mr. speaker , i yield myself such time as i may consume . 
the gentleman from washington just said that our local law enforcement would appreciate the support of the federal government . 
i could not agree with him more . 
then why are we cutting community policing programs ? 
i mean it does not make any sense to me . 
and why did the committee on rules last night deny the gentleman from massachusetts ( mr. capuano ) xz4000630 and the gentleman from new york ( mr. weiner ) xz4004260 the right to offer an amendment that reauthorizes the community oriented policing services , the cops program for fiscal year 2006 , 2008 ? 
that was denied . 
we could have had a vote on the floor today on that amendment and a full debate , and that was denied in the committee on rules . 
the gentleman from new york ( mr. crowley ) xz4000870 had an amendment that would require that the purchase of firearms , ammunition and explosives to be made in person and to require records to be kept on how the purchases were made . 
the reason why this is an important amendment because more and more we find out that gangs are purchasing weapons over the internet . 
yet that was not even made in order . 
i know the gun lobby does not like that amendment , but even so , if we want to make sure that gang members have a more difficult time getting access to firearms , we certainly should have debated that amendment . 
the gentlewoman from texas ( ms. jackson-lee ) xz4001990 had an amendment that would make it illegal to transfer a firearm to any individual that the federal government has designated as a suspected or known gang member or terrorist . 
i am trying to find where the controversy is with that amendment . 
yet the committee on rules would not allow that amendment to be made in order on the floor today . 
the gentlewoman from texas ( ms. jackson-lee ) xz4001990 , the gentleman from virginia ( mr. scott ) xz4003641 , the gentleman from massachusetts ( mr. delahunt ) xz4001020 , and the gentlewoman from california ( ms. waters ) xz4004220 had an amendment that strikes the section of the bill that allows the attorney general to charge as adults those juveniles who commit violent crimes and are at least 16 years old . 
we can disagree on whether or not juveniles should be tried as adults , but , nonetheless , it is an important enough issue that we should have debated it on the floor here today and let members decide that . 
and yet that was not made in order . 
the gentlewoman from texas ( ms. eddie bernice johnson ) xz4002040 had an amendment that establishes funding for prevention and intervention programs for the suppression of youth and gang violence . 
that was deemed to not be made in order . 
the gentleman from california ( mr. schiff ) xz4003610 , the gentleman from california ( mr. cardoza ) xz4000650 , the gentlewoman from california ( ms. watson ) xz4004230 , and the gentlewoman from california ( ms. linda t. snchez ) had an amendment that authorizes the expansion and the enhancement of law enforcement and community-based prevention and intervention programs targeting criminal street gangs , gang members and at-risk youth . 
that was ruled out of order by the committee on rules . 
i mean , i can go on and on and on . 
there are really good ideas here , and yet , for whatever reason , the committee on rules last night said they are not going to have their day on the house floor . 
and i do not understand why , and nobody who has spoken on the other side has explained to me why those amendments were not made in order , not even mr. speaker , i reserve the balance of my time . 
