think it's something that really needs to be addressed, because there is a good amount of agency abuse. i've seen so many cases where they've kept people on the string for years and years and years. and i'm glad you raised that question, sir, because it's -- it does indicate that not all these situations are the same. thanksgiving niekt -- night on c-span it's a conversation on designing congressional gold medals. that discussion touches on the creative process, execution and ceremony. following that event, we'll show you the congressional gold medal ceremony for the world war ii monuments men. you can watch that tomorrow starting at 8:00 p.m. eastern on our companion network, c-span.

this thanksgiving weekend american history tv on c-span 3 has four days of featured programming beginning thursday at 4:00 p.m. eastern. we'll take you inside the national world war ii museum in new orleans as we look back 70 years to the war's end and its legacy starting with the allied invasion of north africa. friday night at 8:00, a new series "road to the white house rewind" takes a look back at the presidential campaigns of ronald reagan, bill clinton, george h.w. bush. and then saturday afternoon, tomb of the unknown soldier. the role and creation of the tomb guard and stories about some of the notable people who are buried at the cemetery. and sunday afternoon at 4:00 on

"real america," the cbs news special report on the five-week battle of la deung valley. and a look now at the 2016 elections and gun policy. representatives from the firearms coalition, the citizens committee for the right to keep and bear arms, and other groups address the 30th annual gun rights policy conference in phoenix. this portion is just over 40 minutes. >> well, the 2016 election is going to be here before we know it, and we need to be engaged now. let me start off by saying we all owe hillary clinton a very big thank you. why? an anti-gun rights rhetoric is

going to ensure the result is going to be a record turnout of gun owners in the 2016 election. [ applause ] >> she's already doubled down on barack obama's assault on gun rights to get her party's nomination. voters are going to impact not just the presidential race, but every race on the ballot from the u.s. senate all the way down to dogcatcher. it will impact every democrat on the ballot and like it or not, democrats have made gun control an extremely partisan issue. not all democrats are anti-gun and not all republicans are pro-gun rights. the party that controls congress or a state legislature controls that flow of legislation and it's important to our whole battle of the right to bear arms.

the importance of the presidential election cannot be limited at all. for us, judicial appointments are critical to our continued success in the courts and believe me, our opponents would love to shut that courthouse door in our face. only a few cases every reached the supreme court of the united states. judicial nominations to lower courts are very important and always fly below the radar. we have seen damaged second amendment rights of obama nominees in courtrooms from massachusetts to oklahoma. i can think of only two judges appointed by democrats that voted to overturn gun rights allows. believe me, if hillary clinton is elected president, all those nominations to the courts are going to be worse.

we can't forget the importance of the u.s. senate election. the senate confirms those nominees to the courts. so let's take a look at the playing field for what we're dealing with in the 2016 election. the key to senate control in 2016 presidential election is going to be down to a few states. we'll go state by state and look at this. if the gop presidential ticket wins by a hair, it will be exceptionally difficult for the democrats to take back the u.s. senate. if the democrats squeak through the presidency and catch the senate, they'll do the trick against us. most analysts acknowledge that democrats have a plausible chance of taking a minimal victory in the u.s. senate. the democrats need to gain four seats to control the senate if a

democratic president gets elected. otherwise they need five. five might be a little bit of a heavy lift to capture the senate on the election map. there's only a certain number of states that are in play. those states are florida, i illinois, new hampshire, north carolina, ohio, pennsylvania, and wisconsin. if you're from those states, that's really the battleground in this election. moreover democrats have to hold shaky senate seats in colorado and nevada. other than illinois, these are states that should be very competitive for the race to the white house, which will make the presidential coat tails all that more important. because the rival democratic majority is difficult, the republicans are still more likely to keep the majority than the democrats to grab it. at least a small net gain for

