are not yet impacted in a very serious way, but you do have measurable loss of cognition. now, in many people who have mild cognitive impairment, that is a step before dementia sets in, and dementia is when you begin to have this functional impairment as well. not everybody. some people who have mild cognitive impairment stay in that stage and do not progress to dementia, and some people in fact who have mild cognitive impairment will revert back to having normal cognition. so just because a person has mild cognitive impairment does not mean they will develop dementia. but everyone who develops dementia had mild cognitive impairment first. we think of it as a step along the way to dementia, and if you can identify people during that mild undated impairment stage rather than waiting until full-blown dementia, there are tremendous benefits to the individual, to their family, and also cost, in terms of what we

saw in the model that we reported on just this week. host: victoria in indianapolis -- >> i will be your moderator tonight. i am from reuters. it is great to have so many of you. it is a friday evening. usually, it is hard to get people out, that we are on the eve on what promises to be a historic data ring with the march for change tomorrow. -- weod news is that even are really filling it up -- i'm glad -- but we also have folks on reuters platforms watching us live. we are on c-span as well. hello, america. whether you are a democrat or republican or other, i think we can all agree it is pretty heartening to see so many young people engaging in civic discourse like this. [applause] cox: is the biggest threat

is apathy, then the kids of marjory stoneman douglas high are giving me hope, and i hope you, too. this whole generation -- i ran to a column a few years ago where i called them generation lockdown. we have seen variations of that. i have children who are 17 and 20 as well, and i have never been through a lockdown drill. it should be a requirement for american citizenship today that we go to that. to get everybody together and focus on yet another horrific tragedy to get us here, the killing of 14 students and three teachers last month is just the latest mass strategy coming way too soon after so many others. names, las the vegas, sutherland springs, orlando, san bernard t, sandy hook, which is in my hometown of newtown, connecticut. that is aside from the daily occurrences in far too many of

our cities that go unnoticed, unreported, and the dairy 20,000 suicides i guns in the country -- by guns in the country. we have had this conversation at reuters a few times. ther orlando week brought governor from orlando, a few victims come and we had this conversation. sadly, we are still having a conversation. i'm excited about the panel because we can focus on the solutions and we can focus from the legislative actions that can be taken, and we can go beyond that look at other things, attitudinal, cultural change, which is important to the conversation. we had a robust conversation internally at reuters because we're trying to be objective, and we thought, how do we make sure we have bouts? -- balance? there are not sides. children are coming out and want

the right to be in their schools without the threat of murder. i think we can all agree that that is wrong, so i do not think is notfalse equivalency what we are after. i want to challenge our panelists tonight to talk about the gun violence prevention movement. how thiso talk about movement can do better, how people can get involved, and how we can go from a state of what we seen over the past few years in particular, and for decades in our cities, how we can go to a more peaceful, less violent america. i will not introduce folks, but i will start with senator blumenthal. you have to go up and represent tonight, which i thank you for come as a connecticut guy. i would love for you to give us a scene setter. floorew from the senate

-- why is it different this time? senator blumenthal: great question, and first, thank you, and thanks to reuters. thank you to all of the folks who are up here for not only been here tonight, but also making possible this amazing national event, international event that we are going to see tomorrow. newtown actionable clients. about thisremarkable social movement is that grassroots effort, and that is what is different, because ultimately, we are political animals in the united states senate. if it is powerful in our state, it is powerful to us.

and what we are seeing unfolding in real time right before our eyes is a social movement, just like civil rights, antiwar, women's health. today, and igroup began deciding that list, and i was about to say we have lived through these movements, and i realized i would sound agent to this group of young people who are living through their own movement for the first time. and a it is so exciting to see these young people who have come here from parkland. they will come from all over the country, and that has been made possible because of the hard work of these organizations. so thank you so much to all of you.

