds per minute Maximum effective The M2 machine gun is one of the world’s most reliable, 2,000 yards (1,830m) range highly accurate and effective weapons. Maximum range 7,400 yards (6,766m) The M2HB fires a variety of NATO .50 Caliber ammuni- 3,050 feet per second Muzzle velocity (M33) (930 meters per second) tion to include: ball, tracer, armor-piercing, incendiary, and Barrel weight 26 pounds (11.79 kg) saboted light armor penetrator. The M2HB will deliver lethal Barrel construction cobalt-chromium alloy liner effects against multiple target types. The maximum effec- tive range of the M2HB is 1,830 meters for area targets and 1,500 meters for point targets. M2HB .50 CALIBER (12.7MM) HEAVY MACHINE GUN KEY FEATURES - Sustained automatic or single-shot firing - Durable, rugged design - Fires from the closed bolt for single-shot accuracy - Replaceable heavy barrel assembly - Simple design for ease of maintenance - Adjustable headspace and timing - Converts from left-hand to right-hand feed - Barrel life exceeds 10,000 rounds - Variety of mounting applications - Trigger block safety 11399 16th Court North - Suite 200 - St.
    [Show full text]
  • Gun Law History in the United States and Second Amendment Rights
    SPITZER_PROOF (DO NOT DELETE) 4/28/2017 12:07 PM GUN LAW HISTORY IN THE UNITED STATES AND SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS ROBERT J. SPITZER* I INTRODUCTION In its important and controversial 2008 decision on the meaning of the Second Amendment, District of Columbia v. Heller,1 the Supreme Court ruled that average citizens have a constitutional right to possess handguns for personal self- protection in the home.2 Yet in establishing this right, the Court also made clear that the right was by no means unlimited, and that it was subject to an array of legal restrictions, including: “prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”3 The Court also said that certain types of especially powerful weapons might be subject to regulation,4 along with allowing laws regarding the safe storage of firearms.5 Further, the Court referred repeatedly to gun laws that had existed earlier in American history as a justification for allowing similar contemporary laws,6 even though the court, by its own admission, did not undertake its own “exhaustive historical analysis” of past laws.7 In so ruling, the Court brought to the fore and attached legal import to the history of gun laws. This development, when added to the desire to know our own history better, underscores the value of the study of gun laws in America. In recent years, new and important research and writing has chipped away at old Copyright © 2017 by Robert J.
    [Show full text]
  • Criminal Redistribution of Stolen Property: the Need for Law Reform
    Michigan Law Review Volume 74 Issue 8 1976 Criminal Redistribution of Stolen Property: The Need for Law Reform G. Robert Blakey Cornell Law School Michael Goldsmith Vermont State Attorneys' Office Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation G. R. Blakey & Michael Goldsmith, Criminal Redistribution of Stolen Property: The Need for Law Reform, 74 MICH. L. REV. 1511 (1976). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol74/iss8/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Law Review at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Law Review by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CRIMINAL REDISTRIBUTION OF STOLEN PROPERTY: THE NEED FOR LAW REFORM G. Robert Blakey and Michael Goldsmith TABLE OF CONTENTS I. THE REALITIES OF MODERN FENCING SYSTEMS ___ 1523 A. Marketing Theory and the Fence ______ 1523 B. Patterns of Redistribution _________ 1528 l. The "Neighborhood Connection" _____ 1529 2. The Outlet Fence ______ 1531 3. The Professional Fence ________ 1533 4. The Master Fence __________ 1535 5. The Role of Organz"zed Crime _____ 1538 Il. SoCIAL CONTROL THROUGH LAW ____ 1542 A. Crimz"nal Sanctions _________ 1542 l. The Development of the Law ______ 1542 2. Receiving Stolen Property: A Modern Perspective ______ 1545 a. The "receipt'' of property _____ 1545 b. The goods must be stolen ---------------- 1551 c. The state of mz"nd requz"rement ----------·--------- 1558 (i).