the gop is expected though. not losing any net seats probably requires the republican nominee to not only win the presidency, but capture more electoral votes. it guarantees no anti-gun legislation can ever get to a president's desk. the u.s. house is where we're able to stop the whole obama agenda and with hillary clinton, if she's elected, it will be twice as important. obama took office in 2009 with 60 democrats in the u.s. senate. they had 250 seats in the house of representatives. today there are only 46 members of the senate in the democratic caucus. the worst showing since the

first year after the ronald reagan landslide. across the capital and the house there were 188 democrats. now the republicans have more seats than when herbert hoover took office in 1929. this, however, is really the tip of the iceberg. when you look at the states, the collapse of the anti-gun rights democrats fortunes are even worse. republicans now hold 31 governorships, nine more than they had when obama was inaugura inaugurated. the gop has won governorships in purple and even deep blue states. maine, massachusetts, new jersey, maryland, wisconsin, michigan, illinois, new mexico, nevada, ohio. the last midterm elections only one republican governor tom

corbett in pennsylvania was replaced by a democrat. in alaska, they lost to an independent. every other republican was returned to office. now turn to the state legislatures. although if you're a loyal democrat, you may want to avert your eyes to this. in 2009, democrats won full control of 27 state legislatures. republicans had control, full power, in only 14. now the gop is in full control of 30 state legislatures. the democrats hold power in just 11. [ applause ] >> in 24 states, republicans control the governorship in both houses of the legislature to give a total control over the political process. that increased power at the state level has already led to serious consequences for both democrats and anti-gun rights lobby. for their political future and

for their goals have been put in jeopardy. the gun rights movement has already identified over 16 million gun owners that are registered to vote. we're on schedule to double that number by election day 2016. [ applause ] >> and most of that work is being done in battlegrounds states and contested congressional districts. this data vault, so to speak, is important to bloomberg's attempt at any ballot measures in states like nevada, maine, and coming up probably here in arizona. we also have to remember, by the way, with independent expenditures and bloomberg's track record, he is planning on spending millions of dollars out of his own pocket targeting to certain pro-gun members of congress and the senate to try to make an example of someone

who supports gun rights that he can say he took down, so our work is really cut out for us. the latest polling data should give our opponents heart burn. the latest cnn poll out just a few days ago in your opinion, do existing laws make it too easy for people to buy guns, too differe difficult, or just about right. certainly this is good news for pro-gun candidates, but this news should give hillary clinton, barack obama, michael bloomberg, and his every town group a migraine headache. 10% responded the current laws to buy a gun are too difficult. when you add the 10% to the 49%, it gives us 59% supporting laws the way they are with no changes, no more gun control, no

new bills passed. so that's good news for us and for our candidates. but of course what the other side tries to do is rebrand it. they don't try to sell it as gun control in the elections. it'll be sold as common sense proposals, mental health issues, various preventive causes, anything domestic violence. they're not going to talk about gun control. they know that's a losing proposition, except for hillary clinton who has doubled down on it. that's why we owe her a big thank you. that's good news for us. next year's gun rights policy conference is in tampa, florida, a key battleground state. that state will determine the future of our gun rights in the 2016 elections. with your help, we'll turn out the gun vote like never before. for all of us, the 2016 election, again, starts today.

in 2016 we must fight to win. thank you. [ applause ] >> does anybody know what i'm about to say? good morning, gun lobby. [ cheering and applause ] >> he made that reading from the grpc microphone for almost every year of the past 30 years, and i'm proud to do it again this year, but this year i want to change it up just a little bit. good morning, gun voters.