it looks and feels very among even my republican colleagues because of grassrootsrants -- growing power, and because, second, there are laws that we know that work in states like connecticut. we lived through sandy hook, which was an unspeakable, unimaginable horror. i was there that afternoon. i was there at the church that night when people were still in shock and grief. and i remember saying to one of , you know, when you are ready, i would like to talk to you about what we can do. , and through at me , she said, i am ready

now. that is the kind of courage and strength that we have seen from survivors and loved ones. and they have come forward in a way that also has changed the dynamic. is growing in awareness and outrage. be -- perland could arkland could be a turning point, a historic moment, but we need to see all these historic moments in the context of a continuum. >> you mentioned your republican colleagues see the power of these kids have. does that mean that something can be a compost without shifting it from a ruling party,

the republican party, to the democratic party? isn't that the movement can in change without it being a partisan affair? senator blumenthal: i think it can be bipartisan. though i just introduced with senator graham for red flag statutes at the federal level, much has been done in connecticut. connecticut, we have some of the strongest gun laws in the country, including a ban on assault weapons, universal background checks, and this kind of red flag statute. they were all done in a bipartisan way. but giving law enforcement the power to get warrants or court orders to prevent people who are dangers to themselves -- look at nikolas cruz -- and florida enacted a statute afterward, those who are dangerous to themselves in a crisis to prevent them from having weapons of war is a measure that has

attracted bipartisan support, including senator graham and others will be joining us. i think it can be partisan, the point is we know from connecticut and other states these laws work. so that is the other reason that i think things are different. to get itou also have passed the president, unless you have a view to have improved majority. how is that going to go? senator blumenthal: this may be the most important point i can make tonight, and that i made to the students -- it is not about one march. it is not about demonstrations, no matter how many of them there. i am hopeful we will get more done. bill, which i nix tell you i supported it. more information in the background checks system. they are already quite to give it, so we are going to throw more money at them to provide

more incentives. modest step. i think it is a baby step. it is a minimal step. but doing more i think is possible in late spring after the series of demonstrations. but most important i will tell you, i think it will come down to elections, when people say, how are you going to get it done? one word -- election. these young people have to register, vote, get others to vote, and they have to be as single-minded as the nra and the gun lobby is. mr. cox: but that is difficult. these are 17-year-olds, 18-year-olds. i got one at home, and keeping them focused on something is a lot of work. but ikids are amazing, threw this to the panel, how do you keep this momentum or keep them focused when they got to

choose college, they are going to meet the room and, they got to go to a party -- they have to do the normal things that one does in life. senator blumenthal: and i said to them exactly that -- you're going to be getting out of school for the summer, you're going to be going off to college. next year all kinds of things are going to be happening in your lives. and democracy is difficult. it is not a spectator sport. often, it is a contact sport. i know from personal experience. and you have to work at it. it is not just speechmaking. it is changing reality, not just rhetoric. is to get to your point, it a marathon, not a sprint, and we may have to look at 2020 as well as 2018. but what i love to tell people -- and you will appreciate this -- the president was almost assassinated by a bullet fired

by a would-be assassin, and jim brady was disabled for life. getl, it took 10 years to that done, to get the brady bill done. we can do it if we have the persistence and perseverance. and if we do the organizing and the hard work that democracy requires. was --: 440 years, there for 40 years, there was this brady bill, but when i look at the last 40 years of legislation related to guns, it is almost entirely about loosening rules rather than strengthening them. which makes me ask the question, where have you guys been? where is the gun violence prevention movement over the past 40 years? it feels like a boiled frog problem -- senator blumenthal: i have a different perspective, because i

started in this in the early 1990's. in fact, brady was one of the only, if not the only, organization around. and we worked with the brady campaign at that point to pass an assault weapons ban in connecticut, well before sandy hook. i advocated it, helped to write it, and then i tried the case in richfield county and then argued it in the state's supreme court. i think we have come a long way. i think we are in the midst of a new phase to an ongoing movement. progressnly made in connecticut. there has been progress in other states as well. expired.ad -- which arc ofhink in the long

history, as martin luther king said, the arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice, but we are making progress. what makes it so heartening is young people coming to the streets. we need to sustain that energy. they need to register, not just march. they need to vote, not just speak. key. think that is the i think there are always reasons to be disheartened, but i am excited about this march. mr. cox: before you go back to connecticut -- senator blumenthal: i apologize. i have to hit the train to get back. mr. cox: a variation on my other question, how do you make sure this is not just seen as a liberal or democrat issue? youuse in these discussions have come if very easily becomes a left-right problem rather than

