which we can achieve together in our debate - it's your constitutional right to bear arms. more than 150 americans are treated for gun assault every day. congress will not pass new gun laws, but would new gun laws make any difference, our gun laws - are they useless. our panel has media fuelled outrage against police shootings made it more dangerous for cops to do their jobs.

amnesty international says selling yourself for sex should be decriminalized. is prostitution a new right. i'm imran garda, and this is "third rail". . >> the stronger gun control you have. >> if gun control did work, washington d.c. and chicago would be the safest cities in the nation. >> preventing dangerous people from getting guns is possible. >> we have to protect the children and the population. >> the law in place is working, we need to make them better. >> no law will stop a shooting. >> we may have more americans with us. >> i think we need to ban gun control laws that keep people from protecting themselves. >> the janet reno justice under clinton said the assault weapons >> criminals don't care. that is the point. >> i can't think of a single

place where a mass shooting occurred, where guns were allowed. these people look for fish in a barrel. we have milwaukee county sheriff david clarke, and leah gunn barrett. >> are gun laws useless? >> i don't know if that's the right question. the question is do we have the will to the enforce what is on the books. once we have that small segment of the population that uses a gun to take property or commit an assault or intimidate, then we'll make progress in this violence reduction effort, if that is the real issue, i think it's about a political agenda than anything else. >> what is the real issue? >> the go after the perpetrators of violence.

those people on the street, with long criminal histories, previous gun violations, under arrest records that are wiped away or are dismissed for plea agreements. we are sending the wrong message to the perpetrators that something bad will be happening to them should be be caught committing a crime. >> i have an assorted list of shootings over the last two decade. we can go through them. besides the massive events, in the past few days alone, taking note in the new, in rochester, three used, in ferguso a 9-year-old girl was shot doing homework in her mum's bed, and her mum was wounded. in milwaukee, your city, there has been 100 homicide, the majority, 82. are they done by a small minority of people you are talking about? >> there's a big

problem. >> it's done by a small segment of the population. most of the research of crime bears that out. what i true to do here in this 2-sided debate about gun behaviour. >> let's focus on the behaviour. >> your question are gun laws useless, my answer is some promote gun, death and injury, some save lives, let me give you examples of gun rules that work. background checks, criminals, domestic abusers, terrorists. new york state has universal background checks. others don't. gun deaths have been declining four years in a row. nationally they increase 6%. we don't have background checks at the federal level, congress and the n.r.a. stymie that. anti-gun trafficking laws, making it a federal offense,

making trafficking a felony. making sure that someone who traffic a bun has the same penalty -- a gun has the same penalty as someone that traffics a chicken. that's ridiculous. 26 states passed the stand you ground, the shoot first. if people face a threat. states like florida, who have the laws, gun deaths increase as a result. >> talking about laws that do work, i'm intrigued that you didn't mention the assault weapons band. do you agree it doesn't work? >> no, i do not agree with that. the ban was in 2004. the part that works best is limited to 10 rounds. now you buy 30, 40, 100 rounds in the market. they were military purposed weapons, designed for battlefield conditions, and have been used by mass shooters,

because they are effective at killing people rapidly. >> the justice department's department definitive study said they found no evidence that it reduced gun crime or made shootings less lethal. >> the fbi said things 2011 mass shootings rows three times, almost tripled, and we know high capacity is used. >> most deaths occur not from assault weapons, but handguns. they come from suicide. >> why is it that laws didn't stop dylann roof in charleston from buying a gun, or the lafayette gun, john michael how'sers, who passed a jet are or mo ham et from chattanooga - i can go on. they broke the law to do what they want, to kill people. >> in the case of charleston and others that you mentioned, the background information on the people had not been entered into the system.