[ cheering and applause ] >> you know, when we talk about lobbying, we're talking about legislation. we're talking about influencing those that we have elected to do what we want them to do, what we hired them to do. when we talk about gun voters, we're talking about getting those guys in, and we can't separate the two. we can. often we do, but we shouldn't. lobbying and political action on the election front are both critical to long-term survival and winning. and unlike the rumors that the nay sayers say, alan and i, nra, goa, we're not in this business to drag it out and make money. we're in this business because we believe in it and it's what

we do. i would much rather have a real job where i go to real regular hours, come home to my family, go out shooting every now and then, than to spend 14 hours a day in front of my laptop trying to get the message out to those who don't understand why it's so critical that we defend our right. in the coming election 2016, it's racing up on us. we've got a crowded field on the republican side, and i just want to comment. yesterday for the second time that i've been attendance to a grpc, we had a presidential candidate in the room. we spoke with us. he endorsed our positions. yesterday when governor jim gilmore was in this room, i would be willing to bet that

there were at least 200 armed people around him at all time. [ applause ] >> i don't think governor gilmore was worried about it, do you? >> no. >> you're not a threat. you're the good guys. that's right. so it's the safest room in the state as bob said. there's a lot of information out there and information is the power of politics. if you want to win elections, you have to have information. and part of the critical information that you need is information about the candidates, where they stand, what they stand for, do they really mean what they say, have they proven that they mean what they say, what did they say a couple of years ago, what are they saying now, how is it

different. there is lots of sites out there. there's lots of research out there. the national shooting sports foundation has their gun vote project online. good information, good resources. the nra, gun owners of america, citizens committee for the right to keep and bear arms, the various state organizations, the arizona citizens defense league -- >> yeah! >> of which i'm a proud new life member. they offered me a deal. they said, well, we can add up all the years you've been a member and here's how much it will cost you to go life, jeff. so i did that yesterday and i'm glad to have done it, but all of those information sites digging around out there, we've come up with something several years ago and each election cycle we build

it back up again and then it dies off. it's called gunowner.org. how many of you play out on the internet? you get out there. you surf. forums, anybody addicted to forums? gunvoter.org is a forum site. it's user driven. the objective is for you to bring information to gunvoter.org from all of those other sites that you visit or your personal knowledge and tell everybody elsewhere this candidate stands, what he's saying about the issues, what he's done about the issues, what she wants to do about the issues, and most importantly the voting record, votes, votes, votes, votes are your best indicator of where somebody stands. that's why right now my critical

issue, along with getting you to come to gunvoter.org to participate in that conversation, my critical issue is representative rob bishop's bill to delete the sporting purpose language from the gun control act. [ applause ] >> i don't know about you, but i've never found the words sporting purpose in the constitution. i don't find it in the second amendment, and it's been the law that some bureaucrat is deciding what you or i can import or possess or purchase based on his determination, her determination, of what meets some sporting purpose criteria. that's absolutely wrong. one of the issues that's been discussed is some division amongst gun groups and rights

advocates. i'm a firm supporter of national reciprocity, but there's some division in the house regarding national reciprocity and whether it's a wise move to push. when it comes to removing the sporting purpose language, i don't think there's anybody in this room or in the rights movement who would disagree that that needs to happen and that's a vehicle for getting votes. we need to be pushing the house and the senate today to push this bill, to get the votes, so that we have the ammunition that we need. we know who's on our side and who's not on our side and we know who to vote for come 2016. that's the objective and that's what we want to do with gunowner.org and bring that in. now, a lot of you know that i'm

not a specialist. i don't focus in one area. i'm kind of eclectic. i get around. i do a lot of things. i'm interested in a lot of things. as i listen to the panels here one after the other, there's always something that i want to comment on, something i want to add. as we talk about the emotion, i want to bring up a story. a few years ago, i was testifying before the d.c. city council. and marion barry gave an emotional plea talking about all of the funerals that he had attended due to gun violence. and i got my opportunity at the microphone, and i gave my little spiel and i said, before i go, i want to say something to mayor barry about those funerals

because i want to tell you about the funerals that i haven't attended. i didn't attend a funeral for my great grandmother before i was born. my family didn't have to attend her funeral when she was alone with her four siblings in a farmhouse in louisiana and a disgruntled former employee was kicking on the door, declaring how he was going to murder all of them and she stood alone in the front room with a shotgun and defended her family and survived. [ applause ] >> i didn't have to attend the funeral of my grandmother and my aunt when they were in a remote location in new mexico and were assaulted by a man with a large

knife. and my grandmother pulled her pistol from her purse and said you get back and they survived. [ applause ] >> i didn't have to attend the funeral of either of my sisters on two separate occasions, one when a man came into our home and my little sister was home alone and met him at the top of the stairs with a gun and she survived. [ applause ] >> when my other sister, my older sister, stopped in at a rest stop on the highway to take care of a little bit of business on a long trip and someone assaulted her in the stall in the bathroom and she had a gun and she survived. [ applause ] >> as alan corwin has told us, guns save lives.

