>> c-span is your unfiltered view of government sponsored by these television companies and more, including cox. >>cox is committed to providing affordable elegant --affordable internet. bridging the digital divide on engaged student at a time. cox, bringing us closer. >> cox supports c-span as a public service along with these other providers, giving you a front row seat to democracy. >> coming up on "washington journal," we talk about gun policy and crime trends with jim kessler, the vice president for policy. we continue our conversation with manhattan institute's rafael men wall -- rafael

mangual and we talk with hans menos about -- "washington journal" is next. ♪ host: as we approach the two year mark of the covid pandemic, prescriptions may be easing across the country that one of the after effects is the rise in crime in many areas, particularly violent crime. assaults come armed robbery, homicides are leading officials and police departments in search of solutions. good morning, it is thursday, february 17, 2022. we will start asking about solutions to combat crime.

we will spend the program talking about the crime issue and other issues involved. this first hour, your solutions to combating is in crime. the lines for those in the eastern and central time zones, 202-748-8000. mountain and pacific, 202-748-8001. for current and former law enforcement officials, 202-748-8002. you can send us a text to 202-748-8003. we are on facebook and you can send us a comment on twitter or instagram at @cspanwj. we will look at other news this morning. focusing a large part of the program today on the issue of rising crime in the country and the concerns people have. asking you about your solutions to that. the thoughts of people in california, this is a survey of folks in california on the crime rate. it survey is concerned about

crime rates. they writes that a majority of californians are concerned about crime and crime rates and open to amending laws to address the issue. a uc berkeley government studies poll sponsored by the l.a. times that many respondents up across the political spectrum support changes to proposition 47 which lowered the total value of stolen goods needed for person to be charged with a felony and dropped other crimes down to misdemeanors. the poll says 80% of strongly conservative voters surveyed, 64% of moderate voters, and 41% of somewhat liberal voters support changes to proposition 47. to put some background on how the crime rates differ between the last couple of years, between 2020 and 2021, the data

on crime rate, homicides 5%. up 44% student set -- up 44% since 2019. aggravated assault are up. gun assaults are up 8%. offenses down and motor theft is up 14%. your thoughts on solutions to violent crime. we will show you the comments of merrick garland at the annual meeting of the nation's mayors on how the administration is responding to the rising crime rate. [video clip] >> another important part of keeping our country safe is working alongside all of you to protect our communities from violent crime and this scourge of gun violence. at the justice department, we stand shoulder to shoulder with you in the fight against violent crime.

we will use every tool at our disposal to protect our communities. last year, the department launched a comprehensive anti-violent crime strategy aimed at harnessing our resources of every relevant component in the department, including our u.s. attorney's office, litigating divisions, law enforcement agencies, and grantmaking offices. recognizing the importance of anti-violent crime strategies tailored to individual communities, we directed each u.s. attorney office to address the crime problem in those communities. as a result, the fbi, dfa, and u.s. marshals service partnered with local state agencies and police departments to help agents in the homicide units to

confiscate firearms, stop drug trafficking, and divide other support. -- and provide other support. we strengthened our cornerstone initiative to reduce violent crime, called project safe neighborhoods which brings together mayors, police chiefs, local agencies, and the u.s. attorneys to develop solutions to the pressing crime problems facing the communities. the department understands it is our mayors and their police departments who shoulder much of the work to disrupt and deter violent crime in their own cities. last year, we awarded $310 million in funding through the department's office to support our law enforcement officers. this included $139 million to the cops hiring program which provides funding to cities and

towns to hire more law officers and put more resources to work building community trust. host: the focus is on the nation's crime rate on "washington journal." asking you about solutions to crime, particularly violent crime. we are on twitter at @cspanwj. this one says "acceptance that cartels are more dangerous than idiot protesters." this one says there are different tiers for different or worse crimes between the wealthy and everyone else. let's go to calls from david in missouri. your first up this morning, go ahead. caller: hello. criminals, if they get charged five years, should you five years. they should do five years making small rocks out of graz.

no more tv, no more internet, none of that stuff. we have gone too soft on crime. i can't tell you this from a personal standing. my first wife was killed by her boyfriend with a sawed-off shotgun. he did two years and eight months in his come out on parole after that. he was a felon with a sawed-off shotgun. the federal government did not do anything. i contacted them every day for a year. they said they had bigger fish to fry. if you are going to be soft on crime, expect criminals. in missouri, we have the right to kill criminals. you come onto my property and steal my stuff, i can shoot you dead. that is what needs to happen. the only way to stop a criminal is to be a criminal, to do criminal things.