it was a miscommunication. because congress limits the time to clear it up, three days, and after three days you don't have an answer, they go to get the gun. should be the other way around. you should extent the period and make certain that person does not have a gun. they need to put the rite information in, garbage in, garbage out. cho, the virginia tech shooter, he shouldn't have a gun. congress needs to allocate more money to follow the laws that does exist. >> seems as if the vast majority of americans wants more comprehensive background checks, 79% of republicans, according to a pew poll, more than 80% of democrats. doesn't this suggest the power of the loggy, and the fact that the politicians are out of touch with what the people want. >> i don't think it does that at

all. one of the reasons is background checks, yuan version background checks. who wouldn't be for that. when it's polled, it's arrived in a way that the person answering the poll doesn't uds what a universal background checks mean. >> why not dig deeper and find out more about the person that wants to buy the gun. >> here is the reason. once you break it down, most health. that's part of the argument. how do we keep firearms out of the hands of people of those judged mentally ill. >> the overwhelming majority of people who are mentally ill, would never do something like take a rife into a church or movie theatre and school and spring bullets over the place. that's an insult to think that the population is more susceptible to that type of behaviour than anyone else. everyone knows someone who

suffers some sort of mental illness, who would never think about that. does their information - i'm throwing it out there. does mental health information belong in a criminal database. part. the overwhelming majority are not criminals. trying to get the comprehensive database will be automatic. the criminal will find a way around any law or background step, and that's the big issue. >> the logic - why should we have speeding laws since the criminals will speed or break the speed limit. why should we have laws against speeding, people will kill each other. that's a silly arguments. the whole point of laws is they prevent people doing things to other people. keeping guns out of dangerous hands is something society would agree on, and most americans agree that background checks to

make sure people who have violent criminal histories, who are adjudicated mentally ill, domestic abusers, terrorists, should not get their hands on guns. time after time this has happened, we do not have bpingd checks. you can get it at a zun show, at a private sale. that is why guns are falling into the wrong hands. al qaeda said they can go gun shopping in america. what are you waiting for. >> how many of those guns are found to be involved in street violence that we are talking internet. >> a lot. the wisconsin laws. the shooting in your state. the man went and killed his gun on the internet. he couldn't buy one legally. that's the problem. >> you were attacked by the n.r.a. for allegedly saying last year that there is "no such

owner". >> i did not say that and it was taken out of context. i was giving a talking in an n.y.u. history class. we were talking about gun laws in new york state, and mentioning that he said that you have to keep guns out. you have to arm people because there were a lot of evil people around. my point was everyone who has a gun, before they commit a crime, of course, are law-abiding. >> you can be law-abiding, lose your temper in domestic violence united nations, have an unintentional shooting incident, be like george zimmerman who was law-abiding before shooting trayvon martin. our society is awash in guns, that's one of the problems. is there guns almost for every person in this country, 300 million.

the united states has 30% of the countries. >> and to add to that point, michael bloomberg said we are the only industrialized country that has this problem. in the whole world, the only one. there's approximately 350 million firearms owned by over 100 million americans in this cunountry, why is this happening here, why are kids shot up unintentionally. >> is it the price of freedom. >> because the price of behaviour. we are talking about someone who would take a firearm. someone that would take a firearm, and use it against a human being, in an intentional act, is a behavioural problem, it's not a firearms problem. i'll go back to the fact that the overwhelming majority. i've heard up to 150 gun owners in the united states would never

dash take the firearm and use it against another human being. >> comparing the united states to other countries, do americans behave differently to the rest of the world. is there something path psychosis. >> no. >> john lot did a study. >> he's so discredited. you've got to be kidding me. >> in the u.k. when they went to a handgun ban, within the eight years following it, homicide went up 50% with a total ban. >> that is wrong. >> why is that, because the criminal will find a way around the law. no matter how tight you make it. all this does is frustrate law-abiding people, and the criminal perpetrator has access to the gun, come hell or high water. purchase through a theft, burglary or a black market.

