treat this person until they are fully awake. we would not say to a person who has just pays that we are not going to help you until you threaten to kill somebody. or until your unconscious from your heart attack. we hold a double standard with mental illness.

>> the bad thing about it is we had the police at our house the night before. we also had the team that was in place here in san berd i & o coaching us and telling us what they had available to us, which was they wouldn't come out to see us because they were staffed with the amount of people needed. they were offering to talk to my son on the other phone to try to talk him out of his psychosis, which is ridiculous. >> wouldn't happen. so the next best thing is they offered to send a police officer to our home. what the police officer did, which was a young layman officer with with no still capable of manipulation answered his question, no. he wouldn't hurt himself or anybody else. six hours later, he woke up with a bat and a knife in his hand

and attempted to kill me in my bed as i slept. host: anthony, first of all, how old is your son caller: he just turned 19. his name is aaron. i talked about him with duncan murphy friend. so, i am pretty sure you are familiar with my story. my son is still in prison now, mr. murphy. he is just now, about a week ago, starting to get medication. now, he is given the medication at inappropriate times. they are not doing blood work in the prison. he is amongst the general public. he weighs about 110 pounds and now he is having to defend himself off of criminals that are there because they dhoez to be there. my son was seen as a victim. we are all victims here, all suffering through this because we try to get an lps conservatorship on him so we can avoid this. we have a history of mental

health in our family, so we are very familiar with this and we have still, to this day, are ashamed of this country that makes it so difficult for us parents that only are the ones that know how bad our kids are. host: anthony, i am going to jump in because i want to thank you very much for sharing your story with us and give the congressman a chance to respond. appreciate it. guest: well, my heart goes to this family. this is a glowing example of what is wrong with crisis of mental illness in our country. in any case, i think it's about 40% of the time a person with a person with mental illness's first encounter is with a policeman. we don't do that with dye beatease. would we try to talk a person with diabetes out of their diabetes, cancer? we recognize the futility of

that. the recognition a person if you ask them with severe mental illness with a propensity towards violence, you ask them if they are going to harm themselves, it's ludicrous because many times a person can keep it together for a moment to go ahead and tell the doctor, no, i am fine. there has been many a case out there where asked in a judicial, are you going to harm yourself or someone else? and they say everything is final. immigrate. and then aside from the judge, they will make a threat again. >> that's not how we should help people with severe mental illness. not all people with severe mental illness are that way but that 1% of 1% who need the kind of help that is available, at times, i believe such persons may have to have someone say, you've got to get them to the hospital. we have to get you into treatment because you are not in a state of mind you can do this. otherwise, we are victims. now, look at this situation his son is involved with in jail. an article from the "new york

times" a couple of months ago talked about prisons in new york and how people with severe mental illness who end up in jail oftentimes are not getting medication, not getting any treatment. they end up in the brutality of the prison system, being assaulted by other inmates. they, themselves, may then assault a prison guard. now, they have bigger charges. then they are put in isolation, terrible situation that makes it even worse. it's no wonder the people with severe mental illness who are in jail tend to serve a sentence of three to four times longer and, in a large extents because we are not treating them. why don't they have services available so there was no victim in this? why didn't we do that? >> the tragedy that goes on america every day. >> to anthony's point, rick lindstrom has a lot of people weighing in. join the conversation, saying what a hell issue life this

caller is describing. let's go to bill in louisville, kentucky. good morning, bill. caller: good morning. first of all, i would like to say thank you to both of you, especially on this issue of mental health/illness. i am veteran. 30 years ago, i served on board the uss carl vinson. i was assaulted on that ship, and i was suffered a concussion, and i had a 4.0 eval prior to this incidents. after this, my mental health capacities continued to drop off. for the past 30 years, i kept this to myself. my wife found some paperwork up in the attic, and she realized what -- my wife of 29 years, she realized now, this could have been a trigger for my ongoing mental health issues throughout the past 29 years we have been married.

i went ahead and contacted the v.a. to see if they could look into this. i wanted to see all of my files, my military records. the v.a. gave me a very difficult time in locating all of these records or even sending them to me. i had to get senator mcconnell involved in this case. he is encourage working with me on this case as well as the social security administration. i just now, after one year of requesting my military records, received all of them. my command had recognized my decline of my mental health issues after the concussion, after the traumatic brain injury. they never brought it to my attention, even though they recommended that i seek psychiatric counseling host: bill, how are you doing today, by the way? caller: i am suffering from major depression. i lost my job of 18 years.