guns are what separate the good guys from the bad guys and give us the ability to defend against those willing to do evil against us. and so let's never forget that if it saves one life, the life it saves might just be yours. anyway -- [ applause ] >> to wrap things up, i just want to say thank you for being here. i'm looking forward to the leadership institute's program across the way this afternoon. if you can attend, it is always worthwhile. morton's programs are spectacular. alan, this has been a great, great conference, and we're glad that all of you guys could come out. votes, your vote, every vote matters, but right now the votes that matter the most are the votes in congress to let us know

where these folks really stand. so i urge you to urge your politicians, your elected servants, the guys who are supposed to be working for you, to vote on the bishop bill, to vote on national reciprocity, and give us the ammunition we need to move forward on gunvoter.org and other sites that are mobilizing the rights movement to get the right people elected to defend our rights. i'm jeff knox with the firearms coalition. thank you very much for your attention. [ applause ] >> thank you, jeff. and thank you, alan. we have finished a little early, so we'll have more time for questions. if you have a question, i'd like you to line up over here to my

left. be prepared to state your name and location and ask a question. now, some of our panelists from this morning have had to fly the coop, so they may not be here, but we'll do our best. if other morning panelists are available, they don't have to come all the way up on the stage, but if they want to hang out over there or down near -- or come up on the stage, we will do our best answer all the questions. but like alex trebek, i will say to you please in the form of a question. if you have statements to make later, that's what the hallway's for. if you want to engage in extended dialogue with one of our panel itseistpanelists, aga

they'll be happy to do that outside in the hall. state your name and your question. if you want to direct it specifically to a panelist, give us that panelists name. [ inaudible ]. >> hang on, steve. >> try it again. >> is the switch on that mic or is there a switch? >> works better when you turn it on. >> go ahead, sir. >> one, two. oh, just get closer? okay. i'm steve mead. long time member of the nra and you name it. i have one fairly broad question that could go to a lot of

people, but somebody may have some answers. why is it not a federal civil rights crime for michael bloomberg and his kind to organize and fund a conspiracy to defraud united states citizens of fundamental constitutional rights? [ applause ] >> no, this is not working. okay. >> yes, i believe we're speaking from the podium so the television cameras are focused on the podium. the problem is the courts have historically have ruled that people have first amendment rights to do these kind of things. your only recourse is use your rights to combat it back or to use your voting rights at the ballot box to defeat them in public office.

it just isn't going to happen. >> i'll take a question, if i can move over to the big mic. i have a very quick answer. i think we need to use our billionaires against their billionaires. >> my only question there, neil, is where are they. where are our billionaires because i really want to meet them? i'm not sure he's ours. okay. all right. hi, bob. >> hi. peggy, thank you. >> i'm not a supporter of donald trump. my candidate in 2016 is nobody. the vote for nobody campaign. i will say donald trump has a second amendment statement on his web page second to none.

>> hi, bob. >> thank you. my name is bob culliver. i'm a semi-retired engineer living in wyoming now. i escaped from maryland. in the form of a question, my question is to the folks who were talking about the nfa regulations and the $200 tax that got imposed. i'm going to reiterate why that tax was imposed. now that person that question for me out in the hall is because under the second amendment they could not regular those firearms. they had to find a dodge. that was the tax. the same thing is going to be applied for ammo and everything else we've hear about today. they can't do some things under the second amendment, but they seem to find ways around it. >> absolutely right, bob.