>> let's facilitate. >> conducting background checks - we are naive. >> kick response from leah. >> the n.r.a., before they were for background checks and now against. you have to ask why are they against something that prevent hands. >> we'll take a break, we are joined by a democratic member of the florida house of representatives who wants guns on campus. >> when i was in college i was the victim of an attempted rape. i was able to get to my gun. attacker. >> later on... >> 100,000 african-americans evacuated out, given a one way ticket. we don't know what happened to them. we know more been baggage on the united airlines than the folks evacuated out of new orleans and hundreds of thousands of american citizens forced to go rced to go

♪ ♪ ♪ get excited for the 1989 world tour with exclusive behind the scenes footage, all of taylor swift's music videos, interviews, and more. xfinity is the destination for all things taylor swift.

there has been a shooting. students there that stopped the shooter. i don't think people's right to defend themselves should stop on a college campus. >> it's all about self-defence. >> the gun-free zone will not someone carrying a weapon illegally. >> people that say i would have shot them that day or ended it. >> the police are the ones that should be holding them. not students. >> welcome back. joining us is representative rehwinkel vasilinda. a democratic member of the florida house of representatives, representing the ninth district voting to allow concealed weapons to be carried on college campuses.

it's a trend we have seen. you're a professor as well. you know the cultures on campus. the drinking, partying, men with egos fighting over girls. >> exactly. >> you want to add weapons into that situation. >> i want to add concealed weapon permit holders to enable them to have guns on campus. that is the difference. we have laws in florida to allow 21 and above would a specific requirements and meet them to take guns on campus. that would be fine and make people safer. i'm concerned about women. we have a rape culture with one out of five women get sexually assaulted on our campuses in in country, those women that choose

to have gun could prevent race. >> this is personal for you. tell us why? >> it's very personal. when i was in college, i was the victim of an attempted rape, i was able to get to my gun, hold off the attacker, and he left. and i thank god that i had that ability that my father had given me a gun, trained me on a gun, that i was comfortable using it, but would have been willing to, and i think women need personal protection strategies, some women will not want to use a gun. you have to be willing to shoot if you do that. strategies. >> leah gunn barrett, does that weapons. >> of course not. the incident - i'm sorry for what happened to you, but i believe it happened off campus. our college camp uses are some of the safest places, why would we want to change that.

i'm a daughter who is a sophomore, and i would never guns. >> our campuses are not. >> there has been no homicides on florida campus, there has been homicides off the campus. >> there has been plenty of sexual assaults. >> sexual assaults are different. usually you are sexually sawed by someone you know, and alcohol is involved. if you put guns, chom, frat parties in the -- alcohol, frat toxic. >> i met amanda collins, when she was 25, a stupid at the university of nevada reno. she was a concealed carry holder in the state of nevada. did not carry on campus, was taking night courses to complete a degree. did not do it, why. law-abiding people obey the law. she was attacked walking to her

carat the parking lot. brutally raped 50 yards from the campus police department. amanda collins who i met personally and tucked to said the state of nevada took ply right away to defend myself. who is the only safe person on that college campus that night - the rapist with a firearm. >> an illegal firearm. >> it gets people hurt and killed. >> you want people to take the initiative. during your last campaign you ran an add saying considering taking a course. you have a duty to protect yourself and family. tom barrett, the mayor of milwaukee said you were auditioning for the next dirty lar any movie. >> tom barrett was returning home from the state fair. he intervened in a domestic dispute on the street. a guy picked up a tire iron and beat him within inches of his life.

i would like to think that tom barrett, if he had a firearm, things would have turned out differently, he didn't have the armed security around him that day. i think he would be a little more sensitive to the flight of individuals who want to defend themselves should it arise. >> i want to know how come there has been such a big change with you. looking at - looking back at some of the stuff you said in 2003, wisconsin considered a bill. you urged the government to veto saying there were better ways to fight crime. and in urban milwaukee, it jeopardized the safety of deputies and citizens. you had a radical conversion. happen. >> therecame a point of time in the milwaukee area, where the police could not keep up the service

there was no searching that could keep trial and violence in sec. at that point i said if the government cannot guarantee the personal safety of citizens, they hust provide them with the tools to do it themselves. licence. >> in high situation, there was no way a police moun or sheriff would help me, i had to take the responsibility to protect myself. my whole idea as a policy maker is to balance the issues. we do have problems with rape and sexual assault. i'm concerned with young women. is there a balance between the guidelines issued to students, if someone comes on campus with a gun, you throw pencils or a

laptop, ridiculous things. is there a battle against that. how about stronger campus police or security guards. >> our campuses are open. what we talk about is allowing people who are concealed weapons, permit holders who have a degree of crime within that group, that universe. we need to be logical, think, be less hysterical about these things. there are other states that have allowed weapons. many across the board are against it. >> college presidents are not protecting young women. >> when amanda collins was brutally raped, where was the college president. >> and a prove senior shoorting himself in the foot.