i've got general anxiety disorder and my psychiatrist diagnosed me with ptsd host: do you think the department of veterans affairs have been receptive as far as what your inquiry has been? caller: they have not. i and senator mcconnell's office caught them in several lies. with the paperwork of my request, they didn't receive my request even though i had date and timestamps on my paperwork. i just got out of a meeting with the director of constituent services with the senator. i have had mental health issues ever since that day and, you know, so anyway, they sent me to a neuropsyche exam. it took seven months to get in to the v a a. to get a neuropsyche exam. and she spent two hours with me, and she said that i had a personality disorder.

she never -- the report clearly showed that i was -- that my -- all of my deficits went down after the major concussion. host: bill, i am going to jump in to give the congressman a chance to respond to you, as well. thank you for sharing your story with us. guest: thank you for sharing that and. carl vinson, my other hat, i am am lieutenant commander on the and served on the carl vinson, a great ship and thank you for your service as a shipmate. you are bringing up something very important that we have become better aware of. >> that's the relationship between concussions and brain injury and symptoms of mental illness. the unit i work on at walter reed specializes in tbi, traumatic brain injury and other psychological disturb applications that go with it. what it is telling us, the 45,000 plus veterans of desert storm of iraq and, also,

afghanistan, that those who have concussive head injuries have a higher instance of psychological difficulties. now, with that, many times, they get misdiagnosed as simple psychological problems which, themselves, need to be treated. but when you look at the problems people may have with holding jobs, social relationships, marital quality, et cetera, focus of their attention, it is imports if you look upon those things as relates to concussions and brain injuries. for the v a. to have seven marks before you can be evaluated is wrong. twenty or 30 years ago, the military was not as astute or aware of the relations to concussions as they are now. it is important that people like this get care. but it brings back that point again that when you look at mental illness or severe mental illness, sometimes it comes through without much awareness, a traumatic event or somebody can set it off. sometimes it's related to a head injury. there are some genetic aspects of mental illness, for example,

this past summer, a major study came out that found 180 genetic markers to schizophrenic. there are genetic markers to bi-polar illness. we will discover so much more. but there is a physical components of mental i willnets. it's a brain disease, personality is all in our brain. we will get better and better at this in diagnosing it but sailing someone with mental i wi willness or with a brain illness is fully capable of thinking and understanding everything appropriately is just not solid thinking. so for you and others, i hope you can help with this. it's imports for any veterans for watching to make sure that they are talking with the va, if they are having trouble, talk with their congressmen or senators to make sure they get an extra nudge. it's the vet transa transadministration. we don't have enough qualified psychologists, psychiatrists in the department of defense, in the v.a. or in the external

areas civilian sector who are aware of how to treat mental illness or those of veterans. in child psychiatry alone, there are 7,000. we need 30,000. we need people who specialize in this because when it comes to severe mental illness like schizophrenia, half of those, symptoms appear by age 14. 75 by age 24. if we don't have enough people to treat that, we end up with missed treatment, denied treatment and people deteriorate over time. we have to focus more on treatment. >> congre host: a trained psychologist and co-chair of the house caucus. larry is joining us from fort worth. good morning, as we talk about the sandy hook shootings two years to the day and mental health issues in general. larry, go ahead, please. caller: good morning, c-span. i have a comment i wanted to make. i notice on fox news that every

time every time someone commits these crimes, there is a mental problems but when a black does it, he is a thug. host: we will get a response. congressman murphy? guest: whatever the attribution made by anybody, we have to get to the root cause. the sad thing about minority populations is -- and others may be 10 times more likely well severe mental illness in prisons rather than hospitals t working with eddy bernice johnson of texas and, they understand whether you are white, black, asian, latino, whatever it is, it is wrong to not have care accessible, and, therefore, we send people to jail. once a person committees a crime, they've got to do the time, but in a context of that,

if you have a person has been abusing drugs or self-medicating themselves because they have early signs and systems of schizophrenia, bi-polar, other certain mental illness, we need to get them access to treatment. >> that's the part that is not to rabble no matter what the person's race is. i hope you become a voice for saying let's get access to treatment before tragedy. let's take the colors off of this of someone's race and understand people have a right to get better and a right to access to treatment. host: our last call from ohio, laura, good morning, independent line with congressman tim murphy. caller: good morning. thank you for taking my call. i am an army veteran with ptsd. to the veteran that called, whatever they do, it took me 20s years. don't give up. >> that's what they want you to do. they put you through a lot so that you finally, get so frustrated, you say, i can't take this any more and you give up. then they win. don't give up. keep fighting.

