Transcripts For CSPAN3 Discussion On Gun Violence And Public Health 20151126

Pipeline how we process and get information, its largely solely demonstrated as an act of violence or a very abrasive vice. Rarely is it narrated in a way where people are constantly having to live in many of our communities in this country in war zones. That are actually assaulting the psychology, the emotion, and the spirit of young people and families far beyond just a physical toll. I think the daily impact, at least how we understand it, particularly here in the way area, is very much around trauma. We just really quickly, 600 shootings have happened in the bay area averaged over the last 20 years. City of oakland, im talking about specifically the city of oakland, 120 killings or so average. You can just imagine the concentric circles of trauma, of families that have had to deal with gunrelated hop sides, not even speaking about suicides. I think trauma is something we have to continue to imagine. Its not just literally the victims themselves or even their immediate families, that the impact of this goes far beyond that. Im sure that you see that in the hospitals too, doctor. Yeah, i know, its a really sad thing in the bay area when we know when its going to be a hot summer well be seeing more gun victims in our wards. Theres an anecdotal relationship. Warm summers, more gunshot victims. We did a survey. It was an informal survey of our members, 20,000 physicians in our organization, asking them, what is your number . When you reflect on medical school, residency, in your practice, in your personal lives, how many gun violence victims have you had interaction with . And the average number was 40. Thats an incredible number. And i think that again reminds us that we are in health care in medicine, at this really important intersection where were trying to care for the victims of violence but also have the opportunity to take move one step ahead and take steps toward prevention as well. Margo hirsch, someone who is working in the realm of solutions, were talking about the bay area and the problems here which in some ways are reflected in every major cosmopolitan area in the country. The bay area is the epicenter of technological innovation. We often in america have were producing worldchanging technology and specifically here. What technologies of available to us now to address this problem . The primary technologies that were seeing today through the challenge that the Smart Foundation started in january 2014 are primarily biotech nick technology. Ridf technology. Those are the standouts right now. They are effective in different use cases. A biometric fingerprint reading reader would be extremely effective in a personal protection home environment or a gun range where theres no dirt, no water, no blood. Whereas for hunters who might have dirty hands or wear gloves, an rfid solution might be more effective. Also for Law Enforcement, rfid could be potentially a preferred solution because it requires you to wear a ring or a bracelet in order to fire the trigger of a firearm. Alternatively, you could put a small chip into your hand, because for Law Enforcement you actually have to be able to fire out of both hands. And a concern is that if the gun was taken away or if you injureds ainjured yourself youd have to use someone elses gun or fire out of your other hand. So that technology could be very effective. Were seeing things like smart ammunition, which is unusual. Another approach. Were also seeing a variety of technologies that can be retrofitted to existing firearms because there are 300 million firearms in this country today. So not only do you have to think about the new firearms which are 10 million that come into the market every year, but youve got all those existing firearms out there that youd want to make safer as well. So were seeing retrofit technologies, external locking technologies which i very interesting, as well as a few that are actually integrated into the gun itself. They sound like some promising technologies, yet i think few people have heard of them even. Why have they not taken better hold . Very good point. I think one of the big issues is that theres no market demand for these technologies because people arent aware of them. Theres been no incentive in the past to get involved in this type of project because the nra has not been extremely supportive of bringing these types of technologies to market. Back in 1990, colt received some funding to develop smart guns and they were boycotted. And then in 2000, smith and wesson through the Clinton Administration received funding to develop a smart gun and they too were boycotted, almost went out of business. So the gun manufacturers have no desire to jump into this space. And then for people, new innovators, theres a lack of capital available for them because when you go to raise money, a venture capitalist is going to say, whats the Market Opportunity . How big is the market demand . And there really isnt a market demand because the technologies dont exist. So its a real catch22. But at the foundation were trying to deal with and hopefully overcome. Technology certainly seems like one promising avenue. But of course whats done at the Community Level is a much more complicated picture. And varies widely depending on where you are in the country. Pastor mcbride, what do you think are the most crucial things that local Community Leaders are doing on this issue or perhaps should be doing . Well, you know, i think the first thing we all have to do is change our assumption that this problem is unsolvable. And i think theres a certain attract ability as relates to what people believe is inevitable, particularly as it relates to gun violence in urban communities. For the last ten years or so we have been engaging in a number of strategies that have popularly been known as ceasefire to help reduce the number of firearm offenders and offenses in our communities across the country and weve had amazing results. Particularly in the bay area since 2007, 2008, weve seen a 60 to 70 decline in 1related whom many homicides in the city of richmond. The reason is many of the fire arm offenders or people who are engaged in gun violence, its a very small number of individuals. If you have 100 gunrelated shootings or gunrelated homicides in the city its not because you have 100 individual armed offenders or shooters, its because you have a small number of individuals who are engaging in volume activity. So our work has been actually to interact and engage with those individuals and interrupt their engagement. The analogy i use is many of these young people are caught on a dryer cycle. How many of you have seen a dryer, you all know what dryers are, you dry your clothes. Its twirling, twirling, twirling. If you open the dryer clothes start flying out, right . Because its been on a cycle for so long. Well, many of us have never opened the door of the cycles. And i have found that when you open doors and pathways for individuals to actually choose different kinds of choices, many of them, the overwhelming majority of them, stop shooting with no incentive because many of them want to live. They just have not had those kind of cycles interrupted with love, with structure, with a pathway out. So those strategies are strategies were trying to bring to scale across the country, even more so in the bay area. We do find that that allows us to engage in Public Safety measures that do not criminalize whole communities, send more of our black and brown young people