-- if we called gun violence, 30,000 people a year, if we called it locks air syndrome -- lapierre syndrome. like the opioid crisis, it would be bipartisan. senator blumenthal: is a great question, and i will have my staff stay for the rest of the panel because they have a better answer than i do. but i will tell you that washington, d.c., is the only place where this issue is seen as partisan. i should not say washington, that the vast majority of american people are for these measures. let's face it. a small group, a lobby, the nra, the gun lightly, as a vice grip on congress. that is the result of very artificial circumstances that are anti-democratic.

90%-plus of the american people can give you very specifics. gun owners, nra members and a growing number -- look at what the private enterprise, citigroup, they get it. people are going to vote with their wallets. if you want to know which way the wind is blowing in this country, look at the folks who depend on customers voting with their feet and their wallet. question, this is not a partisan issue in communities, in neighborhoods, where people know no one is immune, no one gets a pass from gun violence. they are a day -- different races, religions, communities. it is not like they are republican guns and democratic guns. state boundaries and they cross political party lines as well.

mr. cox: thank you very much. senator blumenthal: i apologize to everyone, and especially my fellow panelists. thank you. [applause] mr. cox: so thanks. we can dig into some of the spirit -- some of this. ?ow do you think gabby giffordser was shot in tucson. in the seven years it has been, how does this feel different from back then? >> it was not after tucson that we started this. it was afternoon 10. when you think about the modern history of gun prevention, it exists only over the past five years. i worked for gabby when she got d.c., ander office in the strong emotional currents that were running in the aftermath of that, you can imagine what a tragic situation it was written i was sitting in

opont of my deskt computer, and i was shocked with what i learned. over 30,000 people a year die from guns. i have no idea. i was somebody who was a public policy professional. i worked in congress for about a decade. gabby was injured. she had to recover, plan her new life, moved to tucson, and it was not until after newt own that we all said enough, and we helped start this movement. so what is different? this time it is something about it is kids, i am a new father, and it feels different to me as payrent today than it did

attention to shootings like this over the past two years. it has added to the facts. like whatootings happened with gabby giffords, what happened in newtown, these seem to have come with greater frequency, that cities have been undergoing gun violence for decades. >> that is what i was going to say. i disagree with peter as when the gun violence movement started. national level, it received traction over the last five years is oftentimes the victims were caucasian. on the local level, before every town, it was mayor's against illegal guns. look at thehen you vast majority of gun violence and how it has impacted communities, i started this work when i was 15 when my brother was shot in philadelphia. there was a moment of clarity recognizing that while oftentimes these things seem

normal, we can still make change. much change has happened over the last two years on the local level because of the political will being there. what is different about this moment, one, the fact that we have victims who have received, because of their privilege, have received a national platform because they are white. what is different if these people have been very intentional about intersection analogy. they have met with children in chicago, young people across the nation to think about how this file and -- violence impacts not just parkland, but also everybody else. i have hope about that because they have used their privilege to create space and opportunity for other people. [applause] i need to understand this problem better. out, this iseached happening all over the place. i wouldnot happen --

like to think it does not matter what race, 20 children killed in a school are here we would all have that reaction. i believe that in my heart. withu think working the parkland students, is it collaborative or is it seen -- isworry is it becomes no one looking here and we get into these internal -- >> there should be a conversation around we need to see all human deaths as a problem. we need to care about everyone as they die as a problem. there's something to be said about america creating a culture of violence where people feel the need to pick up a gun and kill someone. but i have seen from the people i have worked from parkland and newtown, they get it. if you talk with them, they understand they are privileged. they get where the intersection