guest: we have -- go ahead. caller: i agree. i feel like not enough is done to focus on early detention and prevention. when you first see the signs, we need medical care provided and available, affordable, which is not to the majority of the u.s. host: thank you for the call, laura. congressman murphy? guest: ashtubula is where i had one of my jobs. when community health centers, it's funding has remained flat and in some cases declined over the years. getting back to the issue is this: when someone with early signs of mental illness is identified by their pediatrician

or family physician or someone else, it's important they are referred quickly to those who can provide care. we know that with such thing as a program called response after initial skits frentic episode which is parts of my bill to helping families with mental health crisis, we can help people get better and i am pleased national institution of mental health worked together on that. we need to make sure federal money is not wasted on programs that don't work. great funds for children with trauma and we want to fund those and the federal funding things like coloring books, showing on the innet, stop that and get to providing services by people who will can make a difference in folks' lives. i want to fight for that. we will introduce our bill in the coming session helping families with mental health crisis the we will make sure the 115 co-sponsors and others will get on board, will continue to fight so people with mental

illness have a right to get better, a right to treatment and that federal dollars on focused on getting the right treatment to people. host: congressman tim murphy is joining us from new york. he is a trained psychologist and is a co-chair of the house mental health caucus adding his voice to the issue on this second anniversary of the shooting at sandy hook elementary school and the issue of mental health in general. congressman murphy, appreciate you being with us here on c-span. guest: thank you. we will continue to provide hope and help for people. host: continue on our facebook./c-span. a lot of you sharing tweets at c-spanwj. we will continues our conversation on this anniversary and the issue of guns and gun violence and gun accessibility here in america. coming up next. first, we want to join mary gilibarky talking about the state issue on mental health, the executive director of the national alliance on mental illness. appreciate you being with us.

guest: thank you for having me. host: congressman murphy was providing a more broad perspective on the federal level. what are states doing? and i guess more importantly, what are states not doing? guest: that is the question. what are they not doing? because in 2013, we saw an immediate response to the tragedy and we had 36 states in d.c. increase their funding for mental health services and then we went back this year to see what happened, we saw a decline. only 29 states and d.c. increase their fundings. that's really concerning to us because $43,000,000,000 were cut out of mental health services from 2009 to 2012. we had nothing but huge cuts. we are not back yet to where we were. we haven't even replaced those dollars. we are really hoping to see more states increase their funding. and we didn't see that. so, it's deeply concerning host: why is this happening? is this an easier place for lawmakers and governors to cut?

guest: i think that's part of it, it's beg at the headline phase, the attention phase as well and i think there is a great deal of bias and discrimination. the congressman was talking about stigma with people with mental illness. we know even though the public tragedies might not be in the headlines, the private ones continue. we take help line calls and our members let us know about all of the time they are spending in emergency rooms, homeless, jails, and prisons. you have heard all of those things and it's really concerning to go us that states have not stepped up here because we know that we can make a difference. we know there are services that really work and yet they are not being funded. host: congressman murphy was talking about state senator credes who own son dealt with mental illness. he attackered his own father and attacked suicide and they earlier tried to get him admitted to a virginia mental health facility. is that indicative of part of the problem that states are facing? guest: absolutely.

virginia is one of the states that did enact reforms last year in response to that tragedy. what we saw in virginia was more funds, $50 million allocated to inpatient and out-patient care, a better registry so that when a hospital bed is available, what happened to the senator was that they couldn't find a bed for his son, and they didn't have a registry that would tell you where a bed was available. and so that's going to be happening in the state. more crisis services, better procedures for how they deal with people who are in need of help. and they also did some work in virginia on at-risk youth, which is important, as you heard, getting in early. so they started to do some programs there. there is much work still to be done in village but they certainly got started there. we would like to see other states take that up. it shouldn't take a tragedy. it's the right thing to do. host: mary giliberti, the director of the national alliance on mental illness. what state is doing the right

thing or things and which states do you think need to do more? guest: i can tell that you wisconsin, for example, they passed 17 pieces of legislation last year on mental health care. the speaker had a bi-partisan task force. some of the things they funded are some perhaps we were talking about that actually work. so, for example, supporting employee. many people well mental illness can work and they need help and there is a program called individualized placement and support that helps them. wisconsin funded that program so it can go statewide. they funded workforce issues. you heard the congressman and others talk about how hard it is to get access to care. we hear all the time, months and months waiting, rural areas in particular can't get care and they passed legislation trying to improve access in rural areas tele mental health, centers for psychiatrists to practice in under-served areas and, then, you know, they also dealt with crisis services as we were talking about. they've got training for police. crisis intervention training.