to jail and prison, and keep our communities intact. Were finding great promise, we just need a lot more political support, a lot more constitutional policing to help us have legitimacy in the community. Hopefully all those things will continue to come together. You mentioned policing. Policing in the United States and officerinvolved shootings in particular have become a Major National issue in the last year or so. How do you think that might be affecting perceptions of the gun violence problem in our country . Its a big perception problem. Because since the war on drugs well, let me say this. In 1939, a prominent clergymen for of mine was born in the south and his mom registered him as a lifelong in the event naacp. The number one issue in 1939 was police brutality. Long before the war on drugs, long before the black panther party, long before the civil rights movement, long before integration. Police brutality. There has not been one day that black folk have been in the United States and not a had their lives subject to arbitrary violence by the state or by its Law Enforcement apparatus. Its important to historicize this conversation. What weve seen around Law Enforcement Tipping Point is a longtime strategy. Our strategies which depend on outside working with Law Enforcement to do constitutional policing in communities require us to have policing services that are constitutional, that are not dominated by rogue, lethal force policing, and even here in the city, earlier today i was at a rally for almacar lopez, another young brother named alex nieto, many of us know the story of is on gar grant. Many case whefrs Law Enforcement are actively gaining in violent, even lethal acts. That erodes Community Trust that is necessary to create the Public Safety partnership. These things are inextricably linked. People say, what about black on black crime . I say, what about constitutional policing . We cant have one without the other. We work on both sides of the issues. I hope people will begin to see the connections soar else we wont have the Public Safety results, particularly around gun violence that we all say we want and need. Another aspect thats come up with the policing issue and people ive spoken with in the world of Law Enforcement, robin thomas, maybe you can comment on this. A lot of police go out into their daily work with the expectation that everybodys armed and dangerous. And theres a lot of discussion about the kind of warrior mentality that police are trained to have. Pastor mcbride saying that thats causing Serious Problems in terms of the local community fabric. When you think about that in terms of gun violence as a Public Health issue, gun violence as a highly charged political issue in and the legal landscape, what are your thoughts about that, how thats come to the forefront with policing . I think when you think about and talk about gun violence you need to look at it as a holistic problem. Its not a problem you can solve purely through Community Approaches even though i think thats absolutely crucial in some communities. Its certainly not a problem even though we really work on the policy side thats going to be solved through policy solutions. It has to be approached holistically. Pastor mcbride and i talk about the supply side problem and the demand side problem in a lot of communities. Theres a demand satisfied problem that needs to be met through innovative, thoughtful, Integrative Community mechanisms. We have to deal with the flow of firearms into these communities which is so prolific and so unchecked. And thats creating another piece of the puzzle. I think looking at those two things hand in hand in the way that they fit together is really important. One of the policies that weve always cared about is assault weapons and largecapacity ammunition. Partly thats because you see a mass shooting, thats the kind of weaponry thats being utilized. But its also because theres this sort of arms war that happens in inner cities. Not as badly in california because the laws are stronger. Certainly cities where Law Enforcement demands stronger and stronger weapons to contend with the types of weapons that theyre encountering. Whether thats even true or not is irrelevant because if thats the perception look at what happened in ferguson. That kind of military force being brought into a community is crazy. And part of the argument behind that was, we have to be able to take on these assault weapons that are now proliferating everywhere. Theres millions of them, legally and illegally. So i think that that sort of arms war problem that we have in this country with so many guns, i think that the ready availability of the ar15s and other assault weapons that have become the choice weapons in a lot of illegal enterprises, as well as for horrific tragedies. You know, should spur action. Unfortunately what hasnt been mentioned that much yet on this panel is the nra and the force that lobbying brings to the equation and how that inhibits us from being able to approach things holistically and with a real clear eye for solutions. We have research. Dr. Choi and i have talked at length about the types of research that exists as to what policies are out there that work. What evidence do we have of what works . And the problem is even when we know what works, we cant get it in place. Because we have this really interesting special Interest Group that inhibits us from really tackling this problem with intelligence, with solutions that we know are available. What do you see as at the top of the list of those policies that we know work yet cant be in place . Universal background checks. Not even a pause. We need to have absolutely background checks on every single sale and transfer of weapons in this country by law. It doesnt mean were going to completely stop the flow. But guns, unlike drugs, are actually manufactured legitimately and have to be imported and tracked, if you just put in place universal background checks for every sale you can begin to assess where theyre coming from, whos getting them, how are they getting them, in a way thats simply impossible now because you dont need a background check in a private sale. Theres no system in place that epps us even understand the flow of the 300 million guns in this country. Thats just step one but i think its absolutely crucial. What youre describing is from the perception of the American Public, not a radical idea . Right, 92 of the American People after newtown, when polled, supported universal background checks on all sales. Thats in wyoming, alabama, everywhere. Yet our senate only managed to muster 54 votes to put that in place. So unfortunately even though americans want it, our leaders dont represent the will of what the American People want and need to address this problem. I think we have to ask the question why. I think what the nra has done a wonderful job, along with gun manufacturers, is peddling fear. Many of us were in the senate during Dianne Feinsteins hearing several weeks after the newtown tragedy. And we heard Lindsay Graham from South Carolina just go on this long diatribe about how the police would not be able to come and protect us in our homes when the looters come and when the hordes at the gate. The natural disasters and youre going to need your guns Lindsey Graham should know better. Hes not someone who i think believes that in his heart. But its politics of fear. And the fear of the other. The ways in which people feel like they need to have a gun in order to protect themselves. When all the Research