if that means killing somebody for trying to urge you are still your property -- host: this guy who shot your former girlfriend and got out of jail, is he still a free man? caller: yes he is. he is a free man. my son is 30 years old and it happened when he was three. my son watched it happen. the jerk left my son in an apartment building with his dead mother on the floor with a 12 gauge shotgun blast through her chest. host: to patrick in pittsburgh, pennsylvania. caller: anybody who believes this is a coordinated and orchestrated reality when you allow 2 billion illegal immigrants, an army metoo come across our border -- an army, to come across our border and think

the crafting of concern for this issue is not completely orchestrated -- they want this to happen. they want crime to be extended. they want this mayhem. the ultimate objective is to disarm this nation. host: bridgewater, new jersey is next up. john, your solution to the rising crime rate? caller: i grew up in the 1950's and 1960's in new york city. it was a great place to live until crime started. it started with drugs. the drug problem -- when someone would rob their mother to buy drugs, they would certainly mug you. my mother got mugged in 1962 before the term was even coined. the problem with democrats has always been they think crime is

a social problem, not a criminal problem. you have to admit only 5% to 10% of people are criminals who cause this problem. we don't know why they do it. everybody wants to ascribe different things, slavery, talking about the cops as a control -- ridiculous. we have to take the 5% out, period, in order to maintain safety in order. host: this is reporting of the new york post, the headline "no neighborhood is safe, crime up in almost every new york city precinct." direct that every -- nearly every precinct has seen in crime, including five in which

the rate has doubled. "no neighborhood is safe, one brooklyn cop warned. at this rate we will lose the city by st. patrick's day. the only precinct not to see crime jump was the one covering central park. only these girls are safe, added one officer. 72 out of the 77 precincts saw crime rise, dipping below their figures for a year earlier." another story in dallas, texas from the texan and their headline "dallas district attorney touts prosecution strategy as the city sees declining crime rate. eddie garcia credits his crime reduction plan and efforts of police officers. john caruso is offering a

strategy that could provide the decreasing crime rate. unlike other cities in texas, there was a 13% drop in the number of homicides in dallas last year and notable decreases in other crime categories. garcia described it to a crime reduction plan implemented last may. he reported in january murders dropped to 7% since the plan was launched. -- was launched." ted cruz earlier this year talked about the rise in crime rates. [video clip] >> crime is rising in this country. assault is rising, carjackings are rising. last year, 12 major american cities roque records, homicide rates. portland, indianapolis, toledo, rochester st. paul, louisville, columbus, action rouge, austin, and philadelphia. what do the cities have in common?

those cities are run by democrats. they crime we are seeing across this country is a direct result of democrats' soft on crime policies. joe biden nominated not one but two of the leading advocates in the country for abolishing the paresis -- abolishing the police to senior roles. every single senate democrats voted to confirm two of the leading advocates of abolishing the police to senior positions at the u.s. department of justice. when democrats engage in anti-police rhetoric, when they demonize police officers, it has consequences. host: keeping our eye on the russia-ukraine conflict, this is the wall street journal, "to fight ukraine gertz for war and decides russian built up. russia is continuing its buildup

around ukraine, even as moscow said it would begin drawing down troops and released footage of tanks and carriers departing crimea." our opening topic, solutions to combating rising crime. 202-748-8000 is the line for central and eastern time zones. 202-748-8001 is mountain and pacific. four current and former law officials, 202-748-8002. a couple on twitter, "crime stats are almost always flawed along with those keeping them and those who pick and choose what crime to focus on." diane says "enforce the laws and punish crimes. protect the citizens, not the criminals." jan is on our lawn for -- jim is on our law enforcement line from

michigan. caller: i have a point i hope you will let me get in. i retired early from the chicago parchment and i now live in my retirement home in northern michigan. there is so much talk that goes on back and forth between political interests. my observation is that the idea is what is creating albums and stopping solutions from being discussed and enacted. don't you think the media plays a very important role in finding solutions, addressing all the issues that are on the table or not on the table? isn't the media responsible for

doing some honest mining? a format such as yours, those possible solutions on the table for people to discuss. c-span does not seem to do that. you have your republican and democrat lines. people argue back and forth at each other and throw insults. host: i hear what you are saying and it is a rhetorical question but also a specific question. this morning we are focusing three hours on the issue. we will hear from guests from different perspectives. our purpose here has always been about a conversation with americans about issues of the day and conversations where -- conversations with lawmakers. caller: every morning you lead with liberal newspapers, liberal concepts of whatever it is you are discussing. you do play a part, you lead.

you create the box within we all operate from on c-span. i feel like you have a high responsibility to make sure you are being not biased. host: okay, yeah. caller: i question your use of washington host and new york times morning after morning. don't you realize there are many different opinions out there you could grab from in order to prevent your news stories every morning and set of the big three liberal publications? host: this morning i lost track think we used the new york post, the hill, the texan from dallas. i did use the wall street journal.