many times, it's unfortunate but police have become the first responders, and police can be trained so that in those encounters, that he have more positive encounter with the person and they are is able to hopefully take them to mental health care rather than jails and prisons. wisconsin is funding some respite centers where they can avoid hospitals and that state will continue its work in to next year. they are not done. i don't think any state is done. they have -- all states have much, much more work to do. it's an example of a state that has taken a really strong approach to mental health reform and enacted changes in a number of different areas. host: which the state or states are lacking in all of these others? guest: we have in our report the states that have cut funding this year, and we are deeply disappointed to see states cut that funding. you know, i hate to call people out, but, you know, we have

decreased states include alaska, louisiana, michigan, north carolina, rhode island, nebraska nebraska and wyoming. host: more information available on line at nami.org. the director of the national aliejts of mental illness, thank you for adding your voice to the conversation. guest: thank you so much. host: when we come back, the issue of guns and gun violence as we look back at the shooting in connecticut, john lowy will be joining us. sunday morning, december .14th. we are back in a moment.

♪ monday night, on the ethics of harvesting research data. >> a creepy question, a great question, because i think for all of us, as somebody who uses a computer every day, we have certain expectations when we fire up our computers about who sees what we are doing, who we are sharing information with. and at any moment, the expectations i have, any moment that the expectations i have are shifted because i realize that there might be another party who sees what i am doing, say, for example, of a message pops up and asked if i would like some help making a purchase, there are certain lines that we don't know we have crossed them until it's too late. >> that's true for researchers. >> that's true for companies. there isn't a clear sense of what's creepy because that's so culturally specific. one person talking loudly on

their cell phone in a park has no problem with somebody standing next to them on a bench and listening to that conversation. and at the same time, you can have someone who is trying to have a private conversation and they will go to great lengths to be somewhere that's completely secluded. so we are not just dealing with the cultural context. we are dealing with individuals' different preferences and experiences around privacy and their needs for that privacy. >>monts night at 8:00 eastern on the "communicators" on c-span 2. influentialing. washingt"washington journal continues. >> john lowy, for the brady center to prevent gun violence thank you for being with us. guest: my pleasure host: i want to share with you what, as we look back on the second anniversary of the shooting in newtown, connecticut

guest: the background check is a totally utesless crime-fighting tool. we have had 20 million background checks in one year and only a couple of handfuls of convictions result from those background checks. they don't identify criminals because most criminals realize there is going to be that check, and they get their gun some other way. so, it really is an imposition on the american people and the imposition imposed by a government that can't be trusted. they say they get rid of the information after .24 hours. do we really think that the government that listens to every one of our phone calls is not interested in who has a gun? i think they are probably keeping that information in spite of the law. in fact, they have had studies done, longitudinal studies, meaning over a period of time, using the database of the

background check. we have caught them lying on more than .1 occasion. and we don't think it's appropriate for the government to keep that information. we need to have background checks on people working for the government, not the people. host: larry pratt from gun owners of america, the full interview on c-span.org. jonathan lowy, this is part of the debate. your response to what larry pratt said yesterday. guest: that is an extreme minority position, the gun lobby position but .92% of americans support background checks for all gun sales and that's the same percentage, .92%, of gun owners and an overall majority of nra members support it at all. it makes just good sense. the fact is the brady law which requires background checks for gun sales at dealers have stopped about 2.4 million people, dangerous people, felons, domestic abusers, the mental mentally-ill from coming into

gun stories and buying guns and has prevented many more than that, people who just don't go to the door store. the .1 thing i agree with mr. pratt is that background checks is not the only answer. we need to, one, expand background checks, to have background checks take place at gun shows and on the internet because the fact is, .40% of gun sales take place with those other sources. there is more we can do. but every law enforcement officer will also agree with us that it's an effective way to stop gun crime. host: .2 years ago, adam lansa killed his mother and then responsible for the deaths of 20 elementary chin and six school administrate orders and staffers. would a background check have represented him from getting those guns, his family? guest: no. there is more we can do and at brady we believe in a multi-facetted approach to stop gun violence. .1 of thing is legislation, expanding background checks to