Says that if you own a gun, youre more likely to be harmed by that gun or a member in your family be harmed by that gun. Its a cruel joke. Cruel irony being played on the American People. Until were able to overcome our fears with more hope and love for one another, i think nra and these weapon manufacturers will actually continue to provide cover for elected officials to keep doing things that they know arent creating Public Safety. I think one of the things were getting at here too is that the politics of guns has a way of obscuring some important things about the issue. We tend to focus a lot on Mass Shootings, on homicides. But according to cdc data, over 20,000 gunrelated deaths each year, which is approximately twothirds of the annual toll, are suicides. More than 80 of suicide attempts using a gun are successful. Yet as a country we tend to think of homicides as the biggest part of the problem. Why is that, dr. Choi . If you look at adolescents, for example, two of the top three causes of death in what we would typically think of is a healthy population are homicides and the suicides, both which of have close associations with guns. We were talking about evidence. Evidence shows that having a gun in the home increases the risk of suicide and unintentional injury. We know that providing advice, telling families that if you lock up your gun, keep it unloaded, keep the ammunition separate from the gun, that not only do patients listen, but it actually does reduce the risk of injury and harm. This is of particular concern when it comes to children. There have been studies that show that while parents think that their kids dont know where their guns are, the kids do. And anyone who has any recent experience with an inquisitive child knows that they find those things. So i think that recognizing this data requires us to then take that next step in doing and follow up with an intervention. While we have some of this data, i think one of the frustrations the medical community is at, we dont have enough data. In the mid90s the gun lobby blocked funding for gun research on gun violence, explicitly stated cdc could not pursue research around gun violence. What we dont know is still h t hurting us. Theres this big problem that we know is there. And we think we know some things. We dont know enough. To continue to build a strong case of kind of thins that we already know is true is challenging in this context. And so theyve tied us up when we talk about Public Health and research in a couple of different ways. Another issue that comes up a lot in the context of Mass Shootings which tend to get the most attention in the National Media is Mental Health. Can you talk a little bit about the connection between Mental Health and gun violence, what people understand and dont understand about that . I think that when there are these Mass Shootings, the first question becomes, whats wrong with the shooter . Do they have a Mental Illness . We start to straddle a very challenging political line. Where is it, do we need to spend more money on Mental Health . Yes, we do. Do we need to spend more money on reducing gun violence, guns, background checks and other policy issues . Yes, we do. But theyre pitted against each other. Unfortunately that doesnt help either of these important needs. Its true that those with a history of juvenile crime in the past, those with a history of substance abuse, those with history of Mental Health issues, are at a higher risk of gun violence. But to turn it upside down certainly isnt true. Everyone who is a substance user, everyone who has a Mental Illness, is not necessarily a threat. To the general public and to themselves. Its a very challenging thing to try to nail down, to identify that person who is having a variety of personal issues, whether or not theyre really truly a threat to themselves and to other people, its a challenge that physicians and other Health Care Providers are dealing with every single day. But the importance is to narrow in on that particular group of people. And not to have this broad swath of saying, oh, yeah, everyone whos committed a homicide must have a Mental Health issue, and all people with Mental Health issues necessarily are threats to themselves and the community. I would just add to that, that if you look at other countries, i think it provides a really interesting comparison. Because we dont have higher rates of Mental Illness in this country than other country dozen. We dont have more violent video games in this country than anywhere else. And yet our rates of gun death are so far surpass any other industrialized nation on earth. Theres other industrialized nations with a lot of guns like canada who also have rates with Mental Illness like ours, that dont have the kind of gun death rate we do. You have to ask yourself, yes, do we have Mental Health issues that need better funding and better addressed, particularly veterans . About 22 suicides a day every day in this country with guns are veterans. 22 veteran suicides every single day. That is astounding to me. Maybe a separate conversation. But i think a really important piece of information. So is Mental Illness a problem . Yes. But thats not the gun problem. Right . Because you can see if you take a step back that thats not whats causing it. Its the easy access that you have when you have any kind of issue. Whether its depression, whether its frustration, that the gun is right there. 75 of the suicides of people under the age of 19 are not the persons gun, its somebody elses gun. So its an up pulsive act. When guns soar easily available, not locked up, so easy to find in that moment, you see drastic consequences. You have 1. 7 million unlocked and loaded guns in homes today. So 1 in 3 homes today have a gun and over 55 have a gun thats unlocked. Not in a gun safe. Thats primarily because gun owners feel theyre typically quite responsible and lock up the bulk of their guns but they want one out of the safe, very easily accessible are for personal protection. And thats oftentimes where these problems come in. Because theyre not always locked up and theyre oftentimes loaded. And thats when children and people who are high risk can easily access them and use them. So i think on a similar note, why is it that we have an inorder nate problem with gun violence when we compare ourselves to other countries . This is in a sense one of the most difficult questions of this issue. We think about it holistically, from a Public Health perspective, we dont have a monopoly on Mental Health problems, we dont have a monopoly on violent movies or video games. Why do we have so much more gun violence in this country . I put that to anyone on the panel who would like to respond. Pastor mcbride . Well you know, i think its a couple of things. Ill be speaking probably if from a plafs just personal reflection. But you know, the legacy of violence that this country has been founded on as a colonizing force i think has really sowed seeds of violence in the soil of our country that probably requires, you know, this maybe, you know action latent, persistent fear that somebodys going to come back and get you and get us, maybe. I think, you know, theres a culture of violence that is just a part of the fabric of the United States of america. And while there are always folks that believe we need to get our country back to the good old days, i think you should always remember the days have never been good for a large number of people. And that has been because of the presence of arbitrary violence. I think