Speaker 1: You place your left hand on the bay and Bible
Speaker 1: and raise your right hand and repeat after me. I
Speaker 1: solemnly swear jury trying it attended this weekend in Ferguson
Speaker 1: and around the country's resisting your It makes no sense
Speaker 1: if it doesn't fit your must equip judge. You are
Speaker 1: the last line of reason in this case. Every one
Speaker 1: of us took it all the sas and we're scorn
Speaker 1: to a poll of the Constitution. From Tenderfoot TV in Atlanta,
Speaker 1: this is sworn. I'm your host, Philip Holloway. This episode
Speaker 1: is dedicated to the memory of the lives lost in
Speaker 1: the October one mass murder in Las Vegas, Nevada. It's
Speaker 1: also dedicated in honor of the first responders and Seville
Speaker 1: and heroes who prevented this from being any more terrible
Speaker 1: than it already was. The uncomfortable truth is that mass
Speaker 1: murder has been around as long as human kind. We'll
Speaker 1: explore the question of whether anything could have been done
Speaker 1: to prevent this tragedy in Las Vegas, while we also
Speaker 1: explore and break down the Second Amendment and what the
Speaker 1: Supreme Court has told us that the Second Amendment means.
Speaker 1: Joy six nine. We got shots fired for day and
Speaker 1: bringing any one. So I'm like, I'm out a fire
Speaker 1: up because that when you signed dammy shop, I'll start
Speaker 1: generally me. I'll play off like a shot gun. I'll
Speaker 1: play up Drols. We have a we have an acre room,
Speaker 1: brave and the whole ward got the audience of the
Speaker 1: thirty sickond floors. One has explosive breach everyone and know
Speaker 1: how I need to lose it back. All units move back.
Speaker 1: We need the air flare for Debra. Twenty one suspicked
Speaker 1: down inside the room. Twenty one s picked down inside
Speaker 1: the room. There's one down, thirty sick animal day. On
Speaker 1: the night of October one, America experienced an unspeakable tragedy,
Speaker 1: the largest mass shooting in modern US history and the
Speaker 1: most fatal attack on our soil since September eleven, two
Speaker 1: thousand one. A gunman named Stephen Paddock opened fire on
Speaker 1: the audience at the Root Harvest Music Festival in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Speaker 1: Our hearts go out to the friends and the families
Speaker 1: of any and all of the victims. Our deepest condolences
Speaker 1: are extended to those who lost their lives and the
Speaker 1: loved ones they left behind, and our greatest hope is
Speaker 1: for a swift and full recovery for everyone who was injured.
Speaker 1: Up to this date, the US mass shooting with the
Speaker 1: most fatalities was in Orlando, Florida, at the Pulse nightclub
Speaker 1: in June of The shooter in that case was Omar Matene,
Speaker 1: who killed forty nine people and wounded fifty eight at
Speaker 1: the least. With mass shootings like the Las Vegas massacre
Speaker 1: at the forefront of everyone's mind, I'd like to take
Speaker 1: this opportunity to discuss the topical issues at hand. This
Speaker 1: tragic incident has brought a lot of attention to the
Speaker 1: ongoing political discussion of gun control laws and terrorism and
Speaker 1: what can we do to protect ourselves in situations like this.
Speaker 1: Of course, this podcast is not a political discussion, and
Speaker 1: it's not our intention to make it one. But this
Speaker 1: is also a real part of the criminal justice system,
Speaker 1: and so it's relevant and appropriate for us to discuss
Speaker 1: the issue of mass murder. So to tie this into
Speaker 1: the greater theme of SWORN, I'll be discussing the issues
Speaker 1: that have risen in the media since the Las Vegas massacre,
Speaker 1: and I'll be discussing them through the lens of legality.
Speaker 1: Would gun control laws helped prevent this situation from occurring?
Speaker 1: How else would gun control laws affect us as a country.
Speaker 1: Why isn't this labeled as domestic terrorism? Some people think
Speaker 1: that it should be. However, federal law defines terrorism as
Speaker 1: the use of violence to intimidate or coerce a government
Speaker 1: or civilians to influence policy. So if this isn't that,
Speaker 1: then what is it. Here's Sworn producer Meredith Steadman with
Speaker 1: a more detailed look at the events of the tragedy
Speaker 1: of October one in Las Vegas. The sadness surrounding the
Speaker 1: events of October one has been inescapable. The Las Vegas
Speaker 1: massacre has permeated our news outlets, as it should given
Speaker 1: the devastating circumstances. Because there's been such constant coverage, it
Speaker 1: can be hard to keep the facts straight. We wanted
Speaker 1: to give you a brief overview of what information has
Speaker 1: been disclosed. The perpetrator of this massacre was sixty four
Speaker 1: year old Stephen Craig Paddock. Paddock, who lived in multiple
Speaker 1: places throughout the course of his life, was currently a
Speaker 1: resident of Mesquite, Nevada, about an hour from Las Vegas.
Speaker 1: He was an accountant and a real estate investor, successful
Speaker 1: enough to sustain his gambling hobby, which brought him to
Speaker 1: Las Vegas fairly often. Paddock suggested that his girlfriend Mary
Speaker 1: Lou Danley go to the Philippines two weeks before the
Speaker 1: incident occurred. He bought her a plane ticket and later
Speaker 1: wired her a thousand dollars. She said she had no
Speaker 1: knowledge of his plans or of any mental health issues
Speaker 1: that he may have been struggling with. Paddock's brother, Eric Paddock,
Speaker 1: said the same. The massacre began just after ten pm
Speaker 1: on Sunday night. From his room on the thirty second
Speaker 1: floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort. Paddock opened fired into
Speaker 1: the crowd at the Root Harvest Music Festival during the
Speaker 1: set of country singer Jason al Dean. Paddock has smashed
Speaker 1: out the window of his hotel room with a hammer.
Speaker 1: Prior to shooting, Paddock placed cameras in and around his room,
Speaker 1: one in the people in, two in the hallway to
Speaker 1: monitor the hallways for security personnel. He had twenty three
Speaker 1: rifles in the hotel room and one handgun. Twelve of
Speaker 1: the firearms were altered with bump fire stocks, which allow
Speaker 1: semi automatic rifles to function as fully automatic weapons. After
Speaker 1: a search was conducted, nineteen more firearms were found in
Speaker 1: Paddock's home, along with explosives in severn a thousand rounds
Speaker 1: of ammunition. Ammonium nitrate, often used in homemade explosives, was
Speaker 1: found in the trunk of his car. Paddock was found
Speaker 1: dead in his room with a self inflicted gunshot wound
Speaker 1: to the head. His motive is still undetermined. People were
Speaker 1: killed in this incident, with over five dred injured. This
Speaker 1: is now the largest mass shooting in modern UN's history,
Speaker 1: surpassing the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando. Good afternoon, is
Speaker 1: this Dr Wilki, Good after day and how are you today?