it is always an effort of trying to get as many voices as possible. i hear what you're saying. as a former law official, we would love to hear your perspective on this. caller: how about hunter biden, getting him on the show? why has that not happened yet? host: it may eventually. it could be a topic for a future show. we are here seven days a week, three hours a day doing this. i hear your input. let's go to stephen in fort worth, texas. caller: how are you this morning? host: fine, thank you. caller: i am so grateful i lived through the 1960's and the 1990's, mostly in california and things were wonderful. we had the right people and -- the right people in office.

i was able to walk the streets. i was involved in criminology for about six years. a judge told me one time that if i ever see your face again i want to see you for a very long time. that shocked me awake. i stopped doing crime because i did not want to end up like other people i knew who went to jail for long periods of time. when they came out, they changed. what is going on in california and the reason i left california is because everywhere i drove there were homeless camps. under the bridges around disneyland, it was really bad. what are they going to do? people have to live so they create crime. you have to either solve that problem -- and no one wants to solve that problem.

so what are you going to do? i don't know if it is going to get any better because of the fact that everyone wants to let everyone have their own way. there are no solutions. host: when did you leave california? caller: i left two years ago. i was buying a bunch of property and then when things got crazy i sold everything. i have had a home in texas for the last 13 years i rented out so i decided when i retired i would get out of there. gas prices were going off of the roof. every business in california was living around me. all of those businesses that lets california are out here in texas. host: an earlier caller suggested the reason for the rise in crime is the influx of immigrants from the southern

border. would you agree with that? caller: i don't know. most people leave places for a better life. i am living in texas and everywhere i go there mexicans -- there are mexicans. i am sure a lot of them are illegals. i am not agreeable with that idea. i think crime comes to defect that there is no opportunity, people are given free reign. i went to jail and the judge told me if he ever saw my face again -- there were things put in place to deter crime. right now, things are being taken out of the way to deter crime. in turn, what do you get? nothing but crime. host: stephen, this is not a crime story but a policy story from the street journal.

"san francisco backs recall. the mayor said she would select school board members to replace the three who were recalled by a majority of voters in tuesday's election. four of the members have not been in office long enough to be recalled. the recall campaign in the city drew national attention as one of the highest profile examples of voter anger over school closures and other campaign related -- and other issues. this is a political earthquake, said one of the organizers of the recall. san francisco is tending cap to fight for its children and good governance." talking about solutions to rising crime rates in california , in riverside, it is david. caller: i think part of it is the black lives matter idea of abolishing the police and committing more crime.

my car was stolen last year and the cops brought it back. cops may be irritating and pushy, they're not my favorite people but they are necessary. we have turned away from the morals of the bible and the 10 commandments, thou shall not steal, thou shall not lie. we cannot teach those things anymore. we teach more relevancy in schools and take the bible out of schools and think it will be fine. no church, no hope. not to mention the kids that were not even allowed to go to school. the teachers union wanted them to not give them the coronavirus. what about sacrificing for the children? we do not care about the next generation. host: this is what speaker nancy pelosi had to say over the weekend. [video clip] >> there appears to be vision on

rising crime and how to handle it. karen bass is trying to increase the police force in l.a., cori bush is saying it is time to defund the police. you are the speaker, how do you think democrats should address rising crime? >> with cori bush, that is not the tradition of the democratic party. to defend in every way is the oath of office. we are all concerned about mistreatment of people. that is why karen bass had the justice in policing act. we hope to get some of that done, whether it is no knock or chokehold, some of those issues, even if we cannot get it all done. make no mistake, community safety is ours possibility. -- is our responsibility. i told one of my colleagues from new york, a new member of congress who is we on the left

saying the police is dead. that causes a concern with a few in our caucus. public safety is our responsibility. mayor adams of new york -- we support karen bass and mayor adams of new york. host: asking people about their level of satisfaction on crime policies, 24% surveyed in 2022 are satisfied with anti-crime policies. that compares with 27% last year and 47% in 2020. in terms of gun policies, it is the same across the last three years of service -- of surveys. let's go to our law enforcement line, hagerstown, maryland. caller: thanks for having me.

i am a younger guy. in my opinion, it is more of an access issue. crime is crime, big or small. i believe you should be punished if you do crime. another call previously said crime is rising because of the coronavirus and people not having what they need. there is an influx of homeless people and people not having things. that is like a backhanded exclamation because i fear the government has been doing a lot to help us out during this difficult time. in that regard, i feel like there should not be as much crime. where there is any opportunity, it is going to happen. it is innate ethics issue. we need to teach criminals and

children and people right from wrong it should not be partisan party to one partisan party. it should not be democrats believe this is how we handle crime and this is how republicans handle crime. right is right and wrong is wrong. host: your client from a smaller city, what has your expense been there in terms of violent crime? caller: i am from the city and i'm a younger guy and i grew up not having a whole bunch. i never resulted do crime. violent crime is on the rise because people are not having things. there are more homeless people. there is more opportunity to get what they need.