thats certainly one thing. Then i also think that its a deeply moral problem. I think it speaks to a hole in the soul of america that we have become so callous in the value of life that we have and we share for our neighbor. And i think that has spilled over to a certain sense of hopelessness that a lot of the people are carrying that may even cause them at times to feel like they dont have any other options but to take their own lives. I think its a very convoluted issue. But i do believe that certainly as a faith leader, someone who believes very deeply in spirituality and purpose and in origins, i do think that our country has a legacy of violence that is always a backdrop. I think it continues to inform perhaps the way in which we have marched from the past into our present, into our future. Thats why i think all of us need to be advocating for more peacemaking work broadly in our country, not always resulting to violence to solve our problems, whether theyre domestic or abroad. How about a related question from the audience. Suggesting that the fundamental issue may be poor parenting. Guns are not the problem, its the lack of education, especially in singleparent families. How do you solve that issue . Get rid of the guns. So i always tell folks, every gunrelated homicide costs the city on the low end 2 million. As high as 5 million. And its a vicious cycle. Because the kinds of resources then that every general fund in a municipality has to spend to either deal with the homicides that are happening in our communities or the officers that are often used as a political ploy to expand their budgets are all coming from the general fund. If all the moneys being poured into Public Safety then you dont have resources left to put into schools and parks and jobs and all these other kinds of things that i think all of us would say is a priority. So i think part what was we have to do is make some very important choices about what did do you value the most . I kind of reject the idea that poor parenting is the result or is a cause for guns violence. Because that would seem to presuppose that poor parents are only in one community. How many of yall had poor parents . Keep it real, keep it real, keep it real, keep it it real, right . No. So i think its much more complex than that. But i hear that often, i guess im just used to rejecting that motion. I would totally second that. The idea that the problem is that simple. I dont know if that person who wrote that question doesnt have children or doesnt have enough children. But i can guarantee you, you get enough children, whether theyre from poor families or rich families, and you will encounter children who have issues and are unmanageable and are prone to violence, whether its one reason or another. And thats not always parenting. Which is not to say that there arent a lot of things that we try to do as parents to help our children go down the right path. But the idea to me that americans are somehow worse parents than in any other country and thats why we have a gun violence problem is astounding. I think it totally fails to recognize the real issues that poor communities do face. When youre confronted with violence in your Community Every single day, the challenge is far different. When you have hopelessness, when you dont have jobs, when you dont have good education. Those are issues that can help children have the hope, have the path that they need, and parents can only do so much without a community that supports them. And with sort of what children are forced to witness in the community in which they live. So i find that question borderline insulting because i think it doesnt take into account the realities and the difficulties and the complexities that certainly many communities face, poor and rich, but are more prevalent in poor communities because they dont have the resources and support. Dr. Choi . As a pediatrician who talks a lot about parenting, and as a dad of three kids, yeah, woefully insufficient in terms of my parenting skills, i think about how the many ways i could have done this or that. Just to turn the suggestion on its head to say, were all responsible. To try to be a good role model. To be the faith leader. To be the pediatrician. To be the person on the street that chose children and young adults and all of us for that matter, a role model, ways of resolution, how we gain one another, how we handle aggression. Weve kind of moved that even further to talk about media. We talk about the Public Health successes around Motor Vehicle accidents and tobacco. Media campaigns. Putting role models on television about gun violence and the dangers of it. Education campaigns around those things. I think that we all have a tremendous opportunity to play a role, to provide some of that influence, as suggested in that question. And so i encourage all of you to do so. Youre listening to the Commonwealth Club of california radio program. Tonights discussion is gun violence and Public Health. Underwritten by the California Wellness foundation. Our panelists are dr. Ricky choi, who serves on the board of directors for the natural physicians alliance. Margo hirsch, president of the smart tech challenges foundation. Pastor michael mcbride, lead pastor at the Way Christian Center in berkeley, california, and director of urban strategies at pico national network. Robin thomas, executive director of the law center to prevent gun violence. Im mark follman, National Affairs editor did for mother jones and your moderator for tonights program. We touched on the Economic Cost of gun violence a little earlier. Recently mother jones collaborated with a top Health Economist to investigate the economic toll of gun violence. We found it to be at least 229 billion a year. More than what our country spends on ewespend s on obesity. In some ways its a conservative estimate. What does this massive Economic Cost mean in terms of Public Health and health in our communities and are people even aware of it . One of the statistics i read, and one of the facts that we talk a lot about in trying to show the correlation between the prevalence of guns and gun violence, is that in states where you have really strong gun regulations, where you have much lower ownership rates of guns, you have much lower gun violence and gun death rates. Its not a causation argument but it is a correlation. California for example has one of the lowest gun death rates in the country, even though we have some of the urbanish ewes and other problems we have. Far Lower Per Capita than a place like wyoming. The state of hawaii has one of the lowest costs per capita for gun violence, 200 a person per year. Wyomings cost per person per year for gun violence, taxpayer cost, 1,400 a year. Thats just wyoming. Not a state people think of as having a huge gun view leolence problem but it does because theres so many guns in so many hands. It all fits together. You have high gun ownership, high gun death rates. The cost not just to communities, forget the human cost. The financial cost is tremendous. Most of that cost flows directly to the taxpayer. So were all paying the cost every day of this issue. Its not just something thats borne by individual families and communities, which is bad enough. You see that in the medical world too, right, dr. Choi in terms of the burden on hospitals . The estimated cost of gun violence on hospitals is the order of 2 billion a year. I think that moneys probably much better spent on investing in Public Health, right . And interventions that we know work. Addressing