Speaker 1: Doing great? How are you sir? Well? I think all
Speaker 1: things are fine, looking forward to a nice week in
Speaker 1: the weather. Would you mind starting by letting us know
Speaker 1: just a little bit about who you are and identifying
Speaker 1: yourself please? I served in the Atlanta area as the
Speaker 1: chief of police of the City of Aca George up
Speaker 1: in cop County for right at ten years twenty five
Speaker 1: years total in the law enforcement field, before retiring six
Speaker 1: years ago to go on exactly at Bob Jens University
Speaker 1: I've be in Greenville, South Carolina about James Is as
Speaker 1: a Christian College, and I teach in our criminal justice section,
Speaker 1: graduate the FBI National Academy, hold a doctoral degree in
Speaker 1: public administration from Baldosta State University. For most of my
Speaker 1: time as a as a law enforcement officer, I also
Speaker 1: served as a police firearms instructor. How long have you
Speaker 1: been teaching firearms? How many years total teaching firearms? Probably
Speaker 1: somewhere in excess of twenty five years, and in terms
Speaker 1: of handling films, something excess of fifty years. Does that
Speaker 1: include what's commonly referred to as assault rifles as well,
Speaker 1: that misnomer that is given to platforms such as the
Speaker 1: a R fifteen. Yes, I do handle those firearms and
Speaker 1: have shot them and have instructed in them. How about
Speaker 1: fully automatic weapons? I'm not certified and fully automatic weapons
Speaker 1: handled a number of them, both in the civilian law
Speaker 1: enforcement in the military context. I'm not actually certified to
Speaker 1: teach that particular file. So we want to talk about
Speaker 1: what happened in Las Vegas. I'm sure you've been following
Speaker 1: the news, and one of the topics that I want
Speaker 1: to talk about first is go back and explain why
Speaker 1: you said the term assault rifle is a misnomer place
Speaker 1: that term is applied to some way that we've made
Speaker 1: in funt arms such as the ALE fifteen, the a
Speaker 1: K four seven similar firearms like that that are long
Speaker 1: rifles that have a magazine capacity, usually in excess of
Speaker 1: ten rounds in the magazine. That's worthing. The term assault
Speaker 1: rifle really essentially showed about nowhere as far as I'm concerned,
Speaker 1: is a essentially a media term that has been handled
Speaker 1: and given to a number of different firms platforms such
Speaker 1: as the a R fifteen, a K forty seven, and
Speaker 1: other rifles that will handle magazines that have capacity of
Speaker 1: more than ten rounds or so your average hunting rifle
Speaker 1: magazine on the hulls somewhere around three to five rounds,
Speaker 1: depending on what the state allows for hunting purposes. Pretty
Speaker 1: much anything over that, the media has just started calling
Speaker 1: them assault lines, which is I don't think really an
Speaker 1: appropriate term now. As a civilian and as a firearms
Speaker 1: instructor and as an advocate frankly for the Second Amendment,
Speaker 1: I think that there's the question that if you begin
Speaker 1: to limit the types of access that civilians in this
Speaker 1: country can have to firearms to an a K forty seven.
Speaker 1: That's the camel sticking its nose under the proverbial tent.
Speaker 1: And you just have a whole population that just does
Speaker 1: not trust where the government will stop on that sort
Speaker 1: of thing. And I think that the answer is not
Speaker 1: to go after the gun. The answer is to go
Speaker 1: after the violin. And if you have people in this
Speaker 1: country who commit crimes while they are armed, that's where
Speaker 1: our most serious penalties need to be, and to take people,
Speaker 1: put them in jail and leave them in jail if
Speaker 1: they committed a crime and had a firearm on their person.
Speaker 1: In the middle nineteen nineties, we began incarcerating people seriously
Speaker 1: in this country who had committed serious felts and we
Speaker 1: took them out of the pool of being able to
Speaker 1: commit additional crimes. And since the middle nineteen nineties, across
Speaker 1: the country, violent crime has plummeted because we are taking
Speaker 1: the repeat offenders out of circulation. They couldn't do their
Speaker 1: crimes anymore. We put them in jail, We put them
Speaker 1: in a place where they cannot harm people. In South
Speaker 1: Carolina alone, since ninet, violent crime has dropped over and
Speaker 1: that statistic is fairly well mirrored across the country. That
Speaker 1: gives us a pretty good answer right there. Take the
Speaker 1: people who couldmit gun crime, put them in jail, and
Speaker 1: leave them in jail. And I commented to this group
Speaker 1: that to date to that day, a couple of weeks ago,
Speaker 1: the Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando ranked as the highest
Speaker 1: mass shooting that we had in the United States. But
Speaker 1: I told that as I said, but don't worry. There's
Speaker 1: someone out there right now who was thinking about the
Speaker 1: Fulse nightclub shooting and saying to themselves, I'm going to
Speaker 1: go set the new record and long behold. Two weeks
Speaker 1: or so after I made that statement, someone comes along
Speaker 1: and does what this individual did and killing all of
Speaker 1: those people. When the Second Amendment was drafted and adopted,
Speaker 1: basically they were dealing with muskets, and obviously an air
Speaker 1: fifteen is much more powerful than a musket. So back
Speaker 1: in that day, you know, if they wanted to, they
Speaker 1: could afford one. They could own a cannon out in
Speaker 1: the backyard instead of shooting skip that's our cannonballs if
Speaker 1: they wanted to. I'm saying that someone is just, but
Speaker 1: I'm also seeing it to make a point exactly what
Speaker 1: the militaries have in terms of their firepower and their weapons.
Speaker 1: This is exactly what the civilians were entitled to have
Speaker 1: under the Second Amendment. It would be not that difficult
Speaker 1: to take a semi automatic firearm of any nature and
Speaker 1: converted into an automatic firearm. It would not be that
Speaker 1: terribly difficult to do that with anything, which when you
Speaker 1: stop and think about that, if that's what happened, and
Speaker 1: I don't know that that's what happened, all the details
Speaker 1: not at yet, but if that's what happened with demand
Speaker 1: few is responsible for shooting all those people in Las Vegas,
Speaker 1: then he already demonstrated going to break the law to
Speaker 1: do what he did. What law can we pass that
Speaker 1: would have stopped that? Well? As us needed. The District
Speaker 1: of Columbia as a model policy and model city ordinance
Speaker 1: that prevents the distribution and ownership firearms and restricts them
Speaker 1: and so forth. And that's why the District of Columbia
Speaker 1: has one of the lowest Oh wait a minute, no,
Speaker 1: it don't. The District of Columbia, even with their stringent
Speaker 1: laws that were founded in a constitutional has one of
Speaker 1: the highest NERD routes for Capola in the country, so
Speaker 1: let's go out to it. How about the city of Chicago.
