Those back in britain who wont have to have me back. Thats all for us tonight. Ac360 start now. Have to have me back. Thats all for us tonight. As c36 starts now. We begin with vital news. News about a man whose courage is inspiring. For years he has raised his voice in syria. For more than a year he defied the dictator insisting in using his own name in interviews, talking about crimes he has seen the regime commit. He has done this knowing full well that the regime that killed, tort chored and killed so many could silence him. Months ago i asked him why he was risking his life by talking, risking his life by insisting we actually broadcast his name. Broadcast his name. When i chant i want freedom. I can hear my voice for the first time in my life. Now, how can i give up this . Even if it costs me my life. Imagine that, a grown adult hearing his voice for the very first time. Three weeks ago Syrian Secret Police arrested him and his brother. Today we got great news. We learned he has been freed. He said he had became seriously ill and was close to death. His brother remains in custody and he and his family fear for his safety. He said he last saw his brothers eight days ago and he was in good spirits. You can go to his Facebook Page to find out about his brothers condition and how to help secure his release. He thanks everyone and hopes to keep the story in the public eye. Now, keeping them honest. The one true thing about the gun debate at home is neither side has a monopoly on the truth or the facts. One side has Research Showing when people are allowed to carry concealed weapons, Violent Crimes go down. Newer studies cast doubt on that conclusion. The bottom line trying to find a way to solve the problem would be hard enough even if this wasnt an emotionally charged subject. With the shortage of facts and a surplus of victims and loss, it has become an issue of competing articles of faith. The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun. Well, that one view, more guns in more places, here is the other. And when it comes to preventing future acts of violence in our schools, let me say this. More guns are not the answer. That was Connecticut Governor dan malloy, his view, and wayne lapierre, from the nra, ring true to a whole lot of people, that is because each side can point to reallife gun incidents to prove their point. In a few moments, we will talk with general mcchrystal and his views. First, randy kaye. Take a look. Reporter if you wonder whether or not good people armed with guns really do help stop more gun violence, look no further than the shooting inside this san antonio theater in december. Around 9 30, december 17th, 19yearold Jesus Manuel Garcia allegedly opened fire at the china garden restaurant. Investigators say he was targeting his exgirlfriend who worked there. Police say when the employees fled, the shooter chased after them in the parks lot, firing at them. In the chaos, he also shot at a san antonio patrol car after the officer shined a light on him. He was having a difficult time dealing with the breakup, and that is what may have set him off to come over here and commit this act. Reporter garcia then followed the restaurant employees into the Movie Theater next door. The gunman kept shooting as panicked moviegoers poured out the exit doors. Could have died, you know . And im glad im okay and i have another day with my son. Reporter one of the fleeing patrons was wounded. But so many may have died, had it not been for the quickthinking offduty Security Guard. The Security Guard happened to be working security at the theater and ran towards the sound of the shooting. When castianno spotted the suspect coming out of the bathroom with his gun drawn, she shot him four times. That was really nerveracking, and it was im not going to lie. It was frightening. But you know, the training kicks in. Reporter garcia, the suspect, is charged with attempted capital murder and has not yet entered a plea. He survived, but more importantly, so did everybody else in the Movie Theater. Thanks to one of the good guys with a gun. But as we all know not every shooting incident ends like the one in san antonio. Those in favor of tighter gun controls may argue that good guy with a gun scenarios can make a bad situation even worse. Take what happened in arizona. January 8, 2011, when a lone gunman opened fire on congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords at a community event. While Jared Loughner was spraying gifford and the crowds with bullets, an innocent bystander was in a nearby drugstore buying cigarettes. When he heard the gunfire, he ran to the scene, legally armed with a pistol. By the time he arrived his safety was off and he was poised to fire. Trouble is, he almost shot the wrong man. Zamudio on fox news. As i approached the people wrestling with them, one of the other gentleman had gotten the gun away from him. And that is what i saw first, was him holding the gun. And i had my hand on my pistol. Reporter he has says he is incredibly lucky that he didnt shoot. Listen to what he told msnbc. I saw another individual holding the firearm, i kind of assumed he was the shooter. So i grabbed his wrist, told him to drop it, forced him to drop the gun on the ground. When he did that, everybody said no, no, it was this guy. I would have shot him. I would have shot the man holding the gun. Reporter the man he almost shot was the real hero, who tackled the shooter and wrestled his gun away from him. Two very different shooters, two armed bystanders to the rescue, and the debate continues. Randi kaye, cnn, new york. And the debate is growing, Vice President joe biden meets tomorrow with the