oality is, and they have done what they're parents have not done, which is being inclusive and holding their elected officials to the same inclusivity. i am from a privileged committee, but you need to worry about what is happening to kids in chicago and any place people are dying prematurely. mr. cox: shannon, when you action, the idea of moms going out and making a movement was a very big, powerful statement. now you have moms and their kids. how do you diagnose the movement, the sort of energy and where you think it can go? opinion, these kids, throughout country

have grown up being afraid of gun violence, having lockdown drills, having deaths in their community. we have acted like these are natural disasters. able to son who will be vote before the midterms, and i think they are angry. they realize that they have been sold a bill of goods, that the adults who are supposed to protect them, elected officials have not been doing that. inhink that is fueling this part, but i want to be clear this is every generation's burden. we do not put this on a few teenagers and say you handle this, you tackle this. every generation -- we need baby boomers to get off the sidelines. and everyneration x generation to care about this. for not getting off the sidelines until sandy hook and not realizing that 96 americans are shot and killed in

this country every day, whether homicide or suicide. this is a crisis. chris, brady is the -- you have been at this now since press secretary brady was shot, and it took 10 years to get to some legislative action. can we get a little nerdy on what is going on? the senator mentioned a couple of these small steps that were included in the omnibus bill. how do you look at them? and what do you see as legislatively possible within a few years or with quite a few things that will need to happen? and how do you explain it in a way that is not i am taking your guns away, because to get more people over the finish line, you need to answer that question. that is a lot. >> at his a lot, and i appreciate the question. i will say the brady bill was

signed into law in 1994, and that took six years and seven votes. us who areink any of involved in this movement think that change can happen overnight. what is so inspiring is actually saidg -- and shannon this so well -- the activity and whataking place that seems to be sparking nationwide, and it is just beyond the high school kids in the college kids and the way that they are so intentionally being intersectional about this is crucial. for me, sitting and watching all this happening and interacting with the students, i know 96 people a day on average are dying from gun violence. and for many kids and many families, the most dangerous part of their day is walking down the street. so we cannot just react as a nation to the horror of a mass shooting.

we have to look at this conclusively and understand the solutions need to address all gun violence, because every life needs to be saved that can be safe. i think it is a compass policy solution. it is not a silver bullet. sorry for the bad analogy. it is multifaceted, and for us at brady, we want to ensure that the apps that have arisen since 1994 before the internet was a thing, for there were gun shows proliferating across this country, those apps need to be closed. it is unconscionable that one in five gun sold today is sold without a background check. mr. cox: the bill which was five, six votes short in the senate in 2013, and we invited oath mansion and to me to speak toomey to speak to us. is that the next legislative priority for the group?

>> yes, to revisit that. that is legislation here everybody is supporting that has a growing base of cosponsorship. that is important. we have the trust of loophole that allows a sale of a gun to proceed even when a background check has not come back. if 72 hours has passed, they can sell that gun. was ableow dylann roof to obtain a gun. there are a myriad of loopholes that have come up under law and need to be fixed. and all of the solutions are pending in congress right now. holdssue is whether we can the elected officials for not voting on them, not bringing them up, and educate this days of voters that is coming into the fold about where the candidates stand at the midterms.

and i think we can do that as a movement, and i think he had very energized and inspired people who will bring along not just their peers, but their mothers, their grandmothers, their grandfathers, their fathers. grandfathers, fathers, and i see this as a turning point because so many americans looked at sandy hook and said this is so tragic and i cannot believe this bill did not pass. those were great schoolers. they did not have the same capability to rise up and speak. mr. cox: some of the senators that voted against that were democrats in touch states like south dakota. montana. my point,ere i get to how do you make sure this is not perceived as some sort of democrat versus republican issue? how do you do that? >> i just came from a brady

event where it was a conversation with hundreds of young people from all over the country. marking tomorrow. resultsing that this will not just be legislative. it would be nice to have a bill to prevent gun violence but it is a coulter shift. -- culture shift. conversations about why we value guns over human life. and what does it mean when individuals can have a gun but not a book. it is structured about how we have serious conversations and one of the organizations is the life care -- camp. the leader looks at gun violence holistically, policy and advocacy, and about the intersection now the between not just communities, but issues, whether criminality -- recognizing that all of this plays a role in what our