Speaker 1: They have some pretty good ordinance there. They're restrictive on
Speaker 1: gun possession and ship and that's why they have some
Speaker 1: of the lowest crime rates and the nerd Wait, wait, no,
Speaker 1: they don't. They have some of the highest actions of
Speaker 1: gun violence and murder in the country. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: that we can come up with the law because of
Speaker 1: those that we have on the bucks have not been
Speaker 1: factored in deterring gun violence. And that's why I'm contending,
Speaker 1: you know, the focus ought to be on the offender,
Speaker 1: not on the firelar. You do any kind of crime
Speaker 1: with a gun, then you have demonstrated a willingness to
Speaker 1: use that gun and kill somebody. The mere fact that
Speaker 1: you have it with you when you're committing a crime
Speaker 1: shows that you're willing to use it. Maybe you didn't
Speaker 1: use it when you robbed that bank. Maybe you can't
Speaker 1: shoot anybody, but you had it with you. And you
Speaker 1: know why, as a society, we are not going to
Speaker 1: give you that chance again. We're gonna take you and
Speaker 1: put you in jail, put the rest of your natural life.
Speaker 1: What would you advise people to do in the event
Speaker 1: of an active shooter if they find themselves, you know,
Speaker 1: in a situation like we saw in Las Vegas. There
Speaker 1: are a number of different training systems that are out there,
Speaker 1: but most of them come down around three fundamental things
Speaker 1: that an individual should do if they find themselves subject
Speaker 1: to an active shooter. And the number one thing that
Speaker 1: is recommended by in the training systems and I think
Speaker 1: by law enforcement as well, this is on the FBI website,
Speaker 1: is to run, at the minimum, create a moving target.
Speaker 1: It's hard hit one that is moving than it is
Speaker 1: to quiet wom that is just simply standing there. But
Speaker 1: get out of there, run as fast as you can
Speaker 1: and remove yourself from the scene. That's the number one
Speaker 1: recommendation from all circles. Secondly, if you cannot run, perhaps
Speaker 1: the shooter is somehow between you and you and an
Speaker 1: egress from the building, your point of exit from the building.
Speaker 1: If you cannot run, then you hide, hide under something,
Speaker 1: Barricade yourself in a room, lock the doors, turn out
Speaker 1: the lights, get furniture in front of the door, making
Speaker 1: yourself as a flat on the floor as you can't,
Speaker 1: and be absolutely silent and hide because maybe as the
Speaker 1: shooter moves to the building looking for victims. Maybe he'll
Speaker 1: miss you because you are well hidden. But then failing
Speaker 1: that you can't run and you can't hide, or perhaps
Speaker 1: the shoot find you. Your last option is to fight,
Speaker 1: and by fighting, that means you offer everything you've got
Speaker 1: to try to stop that shooter from killing you or
Speaker 1: injuring you or someone else. At that point, it's your
Speaker 1: life against the life of the person who's a sailing
Speaker 1: and you throw everything you possibly have at that individual
Speaker 1: to stop them. If you happen to be an armed citizen,
Speaker 1: you know, someone who is authorized by your perspective state
Speaker 1: to carry your fireing on your person, if you have
Speaker 1: the opportunity to engage that individual with that firearm, then
Speaker 1: you would certainly do so to try to protect yourself
Speaker 1: and others. That's not something you want to do in
Speaker 1: the middle of your church congregation with six hundred people
Speaker 1: standing around, or as Philip and I've talked about in
Speaker 1: the past, and you know, maybe crowded movie theaters or
Speaker 1: places like that, that just limits your options because you
Speaker 1: cannot go shooting in there, you know, and take a
Speaker 1: chance on on missing and hitting an innocent person. You
Speaker 1: fight for your life because your life is on the line.
Speaker 1: You cannot legislate evil into non existence. Let's be clear
Speaker 1: about one thing. Sworn is not a political podcast, but
Speaker 1: we cannot forget that there are lots of people whose
Speaker 1: opinions differ from Mike Wilkis. On the other side of
Speaker 1: his argument. There are also those who believe that gun
Speaker 1: restriction is truly the only way to see a definitive
Speaker 1: decrease in these tragedies. For a differing viewpoint, we talked
Speaker 1: to Antoine Seawright, a Democratic strategist who, like Mike Wilkie,
Speaker 1: is from South Carolina. So just to give your background,
Speaker 1: I'm a political consultant and one of my clients was
Speaker 1: killed in a church two years ago here in South
Speaker 1: Carolina is the state Senator Clemente Pinkney. And I don't
Speaker 1: know if you remember when Dylan Ruth, the white terrorists
Speaker 1: who killed nine people in the church here in South Carolina.
Speaker 1: Clemented the past of the church was my client. It's
Speaker 1: a simple thing we called the Charleston loophole. His background
Speaker 1: check in the time period did not come back, but
Speaker 1: they still sold him the gun. And so had there
Speaker 1: been a law in place that says, look if the
Speaker 1: background check does not come back within three days, then
Speaker 1: you can't purchase a gun. Then perhaps he never would
Speaker 1: have been able to have a gun to shoot nine people.
Speaker 1: So my name is Antoine ce Right. I own a
Speaker 1: public relations, advertising and political strategy firm called Blueprint Strategy,
Speaker 1: is based here in Columbia, South Carolina. I've done from
Speaker 1: a pain perspective. I've probably been involved in well over
Speaker 1: a hundred and fifty campaigns and well over a hundred
Speaker 1: ballot initiatives represent a number of political entities as well
Speaker 1: as elected officials, from members of you guys Congress on
Speaker 1: down to dog Catcher. I also am on Fox News
Speaker 1: on occasion to provide some political commentary, and I have
Speaker 1: a radio show. Can we just go straight into it
Speaker 1: and have you explained to us your standpoint on gun
Speaker 1: control us. Well, first of all, let me just say
Speaker 1: my thoughts and prayers are with the families and the
Speaker 1: community of Las Vegas, because when one of our brothers
Speaker 1: and sisters in this country are hurting or have feel
Speaker 1: some sort of pain, I think we all hurt. And
Speaker 1: it's very tragic. What happened one of the largest killings
Speaker 1: on record, and I call the massacre is very unfortunate
Speaker 1: that the person who shot and kill these people and
Speaker 1: injured so many others has not been labeled as a
Speaker 1: domestic terrorist. There's another shooting, and here we are having
Speaker 1: another conversation about gun laws. Yet some of my Republican
Speaker 1: friends and Republican leaders say, as soon as these things happened,
Speaker 1: not the time. Well we've had almost a week now
Speaker 1: in between the incident and we still have not had
Speaker 1: a legislative conversation about gun control laws. And one could
Speaker 1: argue that, oh, well, we don't need more gun control laws.