all gun sales but for cases like sandy hook, we need to prevent access to guns in the home from kids and other dangerous people and we have the ask campaign and we have recently launched add multi-platform public awareness campaign to strife towards a future where know child is killed with a gun from a relative or from the home. >> sort of thing would have prevented sandy hook tragedy. host: news on this sunday, a headline from the metro section. gary terri mcauliffe who will propose gun curbs in the common wealthy of virginia including the renewal of the state .1 a month limit on handgun purchases and a requirement that buyers at gun shows undergo background checks. will this make a difference? guest: it certainly will. studies have shown that. virginia a couple of years ago

did enact a law to limit hand gun purchases to .1 per month because they saw that gun trafficers were coming to virginia, loading up with guns, and then usually heading up north to new york and illinois and other places with stronger gun laws and selling guns on the streets. when virginia enacted this .1 handgun a month law, studies showed that the flow of crime guns from virginia dropped considerably and unfortunately, virg then repealed the law. it's an effective crime-fighting measure. california has had it as well. it's been effective there. host: as larry pointed out in our interview yesterday, these individuals if they want a gun, they are going to figure out a way to get .1. guest: that's an argument to not have laws in general. what you need to do is create as many i am pedime you impediment

possible. it's beg proven these laws, whether it's anti-gun trafficking laws or background checks make it harder for criminals to get guns, and it reduces crime. california is a great example that has very progressive, effective gun laws and they are their violence rate, their gun violence rate has dropped considerably. host: our guest is jonathan lowy. our phone lines are open. host: what isn't being done that needs to be done? guest: as i have said: we have to expand background checks to all gun sales. it will really makes no sense that a convicted felon, who we all recognize should not be able to buy a gun and prevented from buying a gun from a gun store can simply go across the street to a gun show or go online to .1 of these gun-selling websites and buy all of the guns he wants, no questions asked, no

background check. >> should be our top priority. we also need to crack down opinion bad-apple gun dealers. most gun dealers are responsible busy people. but .5% of gun dealers sell virtually all crime guns, .90s % of the crime guns. we need to make them held accountable and change the way they do business. we also need to create public awareness about the risks of guns in the home to prevent children and other dangerous people like sandy hook shooter from getting access to those guns. host: a recent research by pew shows how things have involved. among those surveyed, 52% saying it's more important to protect the right of americans to own guns, 46% saying it's more important to control gun ownership so this is a pretty significant shift in public opinion. guest: i don't think it's very surprising.

2.008, the supreme court for the first time recognized that there is a constitutional right under the second amendment for law abiding citizens to have a gun in the home for self defense. it's not surprising to me at all after that decision, more americans are concerned with protecting this right, which hadn't been recognized by the supreme court before then. the fact remains that when people are polled on specific policy proposals such as do you support universal background checks in gun sales, you see over .90% approval rate, and that includes many of these people who think it's importano important to protect gun rights. we they see those policies keep criminals from getting guns but does not infringe on non-law abiding citizens host: robert from wheatfield, indiana, thank you for waiting. robert, are you with us? caller: hello.

host: good morning. caller: yes. good morning. i just like to say, i don't know where this guy gets his information from because if you buy a gun and you are not a resident of that state, that gun has to be transferred to a gun shop within your state of residence before you can take possession of it. host: is he correct? guest: well, what i am talking about is sales through private sellers. federal law allows private sellers, people who are not licensed to sell guns to sell guns. and if you go on armslist.com, for example, you can find a private seller who, in all likelihood, will sell you a gun, no i.d., no questions asked. you can do the same thing at many gun shows. >> that's the problem. the problem is not the law regulating licensed gun sellers. it's these, this vast private

seller loophole. host: from joe, can you point to .1 website where you can buy all the guns you want without a background check? guest: i did. armslist.com. armslist, to be clear, what they do is they enlable people to post, private sellers to post ads with guns for sale. it's like a craiglist sort of thing and you can buy guns no questions asked. exactly. and that happens. host: you can get more information on the brady campaign by logging on to bradycampaign.org. next is dennisf from hot springs, south dakota. good morning. caller: good morning. my question, i was charged with a non-violent felon, but i cannot buy a gun at a licensed dealer, but i can own a gun. if i was convicted, then i

