Federal assault weapons ban which was pretty notorious for loopholes and allowed manufacturers to use pretty much the same weapons, i think the government could have difficulty defending a law the highest court to consider the assault weapons ban was the u. S. Court of appeals for the d. C. Circuit and it recently upheld a ban in d. C. The Court Assumed the weapons were in common use but the ban imposed no real burden on the peoples ability to a firearm for selfdefense. Similarly, it applies to a restriction on highcapacity magazines, which we treat separately than an assault weapons ban. What a ban on the sale of high capacity magazines, capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition be unconstitutional . I think it is a similar analysis. Common use . , used for selfdefense . It upheld the restriction on the sale of highcapacity magazines as well. Yes, they are probably in common use. Yes, there are millions and millions of these highcapacity magazines out there however, the court says selfdefense typically does not require more than 10 rounds of ammunition. And there remains issues of fit, whether it substantially ferbers recent data suggest that the 1994 ban did have an impact, that the rate at which high capacity magazines where recovered from crime and guns appears to have dropped considerably in the wake of that law and then increase to amass the glee dramatically after the law was expired. In my book gunfight i tried to show there is a long history and tradition of gun control in america. It is not the modern 20th century invention that many in the gun Rights Community tell us. The right to keep and bear arms was not historically been thought to be insignificant limit on reasonable gun control law, short of disarmament. And the major impediment to the effect of guncontrol laws remain congress and not the Supreme Court. The court has made clear that many forms of gun control, including, most likely, the various proposals being considered in washington today, do not offend the Second Amendment. Thank you. [applause] thank you, professor winkler, very much. For our last presentation of the day we have dr. Barry more now from the gun violence summit as john hopkins university. Next, a look at Public Opinion on guncontrol laws. This is 35 minutes. It is an honor to say i am a faculty member at Johns Hopkins and this extraordinary community. Before i began, the title of my talk, of course, is Public Opinion on proposals to strengthen u. S. Gun laws. I want to acknowledge my wonderful collaborators. I think nobody in this room or maybe on the Johns Hopkins campus at this point is unfamiliar with my collaborators Daniel Webster and jan who have done a fabulous work in the context of this entire summit but also the work on the specific study that was done in a very short turnaround time frame, as you will see. Many of you might not know emma maginty an amendment emblematic of the students here. Fourth your doctor will do it in the ph. D. Program and i without her talent and involvement. Thank you. So, i think i may be the only speaker presenting research here who is not an expert on gun policy, gun violence. My expertise is a rather in Health Policy, and in particular, Mental Health and Substance Use policy which is not unrelated to some of the events we were talking about today, but i also spent a lot of time thinking about and conducting Public Opinion research and have interest in Research Methods. That is the context in which i became involved with the work of the summit. I think that the thing that caught my attention in the weeks following the sandy hook tragedy is as we saw Public Opinion data come out on this, the majority of the Polling Research that was done was asking questions about general attitude about the public. That is, does the public support stricter or less strict gun laws about perceptions about the nra. And relatively Little Information no information about americans attitudes and support for specific policy proposals. And i think in this really fast paced environment of policy deliberation over this issue, it is critical to understand how the public thinks about proposals to strengthen gun laws. We live in a democracy and we should care about what the public thinks and we should bring the best Research Methods available to bear on identifying how the level of support and the population overall but also to understand how support may vary across importance of groups across our society. This is what we did. We designed a survey Data Collection and demint to determine support for 33 policies among americans over all by gun ownership and stratified by Political Party identification. And we looked at gun ownership most was done as of the typical 1000 person poll. It is hard to get precise estimates using the approach for smaller subgroups within the Public Opinion poll. In our survey we substantially over sampled gun owners and non gun owners living in households with guns. We design the survey over christmas we apologize for family members that this occurred when it did and we will make up. The survey was designed between the 24th and a 27. We pilot tested it, program that. We got it in the field january 2. Justintime Public Health research. We pulled it from the field yesterday with a 69 Completion Rate for response rate. And what i am gone some present here is preliminary data based on 61 response rate. It is an interim data set of the results cannot change based on distribution of responses. I do not think the results will differ when we do the final analysis by more than a percentage point. The survey firm that did it is the wonderful gfk firm that does a ton of work across disciplines and a great difference is over a short time frame. I want to acknowledge them. They have a probability based very large web panel which is a great dancer in the current environment to some of the serious challenges related to conducting Telephone Survey research. Our results related to the share of gun owners in the u. S. Are extremely consistent with recent data reported elsewhere. Within a percentage point of the General Social survey. 