Speaker 1: We just need to pray for our country, or we
Speaker 1: just need to deal with the people who have been
Speaker 1: committing these crimes because they have mental issues, and we
Speaker 1: can keep making excuses. But the more excuses we make,
Speaker 1: the more people literally will die on American soul, not
Speaker 1: by anyone from any country that Mr Trump proposes Muslim
Speaker 1: band form, but these are homegrown American terrorists. So with
Speaker 1: Las Vegas specifically, do you think that it could have
Speaker 1: been prevented? Absolutely, But we have learned so far is
Speaker 1: that one perhaps change in the law to deal with
Speaker 1: bump stocks could have perhaps prevented this is happening. We
Speaker 1: also spoke with Kim Alfano, a parent and GOP strategist.
Speaker 1: She told us about a personal experience with a shooting
Speaker 1: close to her daughter's school. Even as a representative of
Speaker 1: the Republican Party and their candidates, she believes that there
Speaker 1: are some modifications that could be made to existing gun
Speaker 1: laws that might increase everyone's safety. I'm Kim Alfano. I
Speaker 1: own a political media consulting firm on the Republican side
Speaker 1: for twenty seven years now. I also worked in education
Speaker 1: advocacy and education reform advocacy, criminal justice reform advocacy, and
Speaker 1: do some types of things like that on the side
Speaker 1: versus just candidate work and raise my daughter. Speaking of
Speaker 1: your daughter, could you tell that story and then kind
Speaker 1: of tied into your thoughts on gun control? When might
Speaker 1: it was in first grade? It was shortly after Sandy Hook.
Speaker 1: We lived in downtown Alexandria, Virginia, right outside DC. She
Speaker 1: went to an adorable little public school. They were outside
Speaker 1: playing on playground, and the playground is kind of It's
Speaker 1: a very pedestrian city. It's not, you know, like being
Speaker 1: in downtown New York. But it's also not like being
Speaker 1: in the suburbs where the schools are kind of off
Speaker 1: in a field. There are people walking by at all
Speaker 1: times and cars and things, and their playgrounds sort of
Speaker 1: fenced in by three sides, and the kindergarten and first
Speaker 1: graders were all out on the playground at that moment,
Speaker 1: and she happened to be back by the back part
Speaker 1: of the fence that sort of faced the neighborhood street
Speaker 1: and was playing on the swings and there was a
Speaker 1: guy who had committed some crimes and was I guess
Speaker 1: he was walking through the streets of Alexandria. Basically officer
Speaker 1: little boy whose children had gone to Belas School, so
Speaker 1: he was very familiar to the kids at the school.
Speaker 1: He happened to pull this guy over and he walked
Speaker 1: up to the car. He didn't realize this guy had
Speaker 1: committed a crime. He wasn't looking for him. I think
Speaker 1: he pulled him over for a traffic violation and the
Speaker 1: guy had pulled out a gun and shot him point
Speaker 1: blank in the head. And he was on the other
Speaker 1: side of the car from the kids. You know, there
Speaker 1: was basically the road the sidewalk, and the kids are
Speaker 1: inside the fence, so some of the kids were right
Speaker 1: up against the fence he was luckily on the other
Speaker 1: side of the car, so they didn't see everything go down.
Speaker 1: But basically, you know, my daughter said she heard pops
Speaker 1: because she had her back to it. She was swinging
Speaker 1: on the swings, and some of the kids said they
Speaker 1: heard something, you know, heard like a bag thud. So
Speaker 1: basically it was the officer falling down like some really
Speaker 1: smart teachers heard it, realized what was going on, grabbed
Speaker 1: all the kids. They all were brought inside. They were
Speaker 1: locked down in the gym. Again, this is right after
Speaker 1: Sandy Hook, so everybody was completely on edge anyway, locked
Speaker 1: him down, They did the drill where they all had
Speaker 1: to sit in the gym, and then there was an
Speaker 1: email sent out to parents, Hey, we're locked down. Here's
Speaker 1: the situation as we know it. And then probably about
Speaker 1: thirty five minutes later, they realized it was an isolated incident.
Speaker 1: They had gone to catch the guy. He fled. The
Speaker 1: metic Metavac helicopter landed in the schoolyard to take the
Speaker 1: police officer off to the hospital, and the kids were
Speaker 1: out of their sort of Jim lockdown by then, so
Speaker 1: a lot of them looked out the window and saw
Speaker 1: that happening. They kind of didn't, you know, since such
Speaker 1: little grades it's in elementary school, they didn't really tell
Speaker 1: him what was going on, but a lot of kids
Speaker 1: sort of pieced it together, and then about o'clock we
Speaker 1: were alligable back in the level. I know hunters, I
Speaker 1: know clients who are staunch advocates of the Second Amendment,
Speaker 1: and I understand why they are, and I know them
Speaker 1: to be good people. So I had never been a
Speaker 1: huge advocate one way or another on it. But I
Speaker 1: was never such an anti gun person. I know so
Speaker 1: many responsible people who have guns, but when that happened,
Speaker 1: I was terrified. Now, my my thoughts didn't run towards
Speaker 1: why does that guy have a gun? Because it was
Speaker 1: a you know, a gun that was it's common, It
Speaker 1: wasn't a machine gun. He didn't shoot up the school,
Speaker 1: he didn't do anything. But just how can this stuff
Speaker 1: happen right near my kid? You know, what's the world
Speaker 1: coming to? Where the suburbs and the Bucolic you know,
Speaker 1: rolling hills of our neighborhoods are now kind of up
Speaker 1: for grabs. In the case of Oklahoma City, in the
Speaker 1: case of this guy that shot officer lit boy, in
Speaker 1: the case of Sandy Hook, it was all mental health.
Speaker 1: There are people out there that are hurting, that are
Speaker 1: not getting help, and they go down these rabbit holes
Speaker 1: and do not come out, and we have tragedies as
Speaker 1: a result. I know, the guy in Las Vegas, there
Speaker 1: wasn't any indicator that anything that that would have popped
Speaker 1: on a background check, on mental health background check, but
Speaker 1: clearly he's mentally unstable because he shot up a lunch
Speaker 1: of people. So I think stronger mental health, stronger education
Speaker 1: about spotting and understanding when people are in difficult situations,
Speaker 1: you know, with the opioid crisis, you know, mental health
Speaker 1: and addiction counseling, all of that, I think is how
Speaker 1: you answer this. It's not necessarily a gun law because
Speaker 1: of the people who own all those guns. Everybody's freaked
Speaker 1: out about don't commit crimes. You know, we hear about
Speaker 1: these outrageous, sensationalized ones. But in you know, Illinois and
Speaker 1: Chicago where there's horrifying gun violence, it's happening with illegal guns,
Speaker 1: and they have strict gun laws. So gun laws don't
Speaker 1: prevent gun crime. It's criminals and the unstable people using guns.