>> 20% of women raped or sexually assaulted on the campuses in the united states, that is the rate that the president needs to be concerned about. near... >> they know that rapist in most cases. maybe they've been drinking. >> are you blaming the women. >> i am not blaming women, but a gun wouldn't solve the problem. >> you don't trust women to protect themselves. >> that is not the issue. >> leah, is there the notion of self-defence for you. can we have the notion of defending yourself with a weapon against an attack whether on campus or elsewhere. >> the supreme court says it's legal to have a gun in your home.

when you carry guns in public, look at the 19th century, i cam from campus. >> if it was a gun free zone, maybe the attacker would have been stopped, the charleston church... >> if we had stronger gun laws, you couldn't bring the... >> do you believe if there were laws, dylann roof would not have had a gun. >> i do not agree. >> are you encouraging people to theatres. churches. >> what society do we want to live in. it's an overarching question. >> is the n.r.a. - it's not unlimited. even the supreme court has not said that the second amendment is not unlimited. >> i trust law-abiding people to

possess firearms. i trust people. >> one of them is slavery. >> we don't have them. >> there are. >> are you saying you fear slavery coming back. >> not slavery, i fear government terrorists. there's restrictions on the constitution or the second amendment. any country, the first thing they did was disarmed the media. you warned of a constitution, arguing that you would not enforce laws. is it your job to uphold the law

instead of starting revolutions. >> uphold the law? fix, that is civic duty of everyone it play a role with that. i don't want it police to be omnipresent, i don't want is to be a police state or have an officer on every corner. citizens need to play a role in that. one of the ways that we encourage citizens to play a role is to allow the freedoms to be able to participate in their own personal defense. heads. >> the first line of defense is with the citizen. if they don't have the means to protect themselves, like amanda collins did, it's all for naught. any conversation has to pass muster and by achivable. and some things that we talk about, getting guns off the

street, or a universal background check. >> it's not achievable. >> i applied to go back to the concealed weapons, it's a universe of human being who have a vi, very low rate of crime, violent frim. >> that's one guy. that's one guy. >> if you look at the report, conceal, carry killers, there's a number of people with licences that committed omside. path... >> if we go council your logical -- down your logical path, imp should be armed. >> we have run out of time. i'm riveted by this, but we are out of time. sheriff david clerk, leah gunn barrett, and senator rehwinkel vasilinda. thank you. the "third rail" panel is next. >> we have video proving that police accounts are not trustworthy.

>> it's a consequence of being black, the possibility that you can be shot down literally for being black. >> this was the worst civil engineering disaster in the history of the united states. >> 10 years after hurricane katrina. >> it was like a nuclear bomb had gone off - everything smelt like dead bodies. >> one constant. >> music has been the essence of this city. >> inspires a community to rebuild its city. >> we gonna bring this city back one note at a time. >> and overcome hard times in the big easy. >> we are bigger, we're better, we're stronger.

on the next third rail, campus sexual assault said to be an epidemic on college campuses, are students accused of it treated fairly. back to this week, we'll move from the effectiveness of gun

laws to whether law enforcement is less effective. jo watkins is a political strategist and aid to president bush. michelle is c.e.o. of the bernard center, and harry sheerer a star of simply sons and creator of bbc documentary about new orleans. harry, police brutality hags been front page news for a long time. we have seen case after case of young black men killed by cops. >> unarmed black men. >> and some that are armed. >> we have seen several recent bases of cops being attracted. we had one in alabama who is pistol whip the.