social determinants of health like poverty, homelessness, translation services. This goes back to the commonly used phrase, we dont have a health care system, we have a sick care system. If we really want to move forward in terms of creating a healthy society, the aims of Public Health, its investing in those areas. Much better spent. We havent talked a lot about the politics and yet an undeniable important part of this picture and the role of the National Rifle association and other gun lobbyists. Is it fair to ascribe so much blame to the gun lobby in terms of standing in the way of the things that we know that work, the evidencebased solutions, the technologies . In some ways theyre an easy villain. How does that equation work out in the reality of policymaking, whether in the medical world or trying to bring forth Technological Solutions . Heres a clear example. As we already discussed. There is evidence that shows that taking proper precautions at home, locking up the gun, keeping it separate from its ammunition, keeping it unloaded, works. When doctors talk about it, patients listen. However, the gun lobby has taken active steps to prevent physicians from have this will ki kind of conversation. States like florida, missouri, other states have similar ambitions. Its now illegal. Physicians will be punished if they have that kind of conversation with their patients. Not only does that infringe on the First Amendment rights of physicians to free speech, but also gets in the way of doing things that we know work. And, of course, infringes on what we view as a sacred physician patient relationship. So i think that, you know, that we should be very concerned. There are active efforts to erode those things that we know work. And we need to work very hard to overturn those types of laws. I think with health and with technology, margo hirsch, why would the nra want to stand in the way of potential Solutions Like this . Its in no ones interest, youre conservative on gun rights or liberal on gun rights, nobody wants to see people die from guns, from gun crime, from suicide. Why are they standing in the way of technology . Their concern is that smart guns or when this type of technology with lead to mandates around the technology and infringe on their Second Amendment rights which is what they always bring up. In the case of a Company Called armitix last year, theyre a german manufacturer that brought the first rfid smart gun to the u. S. And it was first showcased at a gun club in southern california. And it received a fair amount of press. And all of a sudden the gun club removed the gun completely from its club and its shelves, completely disavowed knowing the manufacturer, armitix, and that also happened at a in maryland at another gun reseller where they received Death Threats from the Gun Community because they were offering the gun for sale and the armitix gun is no longer sold at this point in time. So whats happened is that theres no incentive. If anything, theres a fear of retribution for firearm dealers to offer for sale any sort of Smart Gun Technology because theyre concerned that their businesses will get boycotted and essentially go out of business. Theres a mandate in the state of new jersey. Its called the childproof handgun law that was passed in 2002. And the nra uses that as something to point to that says, armitix triggered this law, and see, smart guns will lead to mandates. So its unfortunately the law that they passed in new jersey had the best of intentions to keep children safe. By mandating that in three years, when a smart gun came to market, all guns had to be smart guns to protect children. But in a sense, no pun intended, it backfired. And its been a huge hindrance in terms of getting these technologies to market. Robin thomas . I dont think theres any doubt the nra is a huge impediment to innovative and sort of bigthinking approaches to this problem. Once upon a time the nra was a Gun Safety Organization out of world war i and world war ii to help train people to shoot. And then that changed. And now it is run by a very hardline leadership which believes in absolutely no gun regulation whatsoever, and i think far more represents the interests of the gun industry and manufacturers in selling more guns than it does gun safety or, interestingly, its own members. When they poll nra members, 75 of them agree with most of the basic regulations and programs were all talking about. Nra members say, yeah, background checks, great. All kinds of policies that they agree with. Yet the leadership, the lobbyists that represent the nra, fight tooth and nail against even basic measures like background checks because more guns can be sold the looser the regulations. So i think its very clear to those of us that are looking closely that the nra is, in fact, an impediment to any sort of progress on this issue. Theyre going to continue to be because a ton of their funding comes from gun manufacturers and because their membership has a very small, very vocal pace which are mostly hard line and who are very noisy and we have 90 of the American Public who agrees with us but its not their primary issue. Theyre moderately apathetic about regulation on this issue so they dont show up to the meetings and the town halls and they dont vote single issue and these nra hardliners do. So we have this disconnect between 90 of americans and even nra members being cool with it and then this very, very small, very vocal, very hardline group that has money, that are aggressive, and that are singleissue voters that can really dominate on this small front. Which is to me why i think we need to ask more of our elected officials. I think that the courage necessary to bring about the change we seek cant always be about your next election nor can it be about, you know, these money interests. I know that sounds very altruistic, yet at the same time, you know, peoples lives are at stake. And i have not found progressive lawmakers to be any more courageous on this issue. We must remember that at the time of newtown, the senate was controlled by democrats. And they couldnt even get all of their own folks to pass the bill out of the senate. So i just continue to believe that we have a lot of work to do to make sure that our lawmakers are oriented towards doing the right thing. And it is i think again unmasking a big moral challenge that our country has around these sets of issues, around the value of life over and against political expediency or trying to hold on to power rather than actually serving the people. So, you know, a lot of our work in the Faith Community is trying to actually, as the pope hopefully influenced john boehner the last maybe some moral force can influence a few other lawmakers to do whats best for the country. And not their own political careers. Id like to pick up on what youre saying, pastor mcbride, i think youre suggesting in a sense hope for that is much more perhaps at the local and state level. After the sandy hook massacre, almost three years ago now, as we know, congress had a very highprofile debate over a universal background check bill, failed to pass it. I think ever since theres been a somewhat pervasive myth that nothing has changed. And yet thats not true at all. Theres been a huge amount of legislative activity at the state level. Can you talk a little bit about that, robin thomas, and what has and has not changed since then . I think you put it right, that there was i thought of it as a sea change after newtown. Weve been working at the state level for 