Speaker 1: About Oklahoma City, somebody with a car and some fertilizer
Speaker 1: killed three times as many people as occurred in you know,
Speaker 1: Las Vegas. Not to diminish what happened in Las Vegas,
Speaker 1: but anyone with evil intent, where an unstable mind will
Speaker 1: find a way to create a weapon. So solving this
Speaker 1: or that issue. Obviously, bump stocks need to be addressed.
Speaker 1: Nobody wants people out there with automatic weapons. And there's
Speaker 1: some pretty common sense things, but you're not getting to
Speaker 1: the underlying cause. How do you think we become more
Speaker 1: proactive in addressing mental health issues? Where does that come
Speaker 1: in in play when trying to purchase a firearm? I
Speaker 1: just knee jerk reaction, as a mom would be. There
Speaker 1: needs to be some sort of element of the background
Speaker 1: check that allows for part of the process of get
Speaker 1: I mean, if I want to be a daycare worker,
Speaker 1: you do a mental health check on me, right, So
Speaker 1: if I'm gonna have a gun, you should be able
Speaker 1: to do a mental health check. I mean, now to
Speaker 1: keep that record. I get how gun rights advocates are saying, no,
Speaker 1: you can't build a database of those of us with issues,
Speaker 1: So the record goes away, just like the background check
Speaker 1: goes away. It doesn't get stored anywhere it doesn't get kept.
Speaker 1: There's gotta be a way to at least screen out
Speaker 1: the low hanging fruit of people who have been in
Speaker 1: mental health treatment before, or who have been cited for
Speaker 1: domestic violence, or who have been cited for any number
Speaker 1: of things. Like I said, I work on education reform issues,
Speaker 1: and I work on criminal justice for warm issues. Weal
Speaker 1: there's two places right there that nip issues in the butt.
Speaker 1: Kids that are caught in horrible cycles of poverty and
Speaker 1: dependence and lack of a good education, so there's no
Speaker 1: way for them to get out of that cycle. Those
Speaker 1: are kids that are gonna get sucked in the neighborhoods
Speaker 1: and become drug dealers. Those are kids that are going
Speaker 1: to become parts of gangs, that are going to become
Speaker 1: parts of violence. Let's give them the opportunity to get
Speaker 1: out of those situations and break that cycle for their family.
Speaker 1: And so the kid that's nineteen that gets picked up
Speaker 1: because he has you know, drug paraphernali in his car
Speaker 1: and goes to prison for five years or eighteen months
Speaker 1: or whatever it is, is in a prison for eighteen
Speaker 1: months with a career professional drug dealer who could teach
Speaker 1: them how to cook meth, And who's going to indoctrinate
Speaker 1: him into a gang in those eighteen months, And who's
Speaker 1: going to get them in the into a cycle where
Speaker 1: someone had given him drug addiction treatment. Send him to
Speaker 1: a boot camp. That kid might turn around and have
Speaker 1: a productive life. So another place to sort of hide
Speaker 1: and help you bowl just your criminal justice reform. Instead
Speaker 1: of putting them into the system. Let's find ways and
Speaker 1: treatments and and put some government money into helping people
Speaker 1: with addictions and with mental health issues. I'm not sure
Speaker 1: there's a gun law that we could have passed in
Speaker 1: the wake of that that next day. And I think
Speaker 1: anyone Republican Democrat, if you had a heart in your chest,
Speaker 1: if someone said this is something that would stop this
Speaker 1: from ever happening again, gun rights advocate or not, you
Speaker 1: would have said, let's do it. But I don't think
Speaker 1: that there was any one thing that anyone could point
Speaker 1: to that would have said this will never happen again.
Speaker 1: I don't know what the answer is, but I'm not
Speaker 1: sure the answer is to say, you hunter in New
Speaker 1: Hampshire can't have a gun, you know, I mean, after
Speaker 1: all these truck deaths and like we saw in Charlotte.
Speaker 1: So do what you say. You can't have cars? I mean,
Speaker 1: how do you address the underlying problem by just focusing
Speaker 1: on the equipment. Mason stopped by a local firearms store
Speaker 1: to walk us through the steps of buying a gun.
Speaker 1: If I were to come in here, I'm gonna a
Speaker 1: bunch of the stools, shotguns, see a RS on the wall.
Speaker 1: What process would it be for me to buy again?
Speaker 1: All right? So, first and foremost, if you even want
Speaker 1: to come in here and hold a gun, you got
Speaker 1: the eighteen for a long rifle. You gotta twenty one
Speaker 1: for handguns. Check your i D. Make sure you got
Speaker 1: valid driver's license, carry permits something. If you have no
Speaker 1: government issued i D with that current address, I can't
Speaker 1: even let you do that. If you want to actually
Speaker 1: buy something, you gotta at least have a valid driver's license.
Speaker 1: You've got to be of age, and you've gotta have
Speaker 1: a current address on your government achieve documentation, so you
Speaker 1: know if you have a driver's license INSE valid. Even
Speaker 1: if you got a carry permit, if nothing's got your
Speaker 1: current address on it, I can't sell you anything. Once
Speaker 1: you've got all that, all that checks out. We gotta
Speaker 1: sit you down and do some seventy three paperwork which
Speaker 1: basically fill out you know, your name, place of birth, address,
Speaker 1: all the kind of pertinent information. Are you the actual
Speaker 1: buyer of the gun? Where you ever unlawfully and are
Speaker 1: you wanted for a felony or you a fugitive from
Speaker 1: justice where you ever dishonorably discharged. All that kind of
Speaker 1: stuff will disqualify you just like that. On top of that,
Speaker 1: if you don't have a carry permit, we have to
Speaker 1: run a background check on you. And if that doesn't
Speaker 1: come back, you can either get delayed or denied, and
Speaker 1: you can you can just get let go, depending on
Speaker 1: how the background check goes. But that's the part that
Speaker 1: kills a lot of sales is someone will come in
Speaker 1: put their background check in, it will get sent to
Speaker 1: the FBI, and the FBI I'll be like, don't do
Speaker 1: it right. You mentioned age, So what age is it
Speaker 1: to buy a firearm. There's certain type of firearms I
Speaker 1: can or cannot buy a certain age. At eighteen years old,
Speaker 1: you can buy long rifles and shotguns. At years old
Speaker 1: you can buy handguns. And that's pretty much it for age.