nra, Gabrielle Giffords and her husband, kelly, both gun owners setting up a lobby group to press for new laws. New yorks governor today called for his state to enact the toughest assault reps ban in the nation, period. His challenge sparking protests from gun advocacy groups. On monday, it will be four weeks since the sandy hook shooting. More on the perspective from margaret hoover, and Peter Barnhart and jeffrey toobin. Jeffrey t is different seeing these two reports and these two different incidents, it is sort of a rorschach test, it is a tough debate on how this task force is. If you notice, the first story was about a police officer, she happened to be not on duty. She was a police officer, no one disagrees that Police Officers should have guns, and she said her training kicked in. I bet you guys looked long and hard for a story like that. But the one you saw doesnt do any damage to the progun argument, because it was a police officer. I dont think anyone is arguing that Police Officers, perhaps even offduty Police Officers should be armed. The second one is the actual situation that you get when you have lots and lots of individuals running around trying to play vigilante. It is interesting, there were others emailing us, saying we were afraid to tell that story, because they point to us as a sign that people being armed is a good idea, kind of to address the conspira speear theories. You actually say there is more Common Ground and the thing that is the president could do that the nra would actually give thumbs up to. What do you see . The truth is im much less interested in the politics than the policies that can come from it. The president has taken a lot of flack from people like mayor mro bloomberg for not doing enough on gun control. But there are things like enforcement. 77,000 people have lied on criminal background checks on whether they could legally obtain a gun. They have been identified by the fbi, turned over by the justice department, and not processed. The administration could say prosecute people who are lying on their background checks. There are also the National Instant criminal background check mechanism, is not fully funded by the federal government, but could be. And that would prevent people like the shooter at Virginia Tech who had a Mental Illness in his background, would have registered him. When he went to buy his gun, it would have sent a red flag there is a Mental Illness in the background, maybe he shouldnt be legally able to buy a gun. There are things the federal government can do, fullyfunded programs that are already in existence, that the nra wouldnt necessarily disagree with. I totally disagree. There is no Common Ground in this argument. What . The nra, there is zero Common Ground. The National Rifle association and most of the United States congress is against any sort of regulation of guns, period. I mean that is simply not true. David keen on this channel, on cnn, says he is in favor of not letting people who have Mental Illness to be registered in this but he also wants the gun show loophole, which allows 40 of people not to go through any background check. Then actually register anybody with a Mental Illness, or register people which is that is a nonstarter you cant have a data base of people who owns guns, but a data base of anybody who receives psychiatric counseling . How is that going to work . I dont think that is what it saying, but to say there is absolutely no Common Ground is defeating the purpose of this exercise. I think the American Public wants us to find Common Ground. You know, the nra leadership defers to the nra membership. There are reasonable americans who are responsible gun owners, like Gabrielle Giffords and her husband. They are willing to make reasonable concessions. Name one republican in congress who is willing to make any changes to gun control . There are a lot of its not a matter of democratic and republican issue. The biggest obstacle is john boehner. John boehner who was humiliated in the fiscal cliff situation, he needs a vote in the house where most of his republicans would not support it. And its impossible to imagine that happen. So what do you think will happen . The Obama Administration will tee it up, do executive action and bring it to 2014. I do think they believe that the politics shifted enough, they can make some republicans pay a price that they would not even be willing to vote. But remember, in 1994, the assault weapons bill passed and the democrats got mauled at the polls after that. And a lot of people remember that, especially in the west and the south. And youre right, margaret, a lot of democrats dont want to touch this issue either. Im just saying there is no Common Ground, because the people who dont want gun control, they dont want gun control and recognize they will pay a price politically for supporting gun control. Since 1994, there are not as Many Democrats in the conservative districts as there used to be. And i think weve seen some of the conservative democrats who exist moving in response to the shooting in connecticut. Look, if you begin with the point that there is the possibility for no Common Ground, well get nowhere. What are the guidelines now on how far the government can go in restricting gun ownership very modest, i think margaret mentioned a couple of areas. But when you talk about the significant things that can be done, like banning assault weapons, president obama cant do that himself. Guns are portable. This is very much a state issue. Mayor bloomberg points this out all the time. New york and andrew cuomo can pass all the laws they want, but as long as guns are so easy to get in North Carolina