communities are somehow more violent than anywhere else in the world. yes, policy happens in the real shift with sitting down with individuals who own guns and sell guns, many of them believed in gun checks and all of these policies. wascox: gabby giffords working with veterans and law enforcement. what have you learned from that? >> there are a number of credible people who can speak to various constituencies about guns. , we haveundamentally moved past the debate about mansion to me -- joe hin-toomey.my -- manc people are not getting second these arcane debates about the universe over which we require a background check. but why are the adults and

politicians not keeping us safe? if we will make progress, we -- these are what these kids are teaching us, we spent too much time talking about policy solution and not enough time about the moral question. that is what the kids are able to do. 2018, when we have a congress that does not take action, we need to elect one that will and what will inspire people to vote in a congress that does not happen to be democratic but has a mandate for reform on gun safety. it will be because kids, they convince their parents to buy serial, they can convince -- cereak they can convince -- cereal, they can convince their parents to vote on this. 2018 then go down in history as

the year america said, we have had enough. mr. cox: before parkland, in the group, there were divisions about -- differences about assault weapons bans, when sandy hook happened and people in the community said, let's not push for an assault weapons ban in hartford, let's do this because this is what is politically feasible. saying, they do not want that b.s. >> asked for it all and it is their right to do so. interesting about the young people, they do not affiliate with a political party. at the verying, basis of the conversation of why can't you keep me safe when i'm walking down the street and in my classroom? when we get to the heart of the question, even if we feasibly do not think these things are possible, we will make it happen

if it makes our community safer. it is so scary when you talk to your people who do not think they will make it to 21 or 25. are we putting our young people to -- they could be shot in the movie theater. not on a military base or at work, yet we have created an environment where it feels like it is. mr. cox: business is involved. this is what is fascinating. the history of social movements or civil rights movements, think of gandhi, dr. king, always an economic embargo or component. there always has been. there may be a few discounts to nra members, but how do you diagnose this engagement that businesses have in the issue over the past month? >> social media. >> when we first started, we

were mainly women. we realized that there were two very important members we could poll, we only hold 70% of the 500,000 elected positions in this country. -- 17% of thee 500,000 elected positions in the country. we make 80% of the spending decisions. three months and, when we were small, we went after starbucks because they were not only allowing but enabling open carry. people were buying lattes with ar-15's. we could not do a boycott because we were so small. months, by making images go viral of people open carrying at starbucks and having skipped starbucks saturday, putting pressure on the company, their ceo said no more guns in our store at all. not just open carry. parkland, we saw that

companies were voluntarily and quickly distancing themselves from the nra, not just discounts but we got companies to raise the age limit you could buy a long gun from 18 to 21 that is the cultural change. . culturalu change the so that things are not acceptable begun lobby is fighting for. mr. cox: is it because they look out and say, the cohort, the young people are my customers for the next 30 years. i want to be on the right side. or was it pressure? >> it is reputation. down $100 million. it is not a big leap for the exporting guns to say they are not going to sell -- dick's do not sell because they are not making money. >> a lot of them decide where they will shop and purchase

their money based on the company's values. it ishis generation, ingrained with who we are and where we purchase and what we support based on what they support and how much they value our lives. >> i agree. it is the combination. there is pressure but all corporations are profit-seeking interests. they understand that these are folks who have spending power and increasing spending power over time. they understand that they research and get to know the companies they do business with. as a on us, i say this mother of a 16-year-old and 14-year-old, i know they research these things much more closely than i do. >> you did not have google back then. [laughter] >> ceos understand that and that is why citibank, blackrock, coming around to say, i think that we can use our economic pressure to do what congress may not do as quickly. i applaud that.