are police hamstrung, the cop said he didn't want to engage, draw his weapon, because he didn't want to be in the media. >> first thing, if you analyse the effect of media coverage, the first when is what the media is reporting true. if it is, too bad. if it's not, let's fix the media. i happen top have had the experience of meeting a police sergeant from the l.a.p.d. who had gone to gaol in the rodney king case. you should have seen what happened before the cameras rolled. second he said the l a.p. d, over a period of years. had been egen shally deprived over a number of methods of nonlethal force to deal with people in challenging circumstances. and it's don't do anything or bring out your weapon. and so i don't know if this is true in other cities.

i suspect it may be because other cities, certainly if eight l.a.s, militarization of law enforcement. if we have this style of policing occupying neighbourhoods as opposed to being occupying parts of communities. they had a consent. there was people going around disarm,ing, pumping a few rounds of bullets. are we saying this is a necessary side effect. we see from time to time a cop killed. if police don't have access to lethal forms of dealing with problems, they are going to be faced with unacceptable choices.

i would say it is only unnecessary consequence of what we have seen over the last year, if police and the people who train them don't understand that one, when you engage in racial profiling, it's inevitably leading to strife. some people are so excited to carry a gun and a badge, that they lose it like we don't need forces. >> how would a cop watching this feel when you say this is a necessary consequence, when 51 law enforcement officers have been killed since 2014. >> thing of all the black men and women killed in traffic stops, not using the turn signal or changing lanes. >> i'm an african-american man. it's a necessary consequence. it's the possibility that they can be sht down for being black,

and someone fears you, because of the colour of your skin. i don't know if it's an unnecessary consequence that bad things happen to police officers, it's a negative offence if culture and attitudes to race don't change. >> the president of the birmingham's police commission spoke and said if the tables turned and the suspect was laying there, they would be rioting, is he situation. >> who is they. >> exactly. >> when you become a police officers, you are sworn to serve and protect. my bornal is a retared police is. >> it's honourable and hard. it doesn't mean anyone that is

ab solved of the responsibility. i don't like the feeling in this is a day. if i'm not dressed appropriately in someone's mind, i would be stopped, arrested, shot. if i reached through quickly and go into my gough deft, someone could shoot me. that's a terrible feeling to have. i want police officers to be my protectors. i feel like i'm a suspect. when i'm calling them to help me. i called police to my house because there was a suspicious person in my home, and because i live in a nice community, when the police got there, they asked me for identification, wanted to know who i was, why was i there. >> let's move on, a decade after hurricane katrina, things are looking up in new orleans. or are they. katrina. >> a report tracking how new

orleans recovered. >> 70% of whites say it's ta good time for children to grow up in >>. >> they can't pay their bills. >> i grew up here. >> you have lived in the town since 1996, you know it better than most people. things seem to be on the up. however, a poll came out and african-americans, residents there, say things are not as rosy as they seem. in comparison to white residents who say things are looking good. i live in the city. black people and white people had the greatest pleb site of their lives 10 years ago. they could decide not to come back. a lot of them did. 100,000 african-americans didn't wom back to new orleans, they were evacuated out. given a one way ticket. we don't know what happened to them. no government agency, no non-governmental organization.

we know more about baggage on the united airlines than the carolina. as for the folks that chose to come back, i would say there are three challenges they faced. disproportionate to challenges everyone faced coming back to a ruined city. one is the police. in new orleans there were two incidents remarkable examples of this, the henry glover case, unresolved. the schools were taken over. they were bad schools. but they were taken over at an opportune moment to create a charter school system about which a lot of people have difference opinions, there has been a health care crisis in new orleans, the public hospital for working pore and indo gent

people was shut down so they could build a new facility, which opened this month. care. >> i want to ask you about a stockist stat in that poll, when residents asked whether it's a good time for children to come up. 60% of whites said yes, and 37% of african-americans said this is a good place. beauty is in the eye of the beholder. that's what it said. >> if everything is great for you. if you have a contract, work opportunities, and everything is rosy, you'll say the future looks great. if you are african-american, and don't have the choices, it's stuck. look at the labour force, popes rate in new orleans. that disoped looking for work, they are not on the roles any more. that will give you a measuring of the suffering.