Speaker 1: So in eighteen year old with the proper identification and
Speaker 1: checks out coming here and buy an a R. The
Speaker 1: problem in an eighteen year old would have to come in,
Speaker 1: have their proper identification and have I do with their
Speaker 1: current address and everything, have their background check go smoothly,
Speaker 1: no problems, no delays, no hold ups. If everything went perfectly,
Speaker 1: we could have them out here the same day. But
Speaker 1: that's provided everything went perfectly. We as the sales people,
Speaker 1: have the ultimate authority to cancel any sale. We don't
Speaker 1: necessarily have to have a reason. It can be I'm
Speaker 1: getting a bad vibe from this situation, I don't want
Speaker 1: to sell this. We don't have to. We can go
Speaker 1: to a manager and to be like, look, we're not
Speaker 1: doing this. The big, huge red flags, some of the
Speaker 1: really obvious ones are if somebody comes into the store
Speaker 1: and gives money to somebody else and that person is
Speaker 1: buying the gun. So as a as a gun a salesman,
Speaker 1: you would say, how do you advise to do the
Speaker 1: best sale to make sure you're putting a gun in
Speaker 1: the right person's hands. As a gun salesman, it's pretty
Speaker 1: much just gauge whether the person knows what they're talking about,
Speaker 1: if they seem inexperienced, if they don't seem to really
Speaker 1: know what they're doing. They're like, have you ever shot
Speaker 1: a gun before? Do you have much practice? Do you
Speaker 1: go to the range very often? And if the answers
Speaker 1: to any of those questions are, hey, no, I don't
Speaker 1: really know what I'm doing. You know, Georgia Firing Line
Speaker 1: is right down the road. They're building a complex right
Speaker 1: across the street. There's Wild West Traders in Austell. No
Speaker 1: matter where people are coming from, I can generally say,
Speaker 1: there's a range near you, and they offer rental guns,
Speaker 1: so go out there rent a gun. You know, they
Speaker 1: offer safety courses as well. Like my dad works over
Speaker 1: a while West Traders in Austell and he teaches safety
Speaker 1: courses there. So I can say, hey, sit down with
Speaker 1: these people and now at least give you a rundown
Speaker 1: of what you need to know. But here it's like, look,
Speaker 1: we're selling guns, so we have to make sure it's
Speaker 1: done safely, that we go through the proper channels, and
Speaker 1: that we avoid any bad situations. Mason asked if it
Speaker 1: is anywhere difficult to bind a R versus afore ten.
Speaker 1: The man said, besides cost, no, you just need to
Speaker 1: be a teen. To give some perspective, in this country,
Speaker 1: you have to be twenty one to drink, but at
Speaker 1: eighteen you can walk around with an air in public.
Speaker 1: Even with current regulations, it turns out it is pretty
Speaker 1: easy to purchase. Again, probably easier than it should be.
Speaker 1: One debate that has surfaced since the massacre in Las
Speaker 1: Vegas is what do we label this? Is this an
Speaker 1: act of terrorism domestic terrorism? What exactly is the difference.
Speaker 1: We discussed this topic and more with Rebecca Grant, highly
Speaker 1: experienced national security and military analyst. My name is Rebecca Grant.
Speaker 1: I have a PhD and international relations. I'm a national
Speaker 1: security analyst and defense consultants here in Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: After an incident like this, the first question in people's
Speaker 1: minds could there be any link to known terrorist groups?
Speaker 1: So one of the first questions is they begin to
Speaker 1: identify a perpetrator is to look and see in this case,
Speaker 1: were there any links to ISAIS a lot of confusion
Speaker 1: occurred when ISIS decided to take advantage and claim that
Speaker 1: they had been responsible in some way for this event.
Speaker 1: There's done no corroboration of that. That was just the
Speaker 1: terrorist being very very opportunistic. So right now we have
Speaker 1: not heard of any ties between Haddock and a designated
Speaker 1: terrorist group, or at least a designated international terrorist group.
Speaker 1: And the crazy thing was that ISAIS had issued one
Speaker 1: of its periodic warnings a few days before this took place,
Speaker 1: saying that citizens in big cities of the world Paris,
Speaker 1: Los Angeles, etcetera. Should really take cover and not go
Speaker 1: out in public. So that non specific warning had popped up,
Speaker 1: and I think for some people there was an immediate
Speaker 1: question of, oh my gosh, was this link? Was there
Speaker 1: a warning? And then was this the link? You know.
Speaker 1: The other thing that was terribly similar, of course, was
Speaker 1: the attack in Las Vegas and the attacks several months
Speaker 1: earlier this year in Manchester where we saw a concert
Speaker 1: as of target. So I think there were enough superficial
Speaker 1: similarities to raise but right now we're just not seeing
Speaker 1: anything that definitively links Paddock to a radical Islamic group
Speaker 1: of any kind. The main definition of terrorism is a
Speaker 1: lawful force and violence terrorist act, but it has to
Speaker 1: have a purpose to it to intimidate or coerce the
Speaker 1: government or the civilian population or any segment thereof. So
Speaker 1: we think of terrorism as part of a cause very evil,
Speaker 1: very bad, but that it has to have this political
Speaker 1: objective attached to it. So under the strict definition, it
Speaker 1: doesn't look like the Las Vegas incident is an act
Speaker 1: of terrorism strictly defined. Now, does that mean it's not
Speaker 1: horrible and terrifying? Oh my gosh, it was absolutely terrifying.
Speaker 1: The Las Vegas shooting doesn't meet the strict definition of
Speaker 1: terrorism because there's not that political element to it. So
Speaker 1: the Las Vegas shooter fits a little bit better into
Speaker 1: a kind of a subcategory of domestic terrorists. And to me,
Speaker 1: they would include people like Eric Rudolph with the bombings,
Speaker 1: individuals who are carrying out horrible acts of violence but
Speaker 1: without that attachment to an international group or a big
Speaker 1: political movement. Now, our government has tracked what we sometimes
Speaker 1: call homegrown terrorists for a long time, you know. Another
Speaker 1: big example, of course, is Timothy McVey in the Oklahoma
Speaker 1: City bombings, which were very, very tragic. In some cases,
Speaker 1: these individuals have a political agenda of their own, They've
Speaker 1: made statements in some cases they have it. So these
Speaker 1: lone wolf domestic terrorists are particularly hard to track unless
Speaker 1: they meet some of the profile criteria that look for.
Speaker 1: We've been using a set of profile criteria to watch
Speaker 1: kind of homegrowner domestic terrorist candidates for quite a long time.