mr. cox: you mentioned blackrock. larry think, the chairman and chief executive, said that all companies they invest in, they will have to explain their social method. not just that they make a return or our investment. after parkland, with pressure this, theytten about have come up with a list of questions they are giving to three publicly traded firearms manufacturers because they own them through an index fund. they are not divested. it is not clear what they will do. how are you engaged with blackrock? vanguard, state street? a lot of money that people may have invested in guns manufacturers through their 401(k). how do you make that movement part of what you are trying to

do? >> we have had discussions with blackrock and state street, all of the financial services industries. ultimately, engagement works. they have a huge amount of pressure they can go with based on what they emphasize. some of this is education of some of these institutions about what they can do to actually make this pressure happened and how they can engage. we have spent a lot of time talking to them about the kinds of things happening, what manufacturers may be able to do differently to actually exert a little bit more pressure around the marketplace. 5% of gun dealers in this country are responsible for the sale of 90% of crime guns. that does not happen by happenstance. there are many slacked standards that occurs. mr. cox: the bad apples. >> that we call bad apples, yes. the financial services industry

can have a big role in that by putting economic pressure around the types of practices that manufactures should engage in. i think it is not just the boycott side of things, although i support that. it is engagement to try to get the standards that all of us would support. mr. cox: do you get a sense the conversations -- you are having fruitful conversations, are they presenting those to the manufacturers and distributors? >> i think they are engaged and productive line. i want them to continue it and we will see what fruit it bears. of everyyou are part town, the biggest benefactor which is mike bloomberg. why doesn't he buy one of these companies? cap, heon of market could buy all three of them. [laughter] mr. cox: not necessarily shut them down but exert the pressure

because he went on them. have you talked to him? >> i will bring that up. , i cannot alone shoulder a movement. i cannot fund an entire movement , other people had to get involved and donate and that is why we give grants to other organizations. that incredibly important the ball does not rest on the shoulders of mike bloomberg. that is an interesting idea. the other economic peace and want to talk about, a woman in the audience who in texas, raise your hand, after texas passed a bill that allow the open carry handguns, she went door to door with our other volunteers and convince more than 500 businesses to put up signs that prohibit, not only be open carry of handguns, but guns altogether. texas nra board member recently said they had never passed because he cannot bring his gun anywhere.

, where so-called moderate governor john kasich signed a bill that allowed guns in day care, we convince more than 1000 acres to put signage not allowing guns. this economic piece is important. mr. cox: a test of this over the weekend at remington, the storied names in manufactured weapons. bankruptcy from -- a process from where the debtors will become shareholders. the debtors will be very well-known in a financial institution. , we willto one of them just sell this as soon as we can. -- who will buy that? mike bloomberg? this as a testr case for you all to think about. any pressure?

>> i want to piggyback on the discussion about the size of the industry. firearms industry is about $11 billion, that is like sales. way -- given the relative modest size of the industry, some strategic choices the nra has made over the past 20 years or so, gives me optimism for the opportunity that we will have over the next 5-10 years, when the argument -- win the argument. 0 30 years ago, i disagreed but what they said but they could have made an honest argument that they were representing the interests of american gun owners. since then they have become a pillar of the far right conservative movement. when you have a small industry,

you have an nra growing frequently smaller politically. salienceoments of high and a country set up, it gives us on the stage and the americans across the country, a big opportunity to win elections and change happens slowly and then all at once. mr. cox: is there not any common ground with the nra? >> no. >> there should be peered the nra -- there should be. the nra started as a hunting and a shooting stewardship of guns. it has strayed consciously from that. we are seeing increasing vitriol over time from the nra. i think a bankruptcy from its original founding. that is why we are seeing so many nra members contacting us

and other organizations saying, i am fed up, i am tearing up my card. these are gun owners. on twitter i say i bought it nra membership and will never fly delta. >> there is that to. -- there is that, too. membersshows most nra believe in common sense gun laws and if we get rid of the nra, another organization could pop up after 10 years and promote many of the same ideologies. it is about shifting culture, shifting mindsets and giving the power back to the people who they elect into office. mr. cox: it represents the interests of the $11 billion industry, if one looked at it that way, how you look at the tobacco industry or financial services businesses, they clinically look at it. they have done a very good job

this of using everyone of the notion that do that. a huge have corrupted segment of the republican party with their money and influence. when the brady bill was passed in 1994, it passed with a lot of republican votes. then, after 1994, the gun violence prevention political apparatus -- the nra was politically the only game in town. republicans who should have been voting the right way, given the districts they represented, did not because they were receiving campaign contributions from the nra and because the nra was so institutionally important to the republican party. what we have to do here in 2018 is right there back. -- break their back.