    [Show full text]
  • University Microfilms International 300 North Zeeb Road Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 USA St
    INFORMATION TO USERS This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • 3D Printers, Obsolete Firearm Supply Controls, and the Right to Build Self-Defense Weapons Under Heller Peter Jensen-Haxel
    Golden Gate University Law Review Volume 42 | Issue 3 Article 6 June 2012 3D Printers, Obsolete Firearm Supply Controls, and the Right To Build Self-Defense Weapons Under Heller Peter Jensen-Haxel Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggulrev Part of the Constitutional Law Commons Recommended Citation Peter Jensen-Haxel, 3D Printers, Obsolete Firearm Supply Controls, and the Right To Build Self-Defense Weapons Under Heller, 42 Golden Gate U. L. Rev. 447 (2012). http://digitalcommons.law.ggu.edu/ggulrev/vol42/iss3/6 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Academic Journals at GGU Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Golden Gate University Law Review by an authorized administrator of GGU Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Jensen-Haxel: 3d Printers and Firearms COMMENT 3D PRINTERS, OBSOLETE FIREARM SUPPLY CONTROLS, AND THE RIGHT TO BUILD SELF-DEFENSE WEAPONS UNDER HELLER PETER JENSEN-HAXEL* INTRODUCTION “Will the next war be armed with 3D printers? One thing that’s for sure, the cat is out of the bag . .”1 Three-dimensional printers will allow people with no technical expertise to produce firearms at home. These machines,2 employing a novel fabrication technique called additive manufacturing (“AM”), may seem alien, indeed miraculous. [I]magine doing this: designing shoes exactly the right size in the style and colour you want on a computer, or downloading a design from the web and customising it. Then press print and go off to have lunch * J.D.
    [Show full text]
  • The Wickham Musket Brochure
    A Musket in a Privy (Text by Jan K. Herman) Fig. 1: A Musket in a Privy (not to scale: ALEXANDRIA ARCHAEOLOGY COLLECTION). To the casual observer who first saw it emerge from the privy muck on a humid June day in 1978, the battered and rusty firearm resembled little more than a scrap of refuse. The waterlogged stock was as coal black as the mud that tenaciously clung to it; corrosion and ooze obscured much of the barrel and lock. What was plainly visible and highly tantalizing to the archaeologists on the scene was the shiny, black flint tightly gripped in the jaws of the gun’s cocked hammer. At the time, no one could guess that many months of work would be required before the musket’s fascinating story could be told. Recovery: The musket’s resting place was a brick-lined shaft containing black fecal material and artifacts datable to the last half of the 19th century (see Site Map [link to “Site Map” in \\sitschlfilew001\DeptFiles\Oha\Archaeology\SHARED\Amanda - AX 1\Web]). Vertically imbedded in the sediments muzzle down, the gun resembled a chunk of waterlogged timber. It was in two pieces, fractured at the wrist. The archaeologist on the scene wrapped the two fragments in wet terry cloth, and once in the Alexandria Archaeology lab, the parts were sealed in polyethylene sheeting to await Fig. 2: “Feature QQ,” the privy where the musket was conservation. found (ALEXANDRIA ARCHAEOLOGY COLLECTION) Conservation Preliminary study revealed a military firearm of early 19th century vintage with the metal components badly corroded.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ottoman Gunpowder Empire and the Composite Bow Nathan Lanan Gettysburg College Class of 2012
    Volume 9 Article 4 2010 The Ottoman Gunpowder Empire and the Composite Bow Nathan Lanan Gettysburg College Class of 2012 Follow this and additional works at: https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/ghj Part of the Islamic World and Near East History Commons, and the Military History Commons Share feedback about the accessibility of this item. Lanan, Nathan (2010) "The Ottoman Gunpowder Empire and the Composite Bow," The Gettysburg Historical Journal: Vol. 9 , Article 4. Available at: https://cupola.gettysburg.edu/ghj/vol9/iss1/4 This open access article is brought to you by The uC pola: Scholarship at Gettysburg College. It has been accepted for inclusion by an authorized administrator of The uC pola. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Ottoman Gunpowder Empire and the Composite Bow Abstract The Ottoman Empire is known today as a major Gunpowder Empire, famous for its prevalent use of this staple of modern warfare as early as the sixteenth century. However, when Ogier Ghiselin de Busbecq visited Constantinople from 1554 to 1562, gunpowder was not used by the Sipahi cavalry who stubbornly, it seems, insisted on continuing to use the composite bow that the Turks had been using for centuries. This continued, despite their fear of European cavalry who used “small muskets” against them on raids. Was this a good idea? Was the composite bow a match or contemporary handheld firearms? Were Turkish tactics incompatible with firearms to the point that the Ottomans would have lost their effectiveness on the battlefield? Could the
    [Show full text]
  • MOD Spend on the SA8O Assault Rifle Or Equivalent, Number
    ~ DE&S Secretariat Ministry Defence Equipment & Support of Defence Maple Oa, #2043 MOD Abbey Wood Bristol BS34 8JH Email: DESSEC-PoiSecLE-JSC-WPNS@ mod.uk Mr Our Reference: F012015/08992 Via: Date: 10 November 2015 Dear-. 1 Thank you for your email of 14 h October 2015 requesting the following information: I am requesting information related to MOD spending on the SABO assault rifle or equivalent rifle. I wish to know how many are annually manufactured/used. The breakdown of the costs for its life-cycle (from conceptual stage to the disposal stage, including spending on maintenance and usage). Also, if you could provide me with a component list for the rifle, I would be grateful. I am treating your correspondence as a request for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA). A search for the information has now been completed within the Ministry of Defence (MOD), and I can confirm that information in scope of your request is held. The responses to your questions are as follows: a. How many are annually manufactured/used? A. The MOD .do not currently manufacture complete SA-80 weapon systems. Approximately 1792 are repaired annually. Usage data is not collected. a. The breakdown of the costs for its life-cycle (from conceptual stage to the disposal stage, including spending on maintenance and usage). A. The SA-80 family of weapons was developed and manufactured by the Royal Ordnance · Factories for the MOD from the late 1970s into the 1980s. Full cost information of that development is no longer kept by the MOD.