wouldn't even be able to own .1. host: what was the felony, non-violent felony you were charged with? caller: a dwi. host: we will get a response. guest: there are restoration of rights provisions that deal with cases like dennis's, but the real problem, which everyone agrees with, is that dangerous felons, domestic violence abusers, mentally disturbed people like the sandy hook shooter should not have guns and should make it harder for them to get guns. we can do that through sort of policy proposals that the brady center and the brady campaign put forward that i have discussed here today. host: from la port indiana, good morning, with john lowy with the brady campaign. caller: thank you for taking my call. i think the issue here we are not addressing the fact that

education. everybody talks about education. legal almost every aspect in life. but when it comes to this particular issue, they don't want to educate the public and the children at the schools about gun safety, and they don't do it to any extent that makes any difference. and they don't want to educate the public because when the public understands what the true meaning of the second amendment is and how people utilize firearms for safety and sporting purposes and what not, their perspective completely changes and they come very pro-second limit. that's why i believe a lot of these organizations have to go around the bang door to get these laws past. i think it's completely unfair. let's educate the people. let's tell them what the truth is. let's keep like we did 50, isn't, 80 years ago, educate the people and let the truth come out about these issues. thank you very much. host: thank you, randy. guest: universal background checks are completely consistent with the second amendment.

every court that has looked at that has agreed. the second amendment is completely consistent with assault weapon bans and other laws. every law that has been enacted since sandy hook, and there have been at least five important state laws that were enacted to make it more difficult for dangerous people to get guns and get weapons of war has been upheld by the courts as consistent with the second amendment. speaking of getting information out, one of -- i agree with randy's point. it's very important to prevent the gun lobby from restricting the flow of information. .1 thing that the gun lobby has done is created riders on atf appropriations budgets to appropriate atf informing the american public of the flow of guns from the criminal gun dealers. it's an outrageous exception to the freedom of information act.

i would hope randy would agree we thshould get the information out and light people see who are supplying the guns on our streets. is it coming from a few bad apples? host: donna from institute, west virginia. good morning. caller: good morning. it is my understanding that when i read the second amendment, it says you have the right to bear arms. but it also says that in time of militia and defense of your state. for me, americans not 100% and including the nra have a misunderstanding of what that means. now, if the supreme court is going to back the idea that you have a right to bear arms, period, okay? you can't put a stipulation on who or who can not have that gun. and you can't make state by state laws on whether you can have that gun in your possession or not because it says you have that right that the courts

understand. host: donna, thank you. guest: when the supreme court recognized that there is a second amendment right, and this was in the heller decision, justice scalia, .1 of the more conservative members of the court wrote the majority opinion and joseph scalia made clear that that still means that reasonable regulations remain constitutional. and that right exists for law-a3w50iding, responsible people, but not for felons and dangerous individuals. host: randy from fredericksburg, virginia, welcome to the conversation. caller: good morning. i think that the nra stands against background checks is basically because they think that once they let them do that, then it's going to lead to even more restrictions down the road. and i would like for you to

comment on that. host: thank you. guest: well. >> i disagree with you, randy. and i think that that's what the nra will say. the fact is, if you look at any of the position of the nra or any of the other lobby groups on the gun side, you will see that there is .1 motivation, and that's to sell more guns and increase more profit. they are speaking for a billion dollar gun industry, and that's simply what they are trying to do, profit is the profit when nancy lanza buys guns, that's profit. it really doesn't matter where the profits come from. i am very sad to say. but that's the truth. the fact is that the supreme court has now made clear that there is the second amendment right. so there can't be the slippery slope to some total gun confiscation by the government. the second amendment, as construed by the court would not

allow it. so that's no longer a really valid argument even though the nra likes to make it. host: i want you to respond to numbers. .2 years after the shooting in newtown, connecticut, there have been 95 school shootings. forty-nine have taken place in k through 12 schools. and this is in 33 states across the nation, 45 deaths. >> it's hor inhorrific that our congress allows this sort of blood shed to take place without seriously responding to it. this is totally out of whack with every other industrialized nation. the fact is americans are not more violent. we are not more criminal. we are not more mentally disturbed than the people of other nations. in fact, in some cases, we are less so. but the fact is, we have this huge problem of gun violence because of easy access to guns. the important point about the school shootings, we issued a study recently which showed that