we have a huge opportunity with the general political climate, the fact that the road to a democratic house majority goes through a lot of the suburban districts where, not only is the president unpopular, the nra is also very unpopular. they might like their tax cuts but they aren't comfortable with the direction of the republican party under donald trump and the nra. >> i think there is president. -- president. -- precedent. ,n virginia, a gubernatorial what was supposed to be a close race, but was not here in -- but was not. points, theby 10 issue of guns were one of the top two issues that drove people to the polls. that business test, -- that business test, plus where you seem -- litmus test, plus what

u.s. scene, that with momentum and registration and this being one of the top issues, just as it is often for a small percentage of folks on the other side, we know that we have the majority of americans, to say that is an understatement, when you have 97% of americans polled supporting expanding background checks, saying a majority is not we have truth, justice, and the american people behind us and we have to show up to vote on us and make it a number one issue. >> the nra leaders agenda is racist, bigoted, misogynistic. [applause] toxic, and no lawmaker should stand with them. a rating frome an the nra these garland. -- these garland letter. -- the scarlet letter/

mr. cox: they are not here to defend themselves. the rand corporation did a study come all the studies on gun violence and its impact on the country. all the policies that have been -- they look at everything that has been done and came up with a conclusion that was -- we do not have a clue because not enough has been done. that is a paraphrasing. the senator said there is which in the on -- on the miss the-- on the act -- on the lack of significance and what can be done to get more clinical analysis and research done so people can make decisions in the same way they can make about opioids or lung cancer or car fatalities? >> go ahead. >> the dickey amendment is an

amendment put an appropriations bill more than a decade ago. it basically had like words that said, you were not able to advocate if you were at the cdc, around an issue related to gun violence research. viewed,guage has been if you polled people at the cdc, put a chilling effect on research and to gun violence. there is not a strict legal prohibition related to gun violence research, almost zero gun violence research has been funded since the dickey amendment was enacted many years ago. the bill just passed through congress -- mr. cox: & by the president today. presidentned by the today in a cliffhanger. >> a clarified there is no prohibition related to gun violence prevention research, which is huge. the next step is to make up for

the lack of any funding that we have had dedicated to gun violence research in america. i was on a panel four months ago with, doctors and researchers from across the country who talked passionately about the impact of the lack of federal research related to gun violence prevention. it is huge. for every dollar the federal government spends on gun violence research, or any kind of research, you get the buy-in from the private and states of 10 times that. we have a lot to make up for. we have entire communities ravaged by gun violence. we did a report several months ago in conjunction with consideration of repeal of the affordable care act. we tried to get data about the effect of gun violence in this country. not just debts, 36,000 on average per year -- debts,

36,000 on average per year, but the 100,000 people shot and suffered consequences. not to mention entire communities. the most data we get five was that on average, the first emergency visit, average cost was $36,000. when we tried to get any other data about the extended experience an extended cost related to this, we could not find anything. that is because there is not research into this. ultimately, if you look at this issue, we have an entire arsenal that has been put -- barriers put in place to stop us from getting information and facts. mr. cox: the rand folks said something like, if you look at gun violence as an epidemic or disease -- 30,000 people, 100,000, the economic impact. you would spend -- the spending

is 2%, 3%, 4%, if it had been a disease. >> correct and so many republicans say they are physically that's fiscally fiscallyle -- responsible yet we spend millions of dollars to do with the repercussions of gun violence versus putting the money into prevention and intervention. it is backwards to say the least. mr. cox: the assault weapons ban. we are talking about ar-15s. people say it is easy, gun advocates say you do not know what you are talking about. are talking about the ar-15 semi automatic assault you -- apons, suggestion there was ollie that's already policy framework -- already policy framework with a ban on machine guns.