33 of americans reported having a gun in their home or their garage, and a break down into two groups. 22 of americans personally identified as gun owners and 11 of americans identified as non gun owners living in a household with a gun. That means the balance, 67 , identified as nongun owners living in nongun households. As i run through these days that i will stratify by these groups. Just to give you a sense of the proportions. On this side i will give you a quick rundown of the major findings of the survey and then i will get into the data. We find the majority of american support most of the 33 gun policies, including a ban on the sale of assault weapons, large capacity magazines, a range of measures to prohibit essentially dangerous persons from having guns. A range of measures to strengthen background checks, a range of measures to improve oversight of dealers. Only five of the 33 policies were supported by less than the majority. For quite a few policies, but use of nongun owners living in households with guns were actually more aligned with other nongun owners than gun owners. For many of the policies, the difference between the gun and nongun owners were smaller than might be expected. For main road has not spent my career in this area there were smaller than i would have anticipated. Before i jump in the results, we have 33 policies. There is a ton of data. Hold on tight and listening carefully i will go through a lot of information. This is extraordinary information and i will talk very fast. Everything is described in terms of percent favor or support. These are assault weapons and ammunition policies. Over 65 in support of the sale of assault weapons. The banning of the sale of large capacity ammunition magazines that allowed guns to shoot more than 10 bullets in and more than 20 bullets. I want to point out that a near majority or majority support for these policies among gun owners. This slide actually illustrates a really interesting thing that we saw in the data more generally which is a big difference in percentage support among gun owners overall and gun owners who identified as an ira members, which you can see from of the data report very low level support for these policies. We also asked about possession of assault weapons, of large capacity magazines, and you can see somewhat lower level of support all those still over a majority in the American Population as a whole for both of these policies in the context. And we heard about this morning of a policy where the government is required to pay gun owners of the fair market value of their weapons. Here are the assault weapons and ammunition policies brokendown by republicans, independents, and democrats. You can see from my mind for the first three policies i talked about, sales policies, the assault weapons into of a magazine policies, over 50 of republicans, democrats, an independent supports the policies. Prohibited persons policies. You can see, and the first line the streets of this, very broad support among gun owners and nongun owners alike for these policies, which include creating a person convicted of two of war Crimes Involving alcohol or drugs from having a gun, convicted of violating Domestic Violence restraining order, a serious crime as a juvenile, being on a terrorist watch list. Even for the policy daniel talked about yesterday, which is preventing a person under 21 from having a handgun, over 50 support among go on among gun owners and others. Here are some policies related to misdemeanor convictions. You can see gun owners and non gun owners are alike in terms of what policies they like the least. These are particularly two types of misdemeanors related to a drunk and Disorderly Conduct being the basis of denying a gun or indecent exposure. Very low levels of support across the board. Here are the breakdowns by Political Party identification, and with the exception of the two misdemeanor policies have described, i levels of support among republicans, independents and democrats for all of the policies. Here are the policies related to background check, the first policy is the universal background check. Very high levels among non gunners and gun owners alike, even majority support among nra members who are gun owners of this policy, and high levels of support for these other specific policies relating to background checks. Very high support across Political Party identification as well for the universal background check policy and the other policies. Here are the policies affecting gun dealers. You can see these policies i am going to point out this result i support for all of these policies, majority support among gun owners in a near majority or majority support among nra members. I am not going to go through all of these policies because i am talking really quickly right now, but what is requiring a mandatory minimum sentence of two years in prison for a person convicted of knowingly selling begun to the person who cannot legally have a gun. Here are the policies in terms of Political Party and dedication. Here are the policies affecting those with Mental Illness. The first three policies are background check related policies. We have heard a lot about these policies over the last two days. You can see high