i have had stickups to people trying to steal my car at a real light, things like that. it is out of hand. i believe we have a stronger justice system where everyone is on the same page for just punishment for crimes, it will be better. host: jack in west virginia, go ahead. good morning, go ahead. caller: good morning. i think it can be solved by howard stern. host: to lynn, maryland just to berlin, meant -- to berlin, maryland. caller: policy was -- nancy pelosi was silent in 2020 when this world over -- when this oiled over -- and this boiled over.

she called storm troopers in portland when they were trying to protect the courthouse. the police have been thrown under the bus by the politicians and the defund the police movement. the politicians have created the environment, the lack of education in these communities, the destroying of the family, gangs, drugs, violence, poverty -- these were all created by the politicians. now the police have to walk a fine line and try to clean up this mess. they are being thrown under the bus. it does not help when mayor adams comes out and claims the newspapers are being racist towards him when he is not doing his job. host: next up is nelson in san diego. good morning. caller: good morning.

the caller from california, he is african-american like myself. a lot of people said good things. i am a former republican. i left the party in january when they started censoring liz cheney. slavery did not make the shooter go into the el paso walmart and kill mexican-americans, it did not make dylan root going to the church and kill black. it did not -- and kill black people. it did not make the guy in pittsburgh go into the synagogue. we have a history of violence in america. these cities, i think they are not being tough on crime.

almost every city is a democratic city. jacksonville, where i am thinking about moving, is run by a republican. the previous mayor was a black democrat and now it is a republican. there is crime in jacksonville. that is a false thing. you look at the states that are republican run, states, not cities -- kansas and mississippi have like the highest crime. massachusetts has one of the lowest crime rates along with connecticut which is democratic. host: in your consideration of where to move, you are considering jacksonville. is the crime rate in that city one of the considerations? caller: it is where you live. it is one of the tickets it is the u.s. land-wise.

no, because it is so big you can live in a place where there is not high crime. i really like this one black pastor. i would like to go there. as far as the caller who talked about or relativism, look at the way that evangelicals supported trump. talk about moral relativism. have a good day. host: an opinion piece on cnn, "the question we should be asking about violent crime in american cities. in big cities, fears of crime have citizens up in arms. in new york where eric adams ran on a platform of public safety, the recent subway killing has galvanized the city. in los angeles, homicides were

up 12% in 2021 forcing the mayor to answer tough questions and making it clear that los angeles is not alone in this trend. last week, nurse was attacked at a l.a. bus and she died. contrary to fear mongering, american cities are not experiencing record crime rates. crime rates, including national homicide, remain well below they were in the 1980's and 1990's according to fbi data." you can read more of that on cnn.com. senator chuck grassley on the floor of the u.s. senate last week talking about the spike in crime nationwide, here is some of that. [video clip] >> the crime spike began in june, 2020 -- began in june 2020 when cities pulled the police off of their streets, progressive prosecutors stopped

prosecuting, and loose cities started ale reform policies -- started bail reform policies that released criminals into the street. no pulled this on the streets, but a lot of criminals on the streets -- no police on the streets, but a lot of criminals on the streets. it is no surprise crime has risen. progressive prosecution and ineffective bail policies, blue city mayors d police -- mayors depoliced until some realized it was a bad decision to make. this liberal attitude towards criminality may now slight.

the light at the end of the tunnel begins to be getting brighter. eric adams announced he would be reviving plainclothes anti-crime units to combat violence. is also suggesting better bail policies. a couple of months ago, we heard cisco mayor london breed declared a state of emergency over crime in her city. maybe a month ago we saw lori lightfoot ask for federal resources to fight crime. the mission's -- the nation's crime spike is a result of less law enforcement. criminals are getting bold, very bold because they know they will go uncut.