>> an act passed in 1934 proved an effective way to prevent gun violence from automatic weapons. mr. cox: that was gangsters and al capone era. >> in 1988, a full ban on machine guns and silences are in their. it works, right? mr. cox: a machine gun in a shooting organization? gunsere are legal machine and ranges where you see accidents. in terms of machine guns and a crime, we counted three deaths over the past 50 years. mr. cox: what is required to own a machine gun? >> a permit, you have to your friend print, you have to see more enforcement -- you have to get your fingerprint, you have to see law enforcement, registration, it works and we should apply it. mr. cox: what is the argument

against it? if it is viewed as constitutional in alignment with the second amendment? >> the industry likes selling ar-15 assault rifles. mr. cox: i get that, why wouldn't people who want that be able to get that if they could go with that process? >> no reason not to do it. >> people think everyone will come in and take their guns. they think any form of gun control, some people think it is a slippery slope to taking all guns away. peoplebout the educating and telling them what the law is on the books versus what will happen to them should any new bill come about. >> i would like to clarify, brady has come out strongly and said we support the renewal of the assault weapons ban. we have eight states and the district of columbia that do have assault weapons ban in place.

brady has a long history of helping litigate cases where there is a contingent about the constitutionality of those assault weapons bans. every single time it has been upheld as constitutional. we should not just back away from the idea that somehow those kinds of laws are not constitutional. they have been upheld as constitutionally. when you say a ban, are you -- >> that is -- mr. cox: people should not happen? >> they are not appropriate for civilian use, when you have an ar-15, that was designed so that you could shoot it from 50 yards i go to the front and back of the helmet, when you have trauma doctors talking about seen kid from parkland and every other shooting involving an ar-15, and what they say is, i could not

say this child because the outputon one side, the is one foot wide. yes, they are inappropriate for civilian use and should be banned. >> we support an assault weapons ban. out this proposal because we think it would be a smart way to deal with the 30 million assault rifles currently in circulation. it is important to recognize that 95% of gun deaths are the result of handguns. that is why we are also focused on universal background checks on violence intervention programs, the nexus between gun violence and domestic violence. going back to my point from before about not getting stuck and boring policy argument focusing on the big more questions, we can do it all. mr. cox: we have one last question. you are all doing amazing work

in your deals. why aren't you one group? the nra, everyone talks about them as they are this monolithic, impermeable force. is it an advantage or disadvantage that there are so many of you that so many different groups representing different constituencies? shouldn't we just get mike bloomberg to pay for you all? [laughter] mr. cox: what do you say to that criticism? >> there is more than the nra. -- i live in colorado, rocky mount gun owners association are way far right of the nra. this is just not all of us, there are differing gun lobbying groups.

i think what we have been good at is that we have a weekly call and we talk about what is the role of each organization. talks tofords group gun owners and brady does a lot of work on the federal level. we are a national grassroots with chapters in every state. you work on intersectional and you can talk about what you do. we come together with hopefully having these conversations. i think we have evolved because of the conversations. that is the most important part, talking about how to evolve as a movement. >> something to be said about us being separate organizations is an advantage because we can see each other in many ways we could not do if we were one organization. we represent different communities. the responsibilities of inanizations, specifically communities of color where we believe in policy but our work is in the day-to-day talking with people who are victims and perpetrators of violence and looking at the intersection alley.

more beneficial to each other and the movement by being separate and sometimes separate agendas that all fight to the same goal, to make our communities safer for all populations. >> look at other movements, gay marriage, just allowing them to be one monolithic, we did not get there. the environmental organizations. >> the beyoncé of the gun violence organization. [laughter] mr. cox: please give my amazing panelists a round of applause . have a great march. thank you for coming.

>> here is a look at our primetime schedule on the c-span networks, 8:00 team eastern on c-span, president trump's remarks on the $1.3 trillion spending bill which will keep the government funded through september. on c-span2, supreme court oral argument in national institute of family and life advocates ra dealing with pregnancy centers and freedom of speech. c-span3, boris johnson discussing u.k. foreign policy. hour >> a book tv exquisite, we visit shawnee, oklahoma to learn about its history and literary life.