Speaker 1: But when like Stephen Paddock, they really don't fit that profile,
Speaker 1: it's hard to figure out what they're up to, and
Speaker 1: it's hard to really know how to classify the terrible
Speaker 1: deeds that they've done. For many years now, part of
Speaker 1: the study of terrorism has been to try to figure
Speaker 1: out why individuals decide to commit these acts of terror,
Speaker 1: and in that study, there is extensive study of people
Speaker 1: within the United States who meet a certain profile. The
Speaker 1: typical profile and you'll find us in any of the
Speaker 1: academic literature would be someone who has had access to firearms,
Speaker 1: someone who's had military training, someone who lives in isolated life,
Speaker 1: someone who may have had relatives or close associates involved
Speaker 1: in terrorist acts or incarcerated. Their number of profile elements
Speaker 1: that have been used for many years to try to
Speaker 1: spotlight individuals within certain social groups in the US who
Speaker 1: may be heading towards committing an act of violence. I
Speaker 1: think the profile has been pretty useful in helping law
Speaker 1: enforcement keep watch. Particularly let's say if you have a
Speaker 1: radical group, you know radicals of Maryland. What was so
Speaker 1: tragic and heartbreaking with the Las Vegas shooter was he
Speaker 1: really didn't meet any of that profile that has been
Speaker 1: helpful in the past. He was older, he was financially
Speaker 1: well off, and there was nothing in his background that
Speaker 1: was going to trip this profile. He owned a lot
Speaker 1: of guns, which means he had passed multiple background checks,
Speaker 1: and what is so scary about him was that he
Speaker 1: didn't match that profile which has been new successfully in
Speaker 1: other cases. Like everyone else, I'm desperate to find a
Speaker 1: reason why this happened, and we want to find a
Speaker 1: reason so we can work to prevent it in the future.
Speaker 1: When we don't have that reason, I think it's doubly painful.
Speaker 1: Not only is it a senseless act, but we don't
Speaker 1: know what steps we might be able to take in
Speaker 1: the future to make sure things like this don't happen again.
Speaker 1: So my view is that unless we get more evidence
Speaker 1: that hasn't come forth yet. You know, he wanted to
Speaker 1: go out in a blaze of glory. It was very
Speaker 1: personal to him. Some have said he had become mentally
Speaker 1: ill over time. There may be an element there, but
Speaker 1: he's going to turn out to be just a unique
Speaker 1: force of evil that sprang up and committed this terrible act.
Speaker 1: I don't see connection to a terrorist group. I don't
Speaker 1: think that his horrible act means that there's something wrong
Speaker 1: with our country or with American culture in general. He's
Speaker 1: going to turn out to be just one of those evil,
Speaker 1: evil people. We used to call it the work of
Speaker 1: the devil, and I think he's going to turn out
Speaker 1: to be just one lone evil man. Could this has
Speaker 1: been prevented, No, I think Stephen Paddock was determined to
Speaker 1: create a horrible incident of violence. He had the guns,
Speaker 1: he had planned very carefully. Some reports have said he
Speaker 1: had ammonium nitrate in his car. That says to me
Speaker 1: he was going to carry out the fact one way
Speaker 1: or another. Well, I would guarantee there have already been
Speaker 1: changes on the Las Vegas strip. You know, Las Vegas
Speaker 1: is a tightly regulated environment, and it works partly because
Speaker 1: there is a sense of freedom and security. I think,
Speaker 1: you know, a casino four in Las Vegas is probably
Speaker 1: one of the safest places in the world. So I'm
Speaker 1: sure that the casino owners, the businessman of Las Vegas,
Speaker 1: and the state of Nevada will be working hard to
Speaker 1: try to make the Vegas much more secure. Something that
Speaker 1: they can do possibly may include some additional aerial surveillance.
Speaker 1: Their technology is available for that. I'm sure that all
Speaker 1: the casino owners are looking through their databases of people
Speaker 1: that they keep track go because their guests and you know,
Speaker 1: high rollers coming in. I think that those specialists in
Speaker 1: security will be doing everything they can in Las Vegas
Speaker 1: and other popular tourist destinations. I wouldn't be surprised to
Speaker 1: see Atlantic City thinking about it. You know, even Florida,
Speaker 1: some of the big destinations there. There's already a lot
Speaker 1: of behind the scene security, and I think that's where
Speaker 1: we'll see people really studying the lessons of Las Vegas
Speaker 1: and moving forward to try to help crowds and gatherings
Speaker 1: be safer in the future. You know, whatever you think
Speaker 1: about Las Vegas, one lesson really stands out to me.
Speaker 1: That is, there's nothing wrong with American culture. We don't
Speaker 1: need to have a big discussion about American culture. This
Speaker 1: was the act of one evil man. So there's nothing
Speaker 1: wrong with American culture, and we're barking up the wrong
Speaker 1: tree if we try to pursue it that way. This
Speaker 1: podcast is not a political podcast. And we're not here
Speaker 1: to settle the gun control debate. This is a podcast, however,
Speaker 1: about the criminal justice system, and the tragedy in Las
Speaker 1: Vegas was a crime. By way of background, I wanted
Speaker 1: to clear up a common misconception about the Bill of Rights.
Speaker 1: It's the first ten amendments to our Constitution. You see.
Speaker 1: The Bill of Rights doesn't grant any particular right to anybody.
Speaker 1: The Bill of Rights serves as a limit on the
Speaker 1: power of the government versus the people. So what the
Speaker 1: real issue in all of this discussion is to what
Speaker 1: length does our government have the authority to regulate our rights,
Speaker 1: including our Second Amendment rights. Surprisingly, there was not a
Speaker 1: lot of case law from the U. S. Supreme Court
Speaker 1: pertaining to the Second Amendment until two thousand and eight,
Speaker 1: when the Court decided a case called District of Columbia
Speaker 1: versus Heller. Before we get into Heller, it's important to
Speaker 1: understand that when interpreting the Constitution, it's not what the
Speaker 1: Constitution says that matters. It's what the Supreme Court says
Speaker 1: that it means is what matters. The text of the
Speaker 1: Second Amendment says a well regulated militia comma being necessary
Speaker 1: to the security of a free state comma. The right
Speaker 1: of the people to keep and bear arms comma shall
Speaker 1: not be infringed, period. So DC versus Heller is a
Speaker 1: landmark case where the U. S. Supreme Court decided on
Speaker 1: June two thousand and eight by a five to four majority,
Speaker 1: that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess
Speaker 1: firearms and that right has nothing to do with serving
Speaker 1: in any state militia. Further, it clarifies the right extends
Speaker 1: to the use of firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, including
Speaker 1: the ancient right of self defense. The Heller case started
Speaker 1: because the District of Columbia, by local law, banned handgun
Speaker 1: possession and made it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm,
Speaker 1: and it also prohibited the registration of handguns altogether in
Speaker 1: d C. D C law also said that no person
Speaker 1: may carry an unlicensed handgun, but it authorizes the chief
Speaker 1: of police to issue one year licenses. Additionally, it required
Speaker 1: residents to keep lawfully owned firearms unloaded and disassembled or
Speaker 1: bound by a trigger lock or a similar device. Heller
Speaker 1: was a d C Special policeman. He applied to register
Speaker 1: a handgun that he wished to keep it home, but
Speaker 1: the district refused, so he filed a lawsuit in the
Speaker 1: Federal Court in d C. On Second Amendment grounds, asking
Speaker 1: the court to prohibit the city from enforcing these laws.