and virginia, which they are, they will come up here and they will use these guns in crimes. Unless the states regulate it, you will not have to that point, one of the programs in the bush administration, project xfiles. They prosecuted under federal laws state violations because they were also violations of federal law what do they do . They ended up locking up local criminals in federal courts to get them off the streets and the carry rate diminished by 50 , there are things they can do now that would help gun control efforts that dont require passage of congress. It doesnt have to be either or. If we conceded all that, we could say 40 of the guns are not bought by the shows, even all the best enforcement of the current laws wouldnt solve that problem. I think the most important meeting tomorrow is not the nra, its walmart. Walmart spmart is the potentialm solver, why . They have an economic incentive to end the gun show loophole so people buy their guns at walmart. And if walmart gets behind the idea of saying that all guns have to be sold in a place where you can actually have a background check like walmart, that is a powerful ally for the president. You actually wrote a piece looking at the Second Amendment arguing that it is not quite what people think. Well, it changed dramatically. You know, for a hundred years the idea that the Second Amendment gave anyone, an individual, a right to bear arms what as chief just berger said, was a fraud. They started making the argument that the Second Amendment does give individuals the right that it was only the militias. That it was only the militias. And in 2008, the Supreme Court agreed. They said yes, you do have an individual right. Now the extent of that right has not been clarified. Justice scalia says that individuals can have handguns in the home. But can they have them outside the home . Can they have bigger weapons or concealed carry laws . Those are still up for grabs, and even if congress manages to pass something it is not all clear it is going to be declared constitutional. Justice scalia also says that the Second Amendment does not guarantee anybody who wants a gun to have a gun any time, any place, anywhere they within a it. So even the most conservative Supreme Court justice says there are limits. Thank you for following me and tweeting about this. There is a big interview coming up with americas Top Commander in afghanistan, general stanley mccrystal, well talk about gun control with him and the war in afghanistan as it now stands, well be right back. No shortage of good reasons tonight for the ac360 interview featuring americas Top Commander in afghanistan, president obamas choice, chuck takal, to run the pentagon, president obama pulling out all troops by 2014, not leaving any military presence behind. That idea was floated at the white house earlier this week. Well also talk to general Stanley Mcchrystal about that, also talk about his new memoir, my share of the task. But i wanted to begin by asking general mcchrystal about the weapons he used during his long career and whether civilians ought to be able to use weapons. You made headlines talking about gun control. What is your view when you see these militarystyle weapons in the hands of civilians . I spent a lifetime of carry weapons, and they fire a round at 3,000 feet per second. And when it hits human flesh it is devastating, designed to be that way. And that is what i want soldiers to carry. But i dont want those weapons around our schools, i dont want them on our streets. I think that if we cant it is not a complete fix to just address assault weapons. But i think if we dont get very serious now when we see children being buried, then i cant think of a time when we should. So you dont buy the argument that the only good answer to a bad guy with a gun is good guy with a gun . I dont, and i think it is time we have a serious discussion about it, and not an either or discussion, it is not a question of no guns at all in america or all guns. Nobody is talking about taking away all guns. Right. Exactly. It has to be about weapons im not comfortable having around my family. Lets talk about afghanistan, the idea floated earlier this week made a lot of headlines. The idea that there would be no troops after 2014, it is being considered from 15,000 to 16,000. Can you foresee from a military standpoint, not a political standpoint, where there could be no u. S. Troops after 2014 . I think that i certainly wouldnt try to second guess what commanders on the ground are analyzing right now. But i would say that first when i arrived in 2002 in afghanistan, pretty early after the fall of the taliban, the country was devastated physically and traumatized psychologically. It was literally a basket case, didnt know what was up. And normal was before 1978, that was 24 years at the time. People couldnt remember normal. They made a lot of progress. There are girls in school. There is progress, greater security in places like helmut. There is progress, it is imperfect. Now theyre scared. Theyre scared of 2014 because there is a lot to lose now, and they had chaos for 34 years, and the Afghan People dont want to lose it. I think what the Afghan People want from the u. S. And the west is strategic partnership, not numbers of people, but its a relationship that gives them the confidence that we are enough of a partner that if they need our help, not thousands of troops, maybe not even billions of dollars. But some sort of presence. Some sort of presence and some relationship. But how do you have that relationship when you have afghan soldiers, Afghan Police killing u. S. Nato forces and utilize personnel, there is a huge