The testimony of
John Picchietti
Collector Arms Dealers Association
before the
Subcommittee on Treasury, Postal Service and General Government
of the
Committee on Appropriations
House of Representatives

B-307 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C.
April 3, 1998

page 1

Dear Chairman Kolbe and members of the committee, my name is John
Picchiette, and I am the president of the Collector Arms Dealers
Association (CADA).  I have spent 35 years in law enforcement, federal as
well as state.  All this time I have been an avid weapons collector.

First let me thank you for the opportunity to submit testimony to you on
issues regarding the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF).

We have been heard kindly by this committee in the two previous years,
and it is reassuring to know that there are still people in the
government who will take the time to listen to their citizens.

I want to speak to this committee on only one specific issue.  That is
the issue of Curio and Relic Firearms.  We have brought this issue
bezfore this committee previously as one of a group of concerns voiced by
our member Mr. Jeffrey Faintich on page 5 of his testimony of April 30th,
1996.

I would like to request initially that this committee continue to
prohibit BATF from spending any government funds to change the Curio and
Relic definition, remove any firearms from the Curio and Relics list, or
unilaterally change the laws

page 2

regarding Curios and Relics until the herein proposed safeguards and
upgrades can be implemented.

As this committee may already know, the Curio and Relic status within the
umbrella of modern firearms was established by the Federal Government to
provide special treatment for those modern arms which were of particularl
interest to collectors because of factors such as historical importance,
rarity, great value or mechanical inventiveness, and were not likely to
be used or have a history of being used in the commission of crimes.
This Curio and Relic status does not exclude them from being modern
firearms, it simply places them in an additional special category.

It is the process of deciding what items are added to the Curio and Relic
list and how othat status is interpreted that I am addressing here.

To date, the only persons who have any say in decisions regarding Curios
and Relics' status are employees of BATF.  While some of them are very
knowledgable, in a variety of subjects, they clearly do not [bring] all
the available breadth and depth to the table on each issue.  The result
is often one-sided and sometimes capricious or politicized and allowing
the process to remain as it now stands means that the

page 3

only voice in the decision structure is BATF's.  This is a bit like
putting AT&T in charge of deciding what telephone equipment can be
marketed.  They may see all points of view in a balanced way, but the
odds are against it.

In his testimony before this subcommittee on April 30, 1996, our member
Mr. Jeffrey Faintich cited a message from Mr. John Magaw, Director of the
BATF, which appears in the front of the Firearm Curios & Relics list, ATF
#5300.00 (10-095).  Mr. Magaw's letter states "the updating of the Curios
& Relics listing is based on new Curios or Relics classifications and on
requests of the public and licensed collectors.  The strong partnership
and spirit of cooperation we have long enjoyed with the regulated
industries and the law enforcement community are being extended and
strengthened.  In this vein I invite you to become an even greater
partner in this endeavor."

I reiterate Mr. Faintich's proposal.  In the spirit of his (Mr. Magaw's)
proposition to cooperate in the manner of a partnership, I would urge you
to consider forming a civilian committee that would help address these
issues.  This committee would be made up of historians, collectors,
dealers and other experts.  They would be able to assist BATF with

page 4

classifications of firearms and offer information that would be
beneficial in the decision making process.

I realize that in the regulatory field, BATF has always had all the
power, and it is difficult for any group which has all power to consider
allowing others to have even partial voice in that process.  But I
believe this committee as well as open minded employees of BATF can see
that strong positive results should come from breadth and depth of
expertise brought to bear on these issues.

Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony.  I would be pleased to answer
any questions that you or any other your staff members of any members of
the committee may have.