Speaker 1: Up until this point, a lot of scholars and even
Speaker 1: courts interpreted the Second Amendment to be limited by the
Speaker 1: very first few words, which say a well regulated militia
Speaker 1: being necessary to the security of a free state. But
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court said in the Heller opinion that the
Speaker 1: operative cause was the right of the people to keep
Speaker 1: in bear arms shall not be infringed. And they said
Speaker 1: that codifies individual right, a right that existed long before
Speaker 1: the Constitution was written, and a right that exists in nature.
Speaker 1: The Court said that the preamble, the part about a
Speaker 1: well regulated militia was simply an expression of the framer's
Speaker 1: belief that the most effective way to destroy a citizens
Speaker 1: militia was to disarm the citizens, which is exactly what
Speaker 1: the British attempted to do at the battles of Lexington
Speaker 1: and Concord at the very beginning of the American Revolution.
Speaker 1: Justice Scalia, writing the opinion in Heller, tells us, though,
Speaker 1: that like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited.
Speaker 1: For example, there's not a right to keep and carry
Speaker 1: any weapon or gun whatsoever, in any manner, whatsoever, or
Speaker 1: for whatever purpose. Also, the court's opinions should not be
Speaker 1: taken to cast doubt on long standing prohibitions on the
Speaker 1: possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or
Speaker 1: laws forbidding the carrying of firearms and sensitive places such
Speaker 1: as rules and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and
Speaker 1: qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. As a rule,
Speaker 1: rights do not require any government issued license for a
Speaker 1: person to exercise that right, as opposed to a privilege.
Speaker 1: Privileges are granted by the government unlike rights, so privileges
Speaker 1: frequently do require a license, such as a license, for example,
Speaker 1: to drive a car. So from a purely legal perspective,
Speaker 1: what is the bottom line? Well, in light of the
Speaker 1: Heller case, it's clear that while guns can be regulated
Speaker 1: to a point, I can't think of any new law
Speaker 1: or any new regulation that would have prevented the Las
Speaker 1: Vegas massacre. I think it's also clear that the bump
Speaker 1: stock device which the shooter used to increase his rate
Speaker 1: of fire, could legally be outlawed tomorrow. But it's important
Speaker 1: to remember the bump stock device is nothing more than
Speaker 1: a commercially sold aftermarket device, and that device is not
Speaker 1: needed for a shooter to achieve the same or similar
Speaker 1: result using homemade means. The bottom line is that nobody
Speaker 1: has a crystal ball. The future cannot be predicted. A
Speaker 1: determined killer will find a way to kill, whether it
Speaker 1: be with a gun, twenty guns, a box truck, a
Speaker 1: homemade bomb, or whatever the evil mind can conceive. To
Speaker 1: make the USA truly safe from gun violence, you have
Speaker 1: to basically take away or get around somehow the Second Amendment. First,
Speaker 1: Then you'd have to confiscate all of the guns, and
Speaker 1: if you did that, you'd be violating the Fourth Amendment,
Speaker 1: which protects citizens against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government.
Speaker 1: Then you'd have to get around the due process clause
Speaker 1: of the Fifth Amendment, and the list goes on and
Speaker 1: on and on. By the time you're done, that really
Speaker 1: wouldn't be much of a bill of rights left. And
Speaker 1: that is what Justice Scalia, writing for the Court in Heller,
Speaker 1: would call tyranny. And if that were to happen, the
Speaker 1: only people who would have the guns would be the
Speaker 1: folks in the government, and that is why the United
Speaker 1: States exists today, because an armed citizenry took up arms
Speaker 1: against an oppressive government when the British first tried to
Speaker 1: confiscate guns at the battles of Lexington and Concord. As
Speaker 1: of the time of this recording, there's no known motive
Speaker 1: that can be attributed to the Las Vegas murder, and
Speaker 1: so we really don't know if there was any intention
Speaker 1: to influence any kind of policy. So was it terrorism
Speaker 1: or was it just a lone mad men In the
Speaker 1: absence of any evidence that the shooter was using this
Speaker 1: violence to intimidate or coerce some type of policy change,
Speaker 1: my belief is that it was simply the work of
Speaker 1: a madman. But that's just my opinion. Many other people
Speaker 1: have other thoughts about this. We know that the Islamic
Speaker 1: State has claimed credit for it, but according to the FBI,
Speaker 1: there's no credible evidence that this was actually related to
Speaker 1: international Islamic terrorism. We extend our most sincere condolences to
Speaker 1: the families of the victims in the Las Vegas massacre.
Speaker 1: It is our sincere hope and wish that those injured
Speaker 1: will recover as much and as fast as possible. We
Speaker 1: hope that law enforcement can figure out just what motivated
Speaker 1: this evil mind to commit this most heinous of atrocities,
Speaker 1: so that they can better prepare in the future to
Speaker 1: respond to any criminal act. Sworn is produced by Tenderfoot
Speaker 1: TV in Atlanta. Story and production by Payne Lindsay, Mason
Speaker 1: Lindsay and Meredith Steadman and myself Philip Halloway executive producers
Speaker 1: Donald Albright and Payne Lindsay. And if you have it yet,
Speaker 1: please check out our sister podcast, Up and Vantage, that
Speaker 1: follows the investigation into the disappearance of Georgia High School
Speaker 1: teacher and beauty queen Tara Grinstead. Up and Vantage is
Speaker 1: available now on Apple Podcasts. Sworn is mixed and mastered
Speaker 1: by Resonate Recordings. If you're in the market for podcast production,
Speaker 1: go to Resonate Recordings dot com to get your first
Speaker 1: episode produced for free. If you haven't already, please head
Speaker 1: over to iTunes now to subscribe, rate, and review Sworn,
Speaker 1: and make sure you check us out online at Sworn
Speaker 1: podcast dot com and follow us on social media at
Speaker 1: Sworn podcast on Twitter and Instagram, and you can follow
Speaker 1: me your host, Philip Holloway at phil holloway e s
Speaker 1: Q on Twitter. Thanks for listening. This is Philip Halloway
Speaker 1: and I'll see you next time. On Sworn and Lundy
Speaker 1: and Rusty was see I See Blood in the Water. Charming, charming,
Speaker 1: See Blood in the Water.