20 years. And we were lucky to get requests from three or four or five states looking to introduce new laws. In the year after newtown, we were contacted by 30 states looking to introduce new regulations. And eight states passed really sweeping, profound laws including states like new york, maryland, delaware, massachusetts, colorado, that have passed really comprehensive regulations. Modeled in large part on californias regulation which took us 20 years to get in place. The year after newtown we were able to help implement that in a number of states on the Domestic Violence front, 18 states have passed new laws since newtown. States you would never expect. Wisconsin, louisiana. We are seeing good Mental Health progress. States passing laws about that. Even background checks. We have 18 states with universal background checks on gun sales with closed loopholes, thats new since newtown. We are seeing a lot of progress. We are also seeing pushback in more conservative red states that are making it easier to get guns and carry loaded guns in public. But i think mostly what were noticing is momentum in all of those blue states and all of those purple states, we had a referendum in washington last year, the First Time Ever this issue, voters said, okay, politicians, if youre not going to do the right thing by the people were going to put it to the voters and it passed by a wide margin. That was the First Time Ever that path was used and that same law is going to be before the nevada voters next year. Youre talking about real bellwether states where if we can get things to the voters to get them passed, because the politicians wont do it, thats going to be i think the next wave. I want to add on top of the progress that weve seen since newtown, the politics are an interesting question. Because up until newtown, the gun lobby was spending 20 million or 30 million a year on elections out of their 200 million a year machine. There wasnt any money really on the other side. Those of us doing this work werent putting a lot of money into the politics. And since newtown, mayor bloomberg launched an organization, Gabby Giffords launched an organization, the center for american progress, huge lobbying organizations. Bloombergs putting in 50 million a year. Gabby giffords raising tens of millions. The idea that theres only one side of this debate in politics has changed. But its new. How much of that is driven by the perception that this is a serious Public Health issue . How much should it be. I mean, it absolutely should be. I think it is. I think someone like michael bloomberg, whatever your opinion of him, whats a person who cares deeply about Public Health as a lens through which society can be improved. He believes in bike helmets and antispeaking and a antismoking and all that sort of thing. Guns fit clearly into that view. I think the understanding the nras putting 20 million, 30 million a year into politics and thats been enough to completely dominate this issue for decades. Somebody whos got a lot of money says, you know what . I can neutralize that. It might not happen overnight. But over time, we can neutralize at least that piece of impact, especially when you have 90 of the people behind it. So that gives me a lot of hope. Because you see how where there is the soft spots and the ret tense reticence on this issue, it can be overcome. It is for the first time the nras basically for 40 years been alone politically on this issue. Now theyve got some serious competition and things are changing. The races in virginia were absolutely astounding. Terry mcauliffe ran in virginia for governor and he ran on a prorun control platform, gun regulation was one of his plain platforms. The state of virginia, which is where the nra headquarters are. And he won. And it was really profound to watch that happen. Because Something Like that had not really ever happened before. Certainly not in a state like virginia. So i think you are seeing that sort of common wisdom about, you cant support gun control measures and win elections shift. But it takes time to sort of catch up, i think. My sense of it. I want to bring in another audience question here and put my own profession on the chopping block. How does the medias role play into all this . What is the media getting wrong . Pastor mcbride . I remember we were in the Task Force Meeting at the white house with the Vice President and some of the clerics from the Sikh Community shared with us how they went to meet with a Producers Guild in hollywood to talk about the way they were being portrayed. Being perceived as muslims, the Sikh Community, although theyre not. But like these kind of caricatures in tv shows like 24 was one of the ones they mentioned specifically. Just being overassociated with terrorists. And how those conversations with the producers actually helped to shift the way muslims and middle Eastern Religions and people are portrayed in the media. All that to say, i think that advocating for media to be more representative of communities beyond the cairk ra tours of the stereotypes is an important Advocacy Tool that must be used in the months and years to come. Color of change is a very Important Organization that we work with that have actually been able to track, particularly in new york, how the News Agencies overreport incidents of violence, particularly gun violence in africanamerican and urban communities over and against our white and asian counterparts. Which again gives this perception that africanamerican and urban communities are much more violent than other communities. Particularly in the public imagination. Of course, if we all believe that, then it will in turn follow that we need to spend more money on police, more money on probably buying guns to keep in our homes to protect us from the bogeyman out there, right . I do think we have to figure out more ways to move beyond media caricatures and hold media accountable for misinformation and misrepresentation that often feeds stereotypes and appeals to our worst selves. Dr. Choi, what about in terms of the medical community and how the media covers gun violence in the context of medicine . Whats missing there . I think that i always use my children as a litmus test. I drive my kids to school in the morning, listen to npr. There are whole weeks where i just cant even play it. Because its just too hard for them to listen. I think im not necessarily advocating that we should turn a blind eye to these many issues. But on the flip side, you know, to provide a balanced perspective. Whether that be talking through talking about these larger issues, as pastor mcbride has mentioned. And also potential solutions towards improving those circumstances. Having a thoughtful discussion around Mental Health, thats just thats it. Mental Health Parity has been something that weve been talking about and fighting for for decades and still has not gotten the necessary due. And so drilling down to really what are the true challenges that have led up to this particular situation i think are particularly important. I mean, just real quick. To maybe put it in a positive way, what would it look like for media to cover the Many Solutions and the Success Stories of communities and neighborhoods that are reducing violence, just as much as they cover the incidents related to violence. I think that shift in our consciousness, in our reporting, could actually cat lies hope and a shift in the way we understand the solutions that are right within our grasp. That just need scaling up. It would shift i think