-- they will go uncaught and unpunished. they need to bring police back to our streets and take criminals off of our streets. host: your solutions to rising crime, on twitter marianne says "gun laws, living wages, and educating science deniers." and any update on the russia-ukraine crisis, this is from abc, "ukraine blames russian backed -- ukraine government troops and hitting a school there." back to your calls, it is charles from appalachia, new virgin -- appalachia, virginia. caller: good morning. i have worked in the police

enforcement -- please department for 20 years. i am retired now but i spent over five years studying the constitution, the writings of the founding fathers. one of the questions i asked is why is there this conflict continually between police and minorities. the best solution i can think of for ending the massive crime waves is actually to legalize drugs. it sounds counterproductive, but if you look at the lessons from prohibition, when they criminalized alcohol it created criminal classes. it enriched and empowered the mob and created mob violence and gang wars, specifically in chicago and major cities. if you look at those lessons, the same is true for our drug war.

we have created the criminal class and there has been loss of life on both sides. the conflict is not one-sided -- it is not just the cops or the criminals. host: it was after your study after you retired and your research on the constitution that you came to this conclusion? he did not have this view when you were an officer? caller: no, my view was to go arrest bad guys. i was ignorant of the situation. they told me to do my job and i did my job. go arrest bad guys and i went and arrested bad guys. if you look at a violent crime, one of the persons mentioned violent crime is at an all-time low if you don't count the last two years. most current violent crime can be attributed to gang violence,

fighting for control over the drug trade. most are concerned with satellite crimes, crimes associated with people who use drugs, who steal to support their habit. we have those things anyway. legalizing drugs would make it so that the criminals -- the users are no longer criminal. the same thing applies to gun laws. restoring the constitutional right to keep and bear arms, keep and own and bear around with you, would in a lot of the there is a black suit with a gun so we need to send the cops. unless they're doing something violent with it, there is no need to call the cops. legalizing these things would end the war between the police and minorities.

it would free up overburdened courts and would end the mass incarceration of people within the u.s. host: in terms of the last two years, and he appended a lot -- and you pinned it a lot on drug cartels, how much do you think they took advantage of the reluctance of the police to be as proactive in their policing in weight -- in the wake of the protests in 2020? caller: that is human nature. i would be surprised if they did not take advantage of it. a lot of the stuff is a political battle, political propaganda back and forth. the police are using military attack makes, the police are

doing all these things and attacking these people and doing no not once -- no knock warrants. they are using the political propaganda of these people are becoming more violent. most of the black lives matter protests over the last couple of years and defund the police, that was a political ever on the part -- a political error on the part of the democratic party. defunding the police will not solve the problem. does the need to be retraining? absolutely, but not in the areas they are claiming. host: before your call. next up, susan. caller: i would like to comment on people who call in and criticize this program. this is like an ultimate privilege to be able to speak your piece. i wanted to say that.

with violence in crime, i live in south dakota which is not a very populated state. i feel like crime is not an issue here as it is in very populated areas. obviously the more people, the more crime. a lot of this goes back to the foundation, the home. we as parents have to be aware that our main goal of raising a child is to have a decent human being. what happened to the golden rule of do unto others? i think this crime does extend back to the home. our biggest point is that -- my biggest point is that our crime wave began with donald trump. he installed this violent type of behavior and it grew and grew through his term.

to me, he has committed treason along with other crimes. we can list them. financial things, rape, all sorts of things. he is out in public announcing his crimes and he gets i with it -- he gets by with it. he has to have some justice shown to the american people for what he has done. these groups of people are becoming more violent, individuals are becoming more violent and we need to show from the top that donald trump is n/a impressment to our presidency and to the u.s. host: thank you for your call this morning. reflective of the comments from the former officer called us, a comment here on facebook says "all drugs need to be legalized, only violent criminals should go to prison. no one should go to jail for

driving on a suspended license." a tweet saying "notice how the rights don't see the -- as criminals. they would rather scare people with racial dog whistle tactics." 1:00 this afternoon, the senate will take a vote on moving forward with short-term spending measures already passed by the house. a three week extension of that rule spending which has not been finalized. the chair of the judiciary committee is saying the delay is holding up funding for the administration's efforts on fighting crime. [video clip] >> many speeches are given about the rise in crime in america. i know this personally, representing illinois and the city of chicago. the number of a gun crimes in the last year was a shocking. when you look at people who have

been hurt and killed with the use of guns in cities across america, it is clear we need to invest our police force and law enforcement, hold them accountable for the right to and right conduct, but put in their hands the resources to protect us in our homes and neighborhoods. what is holding that up? the decision by the republican leader to not bring appropriations forward for approval by congress. this is mindless. you cannot preach that you want to find the police and then stop the appropriation process which the republicans have done. it is time to pass the appropriation bill so resources are going to atf and the attorney general's office and other agencies that can help the state and local law enforcement to suppress a violent crime. don't reach about the need for this money and then turn around

and stop the effort on capitol hill. why are we not voting on an omnibus appropriations bill this week? it was supposed to be done last october. it is time for us to do it. host: that will be the big issue for the senate today and possibly tomorrow as well. as our capitol hill producer treated, "this and it will take its first boat at 1:00 p.m. to begin work on the bill to avert a government shutdown." our live senate coverage is on c-span2. another issue not necessarily in crime rate but law enforcement, this is a headline from the washington post "facial recognition firm is seeking expansion yonder law enforcement. clearview ai is telling investors it is on track to have 100 billion photos in its database within a year to ensure