>> yes, sir. >> there wasn't a question there? >> we're grading on a curve. >> hi there. i'm a local area activist here in phoenix, arizona, and have had a wonderful time this weekend. i've heard infringed and infringement several times. my question is, why is it i never here necessary for the security of a free state? thank you. >> you want me to take a stab at it? >> there's no doubt that that's part of the second amendment. and there's no doubt that the second amendment was written to keep us secure as a free state and that one of the problems the founding fathers saw was the federal government running away with people's rights.

they wanted to make sure you had the right, like it or not, to rebel. but in today's context in the modern world we're pretty much looking at it as fighting it on an individual right battle. we're relying on a whole lot right now is two key supreme court cases. you have the right to have a firearm to protect yourself. those didn't talk very much about protecting your free state. we're looking at gun laws that are put in place that are screwing up our gun rights. they're all basically aimed at us as individuals. you only hear a lot about it because in the context of the modern debate and the current battle that's not the front line, i guess. >> i'll make a general comment about that. the founders noted that if we

didn't have moral people in government, that the constitution and the whole concept of self-governance wouldn't work. and we don't have strong moral people in government on both sides of the aisle. all powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved for the people in the states respectfully. so we have the government regulating all sorts of things they're not empowered to do. there's no legitimate delegated authority to control education, energy, drugs, all these things that the federal government has taken upon itself. it has no legitimate delegated authority to do. if you find it regulating in the area of the second amendment or gun rights or your medical care or energy policy or education at the state level, we have people who are not moral, who are not

following the constitution from top to bottom, and that's creating problems with our nation across the board. it seems to me like the last time the federal government actually looked at the constitution to see if we had power to do the things they're doing was in the implementation of the federal highway system where they called it the federal defense highway system and said we need this to defend the nation adequately and justified it on that basis. when bob spoke about the nfa, they said we can't regulate guns because of the second amendment, but perhaps we can tax them and that would be okay. and they applied a $200 tax, which at the time was a year's salary. so that would regulate them almost totally without infrin infringing on the second amendment. was sort of a roundabout way to do it. so now government does what they

want regardless of the constitution. no moral people in government, or very few, and government has run amuck, and we find ourselves in a dastardly state of affairs. >> we're going to take two more questions. i don't know why you people are so shy and you don't line up when i tell you to line up. we have one question here and the next question here. and then we're going to allow c-span to take down their cameras. then we'll go into resolution. yes, sir. >> thank you. my name is byron baker from sun city west, arizona. i have a question and i'm looking for comments and possibly some advice on future activities that we might participate in as carriers. there is that arena of intimidation and an as yet unnamed army that's developing against carriers across the

nation. they practice swatting where any citizen can yell gun like fire in a theater, and there's a moral imperative on the part of law enforcement to come immediately to the area where gun has been shouted. and i guess to condense it, my question is going to be what would be my legal response in case i am swatted by someone who is hysterical or is now a member of this unnamed army that feels like in hitlerian germany you're supposed to betray your neighbor. i wonder what the organizations might do to inform the general public about their obligation and the responsibility they have in case some victimhood is created like you talked about yesterday.

>> the first thing is survive the situation. >> thank you. >> number one is to survive it. that means absolute compliance with the police when they show up because they've been told there's a man with a gun and they're possibly jittery. it is the violence policy coalition has been pushing this concept of swatting on their facebook and twitter feeds and it's vile. it is illegal for someone to give a false report. and if they exaggerate that report -- we had a guy killed at a cosco in las vegas because the reports were exaggerated. he walked out the door and the police shot him. it was a horrible thing. but as far as legal consequences or backing up, i think that the

organizations that we have would try and back you up and try and support you if we could find an angle for it, but it's a very difficult situation. it really is. it's dangerous. >> i think we've accomplished a great deal by just making us aware of the fact that it could happen. >> thank you. >> charles heller from over there. >> the arizona citizens defense league is looking at that for this legislative session. we had an incident of exactly that happen in flagstaff last week with a retired peace officer who is also disabled. the store there that used to be -- i can't think of the name of the store. it was a chain that was recently acquired. the store called police and accused him of waving a gun around. he has agreed to testify if he run a bill from the citizens defense league. you should all look at our web sate for updates on that.