about .70% of school shootings take place using a gun that came from the home or from the shooters' relatives family. and so that's a serious problem, and that's why we have launched this public awareness campaign to get people to store the guns more safely and if they have gun people or other people at risk in the home to take greater care to present them from having access be to guns. host: if you are listen okay c-span radio, we are talking about gun violence on the second anniversary of the shooting in newtown, connecticut. yesterday, we heard from larry pratt from the gun owners of america. today, from the brady campaign mark is joining us from twin falls, idaho. good morning. caller: good morning. i wish people would quit citing

the sandyhook since they hadh talk about gun violence that could never be presented. how much do you make, sir, in your job? host: you know guest: i tell you .1 thing, i make a lot less than the million dollar plus that wayne la pierre makes for leading the nra. i will leave it at that, a small fraction of that amount. i do think, mark, you have a good point, which is that not all shootings are presentable, whether the sandy hook shooting could have been, we can debate that. but there are certainly some that you are right. >> should not be caused for us to throw up our hands about the many, many shootings that are preventable. some of these are preventable if guns are locked up more safely in the home. others are preventable if we had background checks to prevent

some from getting guns on gun shows and online. others are presentliable if we make sure that bad apple gun dealers act responsibley or shut down so that the gun dealers selling guns are all acting responsibly. so those are proven ways that will we can stop a substantial number of shootings in this country. host: bill from louisville, kentucky. republican line. good morning. caller: good morning, this is billy begun. i was on your program earlier with representative murphy. but what i wanted to do was say something to mr. lowy. you know, i agree with you. i used to have a different view on guns years ago. i kind of have a different view now. and it kind of aligns with yours as well as justice scalia and he was a constitutional textualist.

if he sees that we should have some type of restrictions, then, you know, based upon my past knowledge and my mental illness, i damn sure wouldn't want myself to have a gun. host: host: this question: what legislation do you want? guestuest: whatever referred t before, number .1 is certainly universal background checks. a felon or domestic abuser or someone who is dangerously mentally ill should not be able to buy a good from anyone without a background check to see if they are prohibited. and again, 92% of americans including 9 go % of gun owners support that under current law, about .40% of gun sales take place without background check.

host: earnest, dallas, texas. caller: i absolutely agreed with mr. lowy .100%. background checks are absolutely, we have to do them. you know, a lot of people go and get guns due to anger and different things of this nature. and their response is to get back at somebody and they leapfrog the legal process, calling the police allege they need to stop taking kids to hunts with guns. they say i don't have to take this. i have a gun. i know how to shoot it. these guys picked on me. i will get even. that's just humannate. in order to control all of this, just as he said, we need to do background checks, take better measures to make sure the guns are locked up safe and that the children actually know that, you know, these guns will kill and you better not bother them, you know, because you are not old

enough, first of all, and you are not responsible enough. so, i hope they pass measures that will do background checks and screenings. i hope they will stop selling guns at gun shows without taking at least .5 days to make sure because they have a backlog and what happens is they get pressure on them to release the information until they can make the sale because these people pay a lot of taxes off of the sales. i think three days is not enough. i think it should go five or 7 business days to make sure everything is right because every life is precious. nguyen once it happens, it's too late. host: earnest thanks for the call. guest: very briefly, there is probably no greater example of the dysfunction in our political system than the gun issue. i mean it is hard to find .92% of americans who agree on anything. certainly no public policy i can think of, and yet you have that sort of almost universal agreement that we need to have

background checks as earnest says for gun sales and yet congress has failed to pass that sort of legislation. host: gleeing you can't get a job without a background check. why should you be able to get a deadly weapon without .1? guest: exactly. it's common sense. the nra, gun owners of america, represents a tiny minority it's happy to take the profits from gun sells from felons and dangerous people they are able to do with this loophole in the law. host: larry pratt joined united states yesterday. you can watch that interview and his perspective on our website at c-span.org and since newtown, there is an organization called everytown.org which has taken a closer look at school shootings .2 years after the newtown shooting. as we said, there have been 95 this is a map of where they have taken place in 33 states around the country.