almost everyone in the world will be identifiable. according to a financial presentation from december, those images equivalent to seven photos 47 billion people on earth would help with -- the company wants to spend beyond scanning faces for the police saying it could monitor gig economy workers and is researching a number of new technologies that could identify someone based on how they walk, detect their location from a photo, or scan fingerprints from afar." we go to john in pennsylvania. hello. caller: thanks for having me on. i hope you will let me have as much time as your last two colors. i agree -- your last two

callers. i agree, it is the media. we hear that it is this crime thing. the crime thing is this, in philadelphia you have the crime rate going through the roof. i see that channel six and george stephanopoulos are focused on a -- where a cop was working to break up a fight but one was black and the other one they keep saying is white. he is not white, the kid was hispanic. as long as we put the cops under the magnifying glass -- when brown's girlfriend wanted to let everyone out for the riots, that was fine. she wants more white people in detail. she does not care who does the crime, she just wants more white people in jail. until we start getting real

about how law is perceived, you are going to have this. host: i'm hearing you. thanks for your call. alex is in district heights, maryland. caller: good morning. thanks for taking my call. i want to be able to commute -- be able to communicate everything. i want to respond to the call from maryland, thank you for your service. it is politicized, the dealing on crime. more just punishment needs to be given to certain crimes that we are aware of depending on the scale of what they do. i also have agreements with

charles from virginia. however, i don't know about agreeing with the legalization of drugs, i don't want to worry about who's on the road and who is not. my mother has been hit by a high driver before. i don't know how i feel about that. i think i would feel less safe. in regards to the topic on the police, unfortunately, that is a true thing. i am in immunize or, in pharmacy tech. i asked an officer who i immunize, they really defunding the police, is this happening? he was an officer in the area

and he was like yeah, they defunded us. especially on the amount of law enforcement on the road. i said wow, this is what is agree with. i live close to the d.c. line. i'm not really far from you all. i hear gunshots quite often, especially pennsylvania avenue. what is happening? here, i am subscribed to the channel of d.c. crime rates or whatever. it shows what crime is happening

wherever it is. it is usually in columbia heights. it is happening. i think we need to have a better approach. it is hard to believe nancy pelosi and how the country is actually dealing with it. host: how concerned you get? you mentioned you are in district heights. it is the random bullet, the stray that often kill someone. how often are you concerned when you go out somewhere, into district heights or the city of washington, that you will become an unintended of the rising crime? caller: very concerned. i am glad you asked. this is concerning even for you. you could be doing your job and all the sudden because someone -- thug or whoever, besides the

need to resolve something with a normally unlawfully possessed weapon just to make a point. i am very concerned. i am sure everybody has heard it , especially those who live in maryland, someone died in their own home, a child. that has happened more than once. if you have kids, just getting shot because i am enjoying my time and my personal space, but all of the sudden it is because someone else and whatever petty dispute they are having is the cause of my own death or someone i know. host: we will go on to jesse in

florida. good morning. caller: good morning. i am personally watching the court tv case about the popcorn murder movie. you can see from that one case the number one issue would be you have a gun. the number two issue is the guy who did the murder was an ex-cop. you would think an ex-cop would have enough training so he would not automatically pull out his gun and shoot somebody because they threw popcorn at him. the murder actually happened in 2014 and it is just now being tried. host: where was that? caller: that happened in

florida. host: why did it take so long to get the trial? caller: i have no idea. it was an obvious thing. you throw popcorn at somebody and he pulls the gun. there are loopholes the legal system provides for the murderer. that guy is using stand your ground. they threw popcorn and his response is to stand his ground and should somebody. not only did he kill the person who threw popcorn at him, he entered other people in the theater. -- he injured other people in the theater. this is crazy. you have got to do something to control the guns. you've got to do something about the legal system. host: a couple of comments on

social media, "the crime of hiring undocumented workers is ignored." "democratic run states in 2020 turned a blind eye to riots. people will do what they want. paris, -- harris, as well." "limit access to guns, invest in mental health care, this is not rocket science." susan is in new york. go ahead. caller: hello. i would like to say that we have to start with the kids when they are younger. 12, 13, 14 years old. we have to do a program like what was done under roosevelt and have the kids get outside of the cities, see what is out there. a lot of the kids never get to leave where they are. they never understand that there is hope out there and have

people who -- and not have people who are retired -- and have people who are retired trained them in skills so they can get ahead instead of dying on the streets. host: a story from the wall street journal about a bill aimed to protect kids, it aims to protect kids online. "social media companies would be held responsible for harm they cause to children. the latest move to strengthen regulation of internet platforms. the measure by senators richard blumenthal and marshall black would require tech companies to provide periodic assessment of how their algorithms, design features, and advertising might contribute to harm to minors. the company would have to give minors the option to opt out of algorithmic recommendations.