and the sour outlook. and according to the data center in new orleans, the income level of employed white males increased in new orleans, it's stackic for black males. >> the only stat where we find african-american residents more positive about the past 10 years than white resident is in public transportation, is that because white people don't take the bus. >> they build a couple of street car lines. >> has this been recovery for some? >> absolutely. >> number one, you are correct that the problems we see preceded katrina. katrina exacerbated and pulled the band-aid off something that was horrific. if you go to the first day of the storm, and the second and third, and all the post recovery, the planning for the storm that had a disproportionately negative

impact on the poor, most of whom were african-american americans, the implementation of the laws to deal with the recovery, i think had a negative and racist impact on people that live on the east side of the northerly, because you look at - i think it's called the road to recovery. bath to recovery. >> the road home. >> supposed to be the largest housing recovery programme in u.s. history. the way they figured out who would get money and who wasn't had a horrible knock on given boar or black. >> it was baste on the value of the land. if you live on the west. whites. and our house was appraised at a higher level. you had more money, if you live on the east. and you are boar and black, you'll get at quarter of what

the people on the west side got because the value of the property. that's within the means of policy holders to look and say what are the consequences going to be of how they implement the law. are black people slighted, are the poor slighted. absolutely, that was within the control of policy. i want to ask two other questions, was there a survey before the flood, so we know if people were spade with life prospects before or after, and two, did they talk to the working poor in suburban st. bernard parish, who were on the paris roofs in 100 degree weather, no water and food during the storm. they were never on television. this was not a racial disaster. and st. bernard parish had a rough time recovering, getting

no intention at all. >> amnesty international takes a controversial stance on prostitution. could it hurt those that it intends to help? >> atilla mesterhazy voted to support dereallisation in an effort to defend the human rights. we'll legitimize the worst thing for women. it will happen no matter what, it's a question are you going to regulate. >> it's exploited, it's dirty, it's a terrible business until you decriminalize it. >> i am... >> luck of the draw. >> so decriminalized prostitution - does that onus up to the exploitation of sex workers. as the opponents of amnesty international. >> no, as long as you are of age and consenting, and this is

something you want to engage in, whether because that is your career ambition because you don't have a choice, because there's no harm in decriminalizing it. opponents say if you decriminalize, we are not going to do anything about the number of young women or chin who are victims of sex trafficking. it's a different issue that can be dealt with. >> like race and clouds, sex trafficking and prostitution are in the real world. i don't know, maybe amnesty are sitting in an office. >> i understand the issues. >> we police the way gambling, we police liquor, it's legal. abortions are legal. what is the difference, and i don't compare this to sex trafficking in any way whatsoever, if you are renting or selling your body, is there that much of a difference between people that do it and are breaking the law, or a woman

who marries someone for their money and is waiting for them to drop dead? >> what i think, i understand what amnesty international is trying to do, make the industry safer for the people victimized by it. >> there's resource. >> why do we not seat an opportunity. i want to help them. i wouldn't want it for anyone i know and love. >> i wouldn't want my kid to be a host of the home shopping network either. there are places where it is legal, we can see what it's likes. >> nevada. >> what are the ends of this. where it leaves us as a society, is it a just society, are we doing the best we can for people in our society who are most lie

lick to be exploited. >> doesn't it suggest those that led by their angels use it more than anything else. >> at the end of the day, the hope is that those who are in elected office and make policy, i hope they are inclined to lead people. >> long term, you'd like... as it stands, can be make it better by decriminalization? >> i don't know that decriminalization helps the matter. for a young girl victimized t 15, 17 years old, a run away, it's legal. does that mean she's not taken advantage of by the institution that made it legal. >> there are people that argue if it's a 16-year-old, it is illegal. it. they benefitted for two years, what does it mean for their life? >> as the sole person and