i don't know if the president is here. i know the treasurer is here and the board. you can talk to us about it afterwards. who's in the back? and drake is back there too, who is on the board. he's in the room and you can talk to him about it. thank you. >> azcdl.org. look for updates and legislation. >> i'm going to basically use my skills as a writer to suggest a strategy. if somebody yells gun and you're the person carrying the gun, yell police because that has two meanings. one is that it implies you are a policeman. it also implies that you're calling for police. it might diffuse the situation and save lives. >> and our last question. yes, sir.

>> i'm dr. johnny dean from san antonio, texas. my question is in regards to gun-free zones. what strategy can we have to hold the owners of the gun-free zones accountable when they disarm us and then something bad happens? how do we put teeth into it, especially corporate entities that disarm us and they feel there is absolutely no negative side to it? >> well, what we have to do is create negative sides to it. the best way with that is legislatively by putting teeth in the law that if you do that, you become liable to the person that becomes the victim. you have the liability now and the victim can sue you. the way the statute gets written it puts the burden of proof back on the victim. then attorneys for the big corporations who want to take that position take a look at it and say, it is more risk for us

to be a gun-free zone than not to be a gun-free zone. >> so it is really a legislative solution? >> i think the legislation empowers personal lawsuits by making the laws more in favor of the plaintiff. >> thank you. >> here in arizona twice now we've introduced the gun-free zone liability act, which says if a place disarms you that way with a make believe gun-free zone, in other words a sign on the wall and you are harmed by that sign, they bear liability for that if you are harmed. we haven't gotten it enacted it yet, but we have introduced it twice. we've modified the bill to improve it. the right to keep and bear arms is a specific enumerated right. that's what it was called in the heller case. the idea they can just deny your civil rights is prohibited under

18 usc-241 and 241. they think they can do with this impunity. there's a conflict between private property rights and your right to keep and bear arms. in your home, you can deny a fat person, a woman, a gay and lesbian person, a gun owner, you can deny almost anybody to come into our home. but in a store, if you own a candy store, you can no longer deny any person access. but they believe they can deny you access if you exercise your right to civil arms. this is an untested area of law, but we intend to test it. we intend to introduce this bill over and over around the country. the gun-free zone liability act where if you deny a person their

right to keep and bear arms and they're harmed by that, you incur liability. the classic case is the luby's case in texas. because of law, she couldn't shoot them. both parents were killed by the madman. she was denied her right of a firearm. so this has to stop and the public has to start becoming aware that these make believe gun-free zones, these pretend gun-free zones, do nothing but protect the criminal. we have that now in federal law. there was a military bill introduced, one of these arm the army bills, where the legislation says that the military recognizes that these make believe gun-free zones are dangerous because we had military people shot by jihadi in a place where they were not able to be armed and they want to see an end and the civilians

want to see an end as well. and we'll luckily get this done in due course. >> thank you, alan. now we're going to take about a five-minute break while our c-span cameras come down. we want to thank c-span for covering it, and they will -- yes, round of applause for c-span. this thanksgiving weekend american history tv on c-span 3 has four days of featured programming. beginning thursday at 4:00 p.m. eastern, we'll take you inside the national world war ii museum in new orleans as we look back 70 years to the war's end and its legacy starting with the allied invasion of north africa through d-day and the war in the pacific. curators and historians will share the experience of soldiers who fought on both fronts. on friday night at 8:00, we take a look back at the presidential