it would become a step in regulation of children's online expenses -- online experiences." caller: listening to the conversations today, great conversations. they are all over the place. crime is in the person who has seen it. as long as we keep having a great divide between the haves and have-nots, there's going to be crime. people are super rich in america and then there are people are super poor in america. i am a baby boomer and i keep hearing people saying need to go back to the 1950's and 1960's. it is not like that anymore. it used to be when you were incarcerated, you would be reformed. they would train them now it is just labor -- they would train

them but now it is just labor. when they get out of prison, they are going to go back to prison because they don't learn anything. when we look at the crime rate and we talk about violent crime papa -- violent crime, it will getting mugged and getting robbed. is that any different than someone in the suburbs beating their wife? is that different than someone molesting their children? those are violent crimes as well but they are not reported as violent crimes if they are being reported at all. the x police officer made a great point -- the ex-police officer made a great point about drug laws. those should be turnout. and then the gentleman said i don't want people driving high or drunk.

it doesn't mean that you are going to drive high or drunk, because you not supposed to be doing that. but we are going to break the law. there was a caller from california and now in texas and he talks about homes in california. he is correct. i almost cried when i drive over to sent cisco. -- when i drive over to san francisco. there are young children living in camps. host: where is fairfield? caller: i am about two miles northeast of san francisco -- about 50 miles northeast of san francisco. there is an old song in the 70's that says "clowns to the left of me and jokers to the right, i am stuck in the middle." we keep blaming each other instead of looking in the mirror.

we need to do this stuff ourselves. we cannot rely on the government anymore. gun laws, you have to protect yourself because police will not be there. when they talk about defunding police, the narrative switched because it was not originally defined the lease. -- he funded the police -- it was not originally defund the police but reform the police. host: thank you. coming up next, we will continue our conversation on crime and anti-crime strategies with experts across the political spectrum starting with jim kessler, vice president of policy at third way. later, manhattan institute's rafael mank wall -- fail -- rafael

>> americom it is -- america is on the move again. >> live coverage begins at 8 p.m. eastern. the president speaks at line -- nine. >> leading offers discussing their latest book. at 9 p.m., journalist -- and the people who stopped it.

at 10 p.m., afterwards, emory professor talks about his book. he argues that millennials lack of generals civic knowledge poses a threat to america's institutions. -- or watch online. any time at book tv dock or -- booktv.org. >> washington journal continues. host: we are looking at rising crime rates. joining us to talk about gun issues and gun policy and the trends in crime statistics is

jim kessler. you are a staffer at the time. in 1994 on the house committee that worked on the 1994 assault weapon band that was signed into law by then president clinton. can you take us back to that year and what led to that creation of that law? guest: i was chuck schumer's legislative director at the time and he was the author of the assault weapon ban and if you looked at gun crime in the 1970's and 80's, the crimes were used with very cheap guns. some of the original laws about what types of guns needed to be bad if you could band them, -- band --banned if you could ban

them -- we moved to these military stout weapons and that -- styled weapons and that was why we moved to this ban. i can tell you up to the very point that when the speaker bank that gavel down, -- banged the gavel down, we did not know if we had the votes to pass. host: what is a assault weapon? guest: it was coined by the gun lobby as a marketing ploy back in the 80's but what we did was, we said, what are the characteristics of the gun that basically -- you would imagine

it more in a military setting fan in a -- band in --than in a self-defense setting. do you shoot it from a hit -- the hip? assault weapons are sock that shot from the hip. do they have pistol grips? do they have a threaded barrel so you could hold onto the barrel as you fire the weapon in the barrel does not heat up? did it have a bayonet mounts? things like that that cross the line from civilian used to military use. host: here is what that brought -- assault rifle been covered.

it focused on models of ar 15's and ak-47s. advanced certain military features and set a high limit on magazines and it was in effect . it expired in 2004. why was there an expiration? guest: no one wanted to have an x -- expiration and the number is how do you get to 50% plus one? as the bill went on, what compromises could you make in order to get to that threshold? leading up to that boat, we never had -- vote, we never

had be sufficient votes to pass it until the very day. one of the compromises was that it will sunset in 10 years. we thought, it will be so popular, no one would repeal it. we went wrong. -- were wrong. host: i want to open up the phones. (202) 748-8001, for republicans. (202) 748-8000. gym cluster, we will take you back to the fort -- floor -- floor debate.