the ways in which we think this problem is intractable and unsolvable. Whats a good example of that . I mentioned ceasefire already. We engage in weekly activities walking neighborhoods in San Francisco, oakland, richmond, in the neighborhoods that are highest at risk of engaging or being victimized by gun violence. One powerful program that is starting to get a lot of coverage is the office of neighborhood safety in richmond, a Peacemaker Program where we actually take young men who have been caught in these cycles and put them in cohorts of life skills, of peacemaking classes. These are individuals who are deemed as the volume shooters, if you will. And incentivize them to do all kinds of different types of activities that are actually about building their own internal healing and selfsufficiency work. And again, these young people make decisions to stop shooting just with structure, incentivization, and care. I believe if every city in the country started one of these programs that maybe costs 15,000 per person to put a young person into per year, just imagine the kind of return on investment, if you will, that would create in a community where 2 million are spent on every gunrelated homicide. I think that kind of praming for those who are worried about the fiscal side, for those who are worried about the cost around the human person or rehabilitation, i think that could do a world of good for us shifting our mindset around how we describe and understand solutions to these kinds of problems. I will say theres some great reporting being done. Not just to toot your horn because mother jones has done phenomenal work, the income types, in tampa bay theyve done brilliant work on stand your ground laws. Theres deep, lovell reporting happening but not enough. I think theres a few outlets that are really looking at this issue seriously. But most newspapers are not really tackling this issue with a broad approach. And looking at it in terms of, what is the real impact, what is the research, what do we know and not know . More often than not, when we get a call from the media, they ask our perspective on something, then they call the nra for their perspective, even though the research they cite has been debunked, media will still cite to them. Were astounded. Why do they kneel the need every time to allow the other side to make the argument more guns are the solution when we know for sure through the research thats not true. Giving voice to that perspective every single time. I think confuses people, leaves people thinking, maybe i do need a gun to be safe, even though we know thats not how this works anymore. Our frustrationtends to be there is a truth here and the opinion of the other side doesnt always have to be given equal weight to the peerreviewed research thats being looked at. I think you sort of get both sides there. Great point. I think another way that the picture has shifted in terms of the impact of gun violence with medicine is the way in which more gunshot victims are surviving now. We have Better Medical Technology and better medicine. How is that changing the picture with this problem, dr. Choi i think that when we talk about vets in particular, i think that becomes sort of a highlight. And certainly, you know, i think we should be telling those stories more often. You know, i was referring to have every summer we have these young adults in sit in the wards of San Francisco general for sometimes months. Unlucky or were in the wrong place at the wrong time or were participants in a gunfight and they got shot in the spinal cord and theyre paralyzed from the neck down. On a regular basis do we have patients like that. Those types of stories need to be shared. I think the other challenge when we talk about media and balanced reporting, ive tried to illustrate the last hour, is that in some ways the game is being rigged. We talk about research thats not being done, that could be done. That people who are supposed to be participating in prevention are not allowed to participate. By virtue of the fact that some of you who are interested in this topic did not know that, i think is very concerning. Those types of things need to be discussed. You know, if we want to move things forward, we need to also highlight the ways that obstacles are being placed along the way to keep us from making progress. Weve reached the point in our program where theres time for one last question which ill put to all our panelists. I think as weve touched on the politics of guns in our country, are intensely polarizing, but also subject to a pretty powerful inertia. From a Public Health perspective in particular, how can that be overcome . What could really start to change the National Conversation . Do you want to start, dr. Choi . I have a small example. About a year or two ago i was giving a talk to at a National Medical student association. And talking about this very topic, gun violence and Public Health. I was doing my best to present the evidence, to give it a very balanced frame, to help these medical students understand the responsibility they have. Without necessarily taking a political side as much as our core responsibility as Health Care Providers. At the end of the presentation i had a medical student raise their hand and say, my moms a pediatrician, were both gun owners, we enjoy recreational hunting. So given everything youve told me, what am i supposed to do . And i just thought, wow. My first thought was, i hope i didnt offend them. My Second Thought was, wow what an incredible opportunity. Someone who is committed to the evidence, the information that i just presented, while is a gun owner. And understands that Second Amendment right in a very personal way. Is the perfect person to be able to articulate these challenges, to walk that line, to be able to serve as that middle to bridge things that the evidence supports, things that are steps we know we can violence in this country. Margo . We believe at the foundation that the time is right now for technology to jump in here. And address gun violence from an innovation in technology standpoint. And these technologies that are being worked on have the potential to save lives and really impact the issue. And it does take changing behavior patterns, but if you look at more consumer type products and things that we see in our everyday life like ooube and tesla, you can change behavior through products, and we like to believe that these Safety Technologies will have an impact on predominantly suicides and accidental deaths, but even a trickledown effect on homicides so when guns are stolen, theyll be rendered useless once they get into the hands of criminals or the wrong hands. And so we believe that technology can play a really important part in addressing gun violence today. Pastor mcbride . We always say that the first revolution has to always be an internal revolution. Revolution of our values, of our heart, of the way in which we see and understand the world, so i would certainly continue to advocate for us all imagining how can we put ourselves in positions to experience revolution of new perspectives and ideas that could catalyze us to further action, which would be the second thing ill say, which is a disorganized truth cannot defeat an organized lie. So what does it mean for us to organize ourselves around these truths, as robin and many of us have talked about, health, technology, policy, and really push back against the very organized lies that have structured our society and again, i think that that requires all of us to take