    [Show full text]
  • Long-Range Fifty Caliber Rifles: Should They Be More Strictly Regulated?
    Order Code RS22151 May 20, 2005 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Long-Range Fifty Caliber Rifles: Should They Be More Strictly Regulated? William J. Krouse Domestic Social Policy Division Summary In the 109th Congress, legislation has been introduced to more strictly regulate certain .50 caliber rifles, some of which have been adopted by the U.S. military as sniper rifles. These rifles are chambered to fire a relatively large round that was originally designed for the Browning Machine Gun (BMG). Gun control advocates have argued that these firearms have little sporting, hunting, or recreational purpose. They maintain that these rifles could be used to shoot down aircraft, rupture pressurized chemical tanks, or penetrate armored personnel carriers. Gun control opponents counter that these rifles are expensive, cumbersome and rarely, if ever, used in crime. Furthermore, they maintain that these rifles were first developed for long-range marksmanship competitions and, then adopted by the military as sniper rifles. Related amendments may be offered during Senate-consideration of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (S. 397).1 The issue for Congress is whether to regulate these firearms more stringently based on their destructive potential in a post-9/11 environment. And if regulation is pursued, what measures seem most effective and appropriate. This report will be updated as needed. Legislative Proposals in the 109th Congress In the 109th Congress, two proposals have been introduced to more strictly regulate certain long-range .50 caliber rifles. The Fifty Caliber Sniper Weapons Regulation Act of 2005 (S. 935), introduced by Senator Dianne Feinstein, would amend the National Firearms Act (NFA)2 to regulate “.50 caliber sniper weapons” in the same fashion as short-barreled shotguns and silencers, by levying taxes on the manufacture and transfer of such firearms and by requiring owner and firearm registration.
    [Show full text]
  • ORT Report Dec 2002
    A Report on Organized Retail Theft Researched and written by: Charles I. Miller, CPP, CSP Food Industry Network P.O. Box 1515 Great Falls, VA 22066 Published by: Loss Prevention Services Department Ó Food Marketing Institute 655 15th Street, NW, Suite 700 Washington, DC 20005 Copyright Ó 2003, Food Marketing Institute. All Rights Reserved. Foreword This document was prepared to provide local, state and federal legislators and prosecutors, the judiciary, and law enforcement agencies without previous experience in dealing with organized retail theft, a better understanding of retailing’s major criminal problem today – professional shoplifting or organized retail theft. We urge all who read this report to join our efforts to prevent the loss of billions of dollars worth of products and many millions of dollars in tax revenue. Coalition Against Organized Retail Theft Consumer Healthcare Products Association Eastman Kodak Company Food Marketing Institute GlaxoSmithKline Grocery Manufacturers of America International Mass Retail Association International Formula Council National Association of Chain Drug Stores National Association of Convenience Stores National Community Pharmacists Association National Retail Federation Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. i Acknowledgements The writer wishes to thank the following executives for their assistance in researching and developing this report. Leslie K. Bryant Armando Navarro Supervisory Special Agent Security Director Federal Bureau of Investigation Safeway Inc. Louisville, KY Clackamas, OR Doyle Hulse Janet Scott Director of Loss Prevention Investigative Task Force, Farm Fresh, LLC Legislative Team Leader Virginia Beach, VA Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Bentonville, AR Steve King Corporate Director of Claims Kathleen Smith The Kroger Co. Vice President, Corporate Security Cincinnati, OH Safeway Inc.
    [Show full text]