levels of support across the board for these policies, including among gun owners and nra members who are gun owners. The lowest levels of support for policy allowing people who have lost the right to have a gun due to Mental Illness to have the right restored if they are determined not to be dangerous. This type of restoration policy which many of us know about is not supported at high levels by any of these subgroups. Over a majority and i have level of support to increase Government Spending on Mental Health screening and treatment as a strategy to reduce gun violence. Majority support across the board. Here is the breakdown of these policies by you can see the background check are supported at high levels. The petition to regain gun rights has the lowest levels of support among all three. For a policy to increase Government Spending on Mental Health of treatment, a little bit more of a political gradient. Slightly less than a majority of republican support this policy. Although it is worth noting that any question this is why question wording is so critical that includes a freeze government funding for is going to tap into our views of citizens about what the role of government should be. That is a component of what we should think about it as well. The last three gun policies. Requiring a person to obtain a license from local Law Enforcement agency before buying a gun has high levels of support across the board, including majority support among the owners. Moderate support for policies to provide government funding smart gun technology. Although the same caveat in terms of using the concept of government funding. We learned from the talks yesterday there are ways beyond government funding per say to increase adoption of smart gun technology. Here is the policy requiring by law that a person locked up the guns in their homes when not in use to prevent handily by kids without adult supervision, and you can see a gradient of support and some difference in opinion as might be expected on this policy by gun ownership status. Hear of these three policies in terms of majority support by Political Party identification. Ok. So, what can we conclude from this research . First of all, we find high support among including among gun owners for a wide range of gun policies. The most feasible policies from a political perspective include 20 from this list of 33 with majority support regardless of gun ownership or Political Party identification. I think the bottom line from this study is policymakers have a large range of options to choose from which are supported by the american public. And i cannot emphasize this point enough in the context of the discussion we have been having over the last couple of days related to the fact that there are multiple levels of problems here and it speaks to the need for a more combined and comprehensive approach and this Research Suggests that kind of approach would be supported by the american public. Thank you very much for your time. [applause] i should say for detailed information, checkout look in two weeks the book in two weeks. This was an enormously quick effort. To produce what we hope our powerful polling results. Theyre also going through peer review very quickly. Daniel tells me we can invade 10 minutes of his concluding remarks with questions for this panel. Are there questions . Cspan is still streaming today. Maybe the microphones have gone away. Here comes one. This is a comment. Can you raise your voice at the end . And a question. It is prefaced by what a great piece of work. I did not mean you. The research. Only with tenure can you say things like that. You mentioned the importance of language. I have a stake and an interest in the question that dealt with government funding and i appreciate your the response may be influenced by the preface of firman funding. Government funding. Heres another thing that influence their response. When we did surveys a little after 2000, we did a series, four ways of random digit dial encompassing 12 adults representing the american 1200 representative but delta representative of the American Population and we asked about personalized guns. We asked about personalized guns and we asked about childproof guns. I used those synonymous leave. The state of new jersey use them as anonymously when it passed into law. We found a substantial difference, though, in the answers that we got, whether it was personalized. When we ask people, would you favor a law requiring all new guns to be personalized, there was an explanation of what that was. My recollection was it was in the mid1960s when we asked a mid 60s. When we asked the same question with regard to child proof guns. In the general population it was 88 . When we tease out the gun owners it was 81 . How we spin the question are phrase the question is going to be very important. Can you hear me . I want to make a quick comment on this. Those are wonderful, extremely important points and i will say yes somebody who has not spent my career in this area and i went to the Research Literature to find out what they prior polls the prior polls said. The last publication was from 1998. I was astonished the last Public OpinionResearch Paper was from 1998. So long ago we need more of today, more research on Public Attitudes about this issue done using scare early Scholarly Research efforts. We did this in such a short time frame. We were not able to include the questions we would have and there are many questions in the original study that were not asking the steady and that should be replicated now, i think. Thank you. Good morning. But the commissioner, Baltimore City health department. Unclad in the end we find ame