a look at fear and race and economics and politics and many of these things that may be a little offputting for us. Preferably, well all do that again. From a policy perspective . I think we have to all know and believe there are solutions. There are some absolutely solutions to this problem. We actually know what they are. We know what the answer to this problem is. Never mind the fact that this is a country where generally we believe that we can find answers even when we dont have them. We actually have them in this case. So i think knowing that, believing that, being educated to what michael said, being courageous enough to speak out that this isnt a political wedge issue, you know, in the way that many others have changed, like marriage equality, having the courage to say if you want to have a gun, thats fine, but were going to regulate the heck out of them because we need to protect our children, protect our communities, do a better job of preventing gun violence, and im not going to be quiet about it. Youre not going to give me a dirty look because you love your gun and im going to shut my mouth because people are dying. I think theres a level of informativeness and courage that has to come along with the debate, whichever your perspective is, that we really promote, we believe in researchdriven truth and answers, and i hope that all of you got a little bit of that tonight. Our thanks to the California Wellness foundation for underwriting this program. And to our panelists, dr. Choy, who serves on the board of directors for the National Physicians alliance, margo hirsh, pastor michael mcbride, the pastor at the Way Christian Center in berkeley, california, and director of urban strategies at pekoe national network, and robin thomas, executive director of the law center to prevent gun violence. We also thank our audiences here and on the radio and internet. Im mark fulmin. Now, this meeting of the Commonwealth Club of california is adjourned. Four days of nonfiction books and authors this Holiday Weekend on cspan2s book tv. Thursday morning at 8 00 eastern, all day coverage of the 15tth annual book festival. Friday, the miami book fair. Our all day coverage begins at 8 00 a. M. Featuring author talks and interviews. Saturday afternoon at 3 00 from the fall for the book festival at george mason university, robert poole on the 14acre plot at Arlington National cemetery, known as section 60, and sunday night at 9 00 on afterwards, are burta kaplan who argued the case the United States versus windsor which struck out the defense of marriage act. I got a call from the trial level attorney basically saying, look, we need 30 days. Were thinking about what to do in the case. We need time to decide. I will be honest with you. I didnt believe her. I thought she was stalling for time. And i, first of all, i dont get to be a plaintiff all that much. Number two, edie had had a lot of serious Health Issues during the case. I was worried, i wanted to make sure when the case ozover, not only was she still alive, but she was healthy enough to enjoy it. That was very much weighing on me. I said to the government, forget it. No extension. Shes interviewed by National Law Journal and legal times reporter zoey tillman. Watch book tv all weekend every weekend on cspan2. The Second Amendment foundation and the Citizens Committee for the right to keep and bare arms hosted the annual gun rights policy conference in phoenix in late september. Speakers include authors, bloggers, radio hosts, and the author of the well armed woman training company. This is an hour and 50 minutes. Well bring up our first panel, which is called Second Amendment outliers, blade suppressers and hunting. Our three panelists are carey lightfoot, author of the well armed woman training company. She is new to grpc, so give her a warm welcome. But also [ applause ] but also, new to us and deserving a not new to us and deserving of a warm welcome nonetheless, are todd ratner, chairman of nsa freedom alliance, and doug ritter, knife rights org. They will each have nine minutes at which time my phone will bong at them, and then i will get up and poke them with the other knitting needle, because i gave one to julie, but i kept one for myself. I would like to remind our panelists to please give their name again when they right at the beginning of their talk so people that are recording and podcasting and cspaning and god knows what else can capture whos who. Okay, without further ado, well start with carey. One further ado. Please, everybody, take out your cell phones and turn off the ringer. All right, ready, talk fast. Good morning, everybody. My name is carey lightfoot. We have some women in the house. A few, yes. What im going to talk about very quickly is how we can double that next year, and how we can get millions of women to the polls and activated politically. We all know that women are coming to gun ownership in droves. We all hear it, right . Everyones talking about it. Were talking about women coming to the range and coming into responsible gun ownership. This is huge, and this is significant. Significant for what were here to talk about today. We see them at the ranges. S we see them in the gun stores. Where we need to see them is here. Where we need to see them is with you all in your communities, passionately driving for change and to protect our Second Amendment rights. Everyone is talking about it. But what we need to do is Start Talking to women. So lets stop talking about women and lets Start Talking with them. Thats our task, mine and yours, is to engage women in the Second Amendment conversation. Which historically has been a male and mens conversation. Agreed . So we need to bring them in and draw them in and create the pathway for them, so thats our mission. And why is this important . Because women, guys, can save and protect our rights. Women are drivers. If you want something done, you get a woman to do it. Right . Right . When women are enthusiastic and passionate about something, things happen. Take a look at education. Who drives educational change . Women. Health, nutrition. Well, women are just as passionate about their gun rights as they are about these other important things to them and their families. When mom is shooting, who is shooting . The whole family. And theres probably a few guys here, a few families where the women kind of drive the pocketbook, maybe, just a few. So when moms shooting and the whole family is shooting thats really good for the industry. What we need to do is bring them into the political debate and political conversation. Women are raising the next generation of Second Amendment supporters, lovers. Its a very important task. And thats what women do. And i believe strongly women will influence this legislation. Lets talk about the b word. Bloomberg. No profanity. Okay, ill watch my mouth. You know, its more than just one person. Its his influence on others that were combatting, and theyre going after women. Theyre going after mothers, theyre going after women. Whats wrong with that message . The message is that were not capable of taking care of ourselves. Excuse me. Thats false. Women are equipped. Were strong. And we can be trained to effectively protect ourselves with a firearm. So i totally rebuke that message. And i do that on behalf of all women. We rebuke it. [ applause ] its perpetuating victimhood for women. Were tired of it. The target on our backs is big enough. Were here to shrink it. And protecting our rights helps to shrink that target even more. So enough of