eostrogen sitting on the panel. >> maybe that's why i asked you the question first. i would add i do not want this for anyone. the point that comes back to donald trump, and that our policies makers don't do anything. they don't care about the poor, fair housing, education, and don't care about women's rights. if we have to have an argument about whether or not a woman with a masters degree deserves equal pay for the same job as a man, imagine what it's like for a woman who is illiterate or a high school degree, and our government does nothing. >> you talk with great feeling about the girls. it seems to me we don't help their life prospects turning

them over to the criminal justice stmp. >> or to pimples. >> i pass a church, there's a lot of young people forced to make those choices, i want them not to make that choice if they don't have to. >> they'd be to. >> i would like police concentratingon serious crime, which they have a problem reducing in cities like chicago and new orleans, and not dealing with problems that are festering social problems, better with by other institutions. >> if it's decriminalized, i would argue that you are returning the power to the woman. if we are not going to do - fix the country structurally. suffering. can believe that they have a shot at the american dream, and use the laws to protect minors. >> okay. that was wonderful. we have run out of time. thank you so much all of you, jo

watkins, michelle bernard, harry shearer, thank you for your time. straight ahead. a tourist hot spot in america, where only the tourists v regular access to water. >> in order to save my children, i had to try to save everyone else's. >> chicago mothers, fed up and fighting back. >> what we've essentially done is created an outdoor community center. >> changing the city one block at a time. >> i'm out here to encourage them, to tell them there's a better way.

peurto ricans are facing a debt crisis and another fundamental to daily lives. one of the worst droughts in the island's history, more severe than the drought facing california, and the rest of the

western u.s. al jazeera's jonathan betz was in peurto rico and awe the effects of the drought. jonathan, how bad was it to see. what was it like. >> it's one thing to care about, to go to peurto rico. i don't think i fully understand the severity of the crisis, when you think of a drought, you think what people in the west days, water restrictions like you can't water your car or wash your. they cut off the water to hundreds of places they had to turn off the tap water. that is something i was not expecting to sigh there. it is a huge problem, a lot are trying to get through that. >> let's watch an excerpt of your report. >> reporter: with water cut off

to his house, antonio must go find it. and then haul it back home to his waiting wife. peurto rico is so dry the government has cut off the tap water to 400,000 homes. for every day the water has run, they must get by for two days without it. from the air, you an see the full effects. less than two inches of rain fell last month. the main water source is down 25 feet. if the local water office, angry customers arrive with bills and questions. the bill is seven times higher than normal. even though the water runs once every three days. >> the extraordinary pictures, overhead from the chopper. they are facing the death crisis and the crip lick drought. how are they coping with the double wamy.

>> at least are american citizens, it's interesting to hear the pitches. they don't have water running in their homes for days at a time. the water crisis is one of the crisis that ireland is facing. they have an marge crisis with high power rates. and honestly, i was struck by how strong everyone is. everybody is facing the problems. you don't here a lot of korm plaint. there are not protests in the streets over the issues. people realise there's serious problems and are working hard to get through it. >> a large part of the economy driven by tourisms. children are going, they are having fun. water is not an issue for them. how are locals responding to the tourists. >> it's two different worlds. you have water restrictions, some don't have water and power.

when you compare that to what tourists are facing it is different. tourists, hotels have running water. the hotels would argue that there's a lot of conservation efforts in places, but the water is running there. the power is still going. and so tourists who arrive there realise that there's an issue that many people in peurto rico are facing. from their stand point everything is fine. since tourism is such a big part of the island's economy, a lot of people were not angered, they are irritated, mainly irritated at the government and the fact that they had the problems to begin with, not at the tourists coming to help the economy. >> thank you for joining us. that does it for this week's show, the conversation continues on the website at aljazeera.com. and on facebook, and quitter. ajam third rail. i'm imran

sglvrnlings i am david foster. you are watching the al jazeera newshour live from london. this is an idea of some of the stories we are covering in detail. of course, in the next 60 minutes. >> anger and upset as a ask the court in egypt sentences three al jazeera journalists to three years in prison. >> it sends a drainage dangerous mention that there are judges in egypt that will allow their courses to become instruments of political repress and