>> website is everytown.org. bill from ohio, good morning. caller: good morning. this discussion has been very interesting. i have picked up on numerous things i could touch on. but just briefly, number 1, in the -- everywhere in the united states it is illegal to sell a firearm without a background check except in private person, face-to-face transactions. if you go on armslist on the internet and find somebody who has a gun, unless they are somebody in your state that you will meet face to face, a private citizen, not a gun dealer, you have to get a background check. host: is he correct? guest: well, what armslist does -- and let me give you an example.

there was a mass shooting in wisconsin at the azana spa and there was a man prohibited from buying guns because of a domestic violence restraining order. he knew he was prohibited from buying guns. he went on armslist and posted and said, need a gun very quickly or something like that. he got in touch with a private seller and he bought a gun without a background check. no questions asked. >> that's the whole business model of armslist is to enable exactly those sorts of no-check sales. under current law, it is almost impossible for law enforcement to crack down on that sort of thing. that is the problem. again, if we want to prevent that sort of transaction from taking plates, we need to require background checks for all gun sales. host: let's go to joe, richm d richmond, virginia, good morning koul koul good morning, mr

mr. lowy. how are you this morning? guest: i am fine. caller: my comment is that it seems to me when you use the term "crime gun" that takes the responsibility away from the criminal and puts it on to the gun. guest: that's -- if that's the way you are reading my comments, that's completely inaccurate. .1 of the things i do, in fact, is represent victims of gun violence, victims of, for example, the aurora movie theatre shooting a, and nobody feels more strongly about the responsibility about the sheeter. in that the case, the shofamily lost their daughter and many clients, many law enforcement officers have been shot dead by criminals. we believe tremendously that the shooter is responsible. however, we cannot make it harder for dangerous people,

criminals and others, to get guns and that's what we need to do. so everyone has some responsi e responsibility for their actions. everyone in our society should behave reasonably to prevent crimes in whatever way thing. if you are selling guns, you should do so in a responsible manner which most gun sellers do. unfortunately, there are a small group of bad apples and they supply virtually all crime guns. host: the. host: conversely, there is a point of view that says my guns are not for killing people but stopping criminal act orders. guest: assuming, as i will assume, that listener is legitimate and law-abiding, they have a constitutional right to do exactly that, have their guns in their home to protect their fami family. >> that's completely consistent with background checks, cracking down on bad-apple gun dealers

and locking up guns to prevent access by kids and other da dangerous people or people who shouldn't have access to guns. host: mike, good morning. akron, ohio, you are next. caller: good morning. thanks for c-span. i want to let you know, what you ought to do, one thing you should do is to explain the history of the nra. people who debunk that don't know their history. william c. church in 1971 and wyngate. the first was ambrose burnside. these were proud to be pro-union. they put their lives on the life for the union during the civil war. somebody from the nra to say i am proud to be pro-union. the founders were willing to put their lives on the line for the union. 1938, carl frederick praised congress for the gun control act.

i have never believed the general practice of carrying weapons in the public. in 1.971, a man named william leob, editor of the manchester un yun newspaper in new hampshire referred to treasury agents as gestapos for killing a nar member. host: we are short on time and we have an open invitation for wayne la bierre to come on this program any time to talk about the nra but to the caller's point, your response? guest: the nra has changed a l lot. a lot of good, decent gun owners who maybe grew up with nra gun safety training and have that sort of image of the nra they feel disconnected.

going back george h.w. bush resigned from the nra because of their extremist comments. he was no -- he was a goodman but no great liberal on gun issues. the nra really has gone too far. they have had this desperate position to fight for profits for the gun lobby, which disconnects from what law-abiding gun owners want, and in some case, the nra takes positions that hurt gun owners. they fought for a bill which protected and protects negligent gun sellers and manufacturers and inhibits safer guns from being made. these are policies that would help law abiding gun owners and their families make their products more safe. host: where does your funding come from? how does the brady center

operate? guest: from listeners, from mostly small contributions from people who believe strongly that we need to do more to keep guns out of the wrong hands and are generous enough to donate to us. host: the website is bradycampaign.org. thank you for joining us. guest: my pleasure host: we will continue the conversation at 7:00 a.m. tomorrow morning on "washington journal." a closer look at the look that the cia report has and the u.s. in general outside the u.s. scott pattison will join us to look at state spending around the country and your money segment, garrett graff of politico to look at border patrol operations around the country. 7:00 a.m. eastern time. 4:00 o'clock for you on the west

coast. hope you enjoy the rest of your weekend. have a great weekend. ...

>> welcome to "newsmakers." lots of discussion in town and around the country of the tactics employed. we are very pleased to welcome our guest, john yoo. he joined the bush administration. thank you for joining us from berkeley, where your teaching now. let me introduce you chart to reporters. eric lichtblou works for the new york times. he is also written two books that deal with the cia, the most recent "the nazis next-door." next