campaigns of ronald reagan, bill clinton, george h.w. bush, a. thomas tudor, tomb of the unknown soldier on the history of arlington national cemetery, the role and the creation of the tomb guard, and stories about some of the notable people who are buried at the cemetery. sunday at 4:00 on real america, the special report on the five-week battle of la drang valley. american history tv all weekend and on holidays too only on c-span 3. remarks now from gun control advocates, a pediatrician, and the head of a smart gun technology foundation. this is about an hour and ten

minutes. >> good evening and welcome to this night's meeting of the commonwealth club of california, the place where you're in the know. you can find the commonwealth club online at commonwealthclub.org. i'm mark follman, national affairs editor for "mother jones" and your moderate eor fo tonight's program. the data on gun violence in the united states is sobering. according to the centers for disease control and prevention, each year more than 33,000 americans are killed by guns and at least 80,000 are treated in hospitals for nonfatal gunshot wounds.

more than 20,000 of the gun deaths per year are suicides. hundreds of kids die annually in gun homicides, and each week seems to bring news of another child accidentally shooting himself or a sibling with an unsecured firearm. while violent crime overall has declined steadily in recent years, rates of gun-related injury and death have climbed since 2011 and public mass shootings have become more frequent. among 15 to 24 year olds, gun fatalities are about to surpass car accidents as the leading cause of death. in the last several years u.s. surgeon general and organizations such as the american bar association, the american public health association, and the american academy of pediatrics have all urged that gun violence should be regarded as a serious public health issue. what are the realities of gun violence in our country?

what kinds of innovative solutions are being put forth to reduce the carnage? tonight our panel is here to discuss how gun-related injuries and deaths impact the health of americans and their communities and what can be done to help solve the problem. joining us are dr. ricky choy, who serves on the board of directors for the national physicians alliance, margo hersh, pastor michael mcbride, lead pastor at the way christian center in berkley, california, and director of urban strategies, and robin thomas, executive director of the law center to prevent gun violence. please join me in welcoming our panelists to the commonwealth club. [ applause ]

>> so i'd like to begin with a basic question about gun violence as a public health issue. why should it be considered a public health and why doesn't the general public tend to see it as a major public health issue and maybe we can start with you, dr. choy? >> public health is promoting and protecting the health of people in communities where they live work, go to school, and play. public health is about promoting healthy behaviors, reducing injury and harm, and gun violence is a direct threat to these aims. physicians are on the front lines every day dealing with this in our hospitals and our clinics. except for these situations where victims end up in the morgue, all of these victims end up in our clinics. and we feel this very strongly there's consensus that gun violence is a public health issue that we, as health care

providers, need to take very seriously. >> do you want to comment on that? >> yeah, i mean, i think that traditionally people think about public health issues in terms of things like diseases, the kinds of problems that confront our society that we don't have that same level of agency and control over sometimes. and with gun violence, i think the perception, similar to cars, i think that's a good analogy, that there isn't a way to address it because of the agency, the intervention of human agency that's involved in the problem. but if you take a step back from that and you look at public health as a situation where communities are in danger and being harmed and there are both preventive ways to address the problem, you can make guns safer the way we did with cars, you can affect people's behaviors, the way they treat, store, and deal with guns, the guns themselves can be made safer, so i think when it comes to public

health people hear the word public health and they think chickenpox. they don't think of cars and guns being public health crises. but if you look at the number of people harmed by diseases that we take steps to prevent to deal with these problems, it is so obvious when you look at the 100,000 people getting shot every year that this is an absolute epidemic. it should be viewed that way because there are so ny things that could be done that would have an impact on those numbers. >> one of the counterveailing arguments to this, i'm curious what your thoughts are on how this is seen at the local level in communities and medical facilities. what are people not seeing about gun violence that goes beyond what we see in the daily drum

be beat of news that people are desensitized to at this point? >> i certainly think that, you know, the reality around the is not always very quantifiable through news reports. the level of trauma that families and communities are constantly having to process and address -- whether they themselves are victimized by gun violence, whether folks in their immediate family have been victimized by gun violence. whether it is a larger communal impact related to trauma. so of course when we see the way these issues are covered in the news, the media, which i think is kind of