i want to get your reaction. >> we have more heard factually inaccurate words in the last four minutes then we have in a long time. i submit for the record a statement put out on august 10. i submit -- you may laugh but you know why you are laughing and that is because every time this bill is improved, you find another objection. remember the racial justice act? we heard that they want for -- the bill except for the racist -- rasul justice act -- racial

justice act. there is now $8.4 billion for funding in prison. they are still not for it. they want the truth in sentencing and they got truth in senate seat and -- sentencing and they still oppose the rule. they have one excuse after another. the time has come for truth in voting. if you want to do what our constituents are pleading with us to do, which is make the streets safe. tough laws on punishment. smart loss on prevention, -- loss --laws or prevention, you will vote on this rule. host: jim kessler, former policy

director, what did you hear with those comments? guest: the assault rifle band was a part of the crime you -- bill. a lot of painstaking compromise. it passed by a margin of 235- 195. it got republican support by a three to one margin, they voted against it. by 83 to one margin -- by a 3-1 margin, democrats voted for it. it will be emblematic of congress in the future because it is a very emotional issue. very easily -- easy to play

politics with the crime issue. on the local level, if you look at mayors and governors, the crime debates there are a lot more measured. as you get it closer and further away to congress, a lot of demagoguery going on. the nra was a foe of that bill and they controlled a lot of members of congress. i think they still control a lot of members be -- but it was an epic battle and we did not know we had it until the very end. host: chuck schumer said that this -- the streets would be safer with that law. a report from northwestern university in 2004, said that

the assault on -- the weapon ban works. did you think it worked? guest: the 1993 ready law, that was a separate law that required background checks for firearm purchases. that had a larger impact in america then the assault weapons ban. i think the assaults -- assault weapons ban improved balance on the streets not as much as the brady law. host: in lower maryland -- laurel, maryland. caller: i was a former police officer. i locked up a lot of offenders.

i believe all good law-abiding citizen should be carrying weapons if they choose, as long as they make the background checks and get the proper training. i think the bottom line is this. assault weapons are not the problem. -- or not, the problem lies with the revolving -- it should come back with mandatory minimums on crimes that are committed with firearms. that is the only way where he will deter people -- or criminals, is to lock them up. i believe there is no other way. host: jim kessler. guest: i want to touch on one part of the comment.

he says he is a staunch supporter of the second amendment. all law abiding citizen should exercise -- exercise that right. the key word is law. -- abiding citizens. there are a bunch of ways to buy a gun legally and bypass that check so that is one of the ways to reduce some of the violent crime, is to set off those loopholes in which a fire -- firearm goes from being a legal object to an illegal object. host: two norman, in one rope township -- munroe township. democrat line. caller: why do we have one kit

-- killings in -- more killings in one week then we have an -- in other countries in the world. i was told that the second amendment, which is to protect citizens from a government, that we would -- that was -- we would be afraid the government was corrupt. if it takes on against the government, that is treason. it did not make sense. the only way we will stop it is to get rid of all the guns that have in england and australia and then that will get rid of it. all these laws do not mean anything.

background checks and all that. host: jim kessler -- jim kessler with the third way. what has your organization brought -- with the second amendment? guest: we are a centerleft organization and we look for solutions. whether you like the second amendment or not, we are stuck with it. it exists and we have to have laws and keep people safe around that amendments. there isn't going to be a repeal of the second amendment, not in my lifetime. on guns, we have a murder problem in violent crime problem because we have a gun problem. i want to throughout some

statistics that anyone can look up. there is a huge proliferation of people buying guns that we have never seen before. in 2005, the americans bought 8 million firearms in those years. in 2019 and 2020, and 2021, americans. almost 40 million firearms in each of those years. we are seeing a loosening of gun laws such that people can quote unquote defend themselves with stand loss in ways that they could never defend themselves before using a firearm. we are heading towards more incidents of gun violence in my

view because of the huge increase in purchasing guns and the loosening of loss, not just to -- loss --laws, not just to purchase them but how they can be used. host: the sandy hook lawsuit, remington has agreed to pay 70 million dollars to victims -- $73 million to victim's families. the 73 million dollars came from a current -- insurance companies. caller: i was -- guest: i was pleased and surprised by that decision. there was a law that congress passed in 2005.

it was the plaa, protection of lawful commerce act. i am getting the name wrong. it passed in 2005 that prevented any lawsuit on the gun industry to proceed. it was one of the most reprehensible loss that congress had passed in my lifetime. it was seen that it would be almost impossible to sue a gun manufacturer. this may have turned that on its head. too early to tell. i think one of the comments on twitter says it was the insurance companies that did it. that gives me some pause on it. i want to look at that more carefully but if you had a gun industry that felt in any way

culpable on what was happening with the use of their product, you will see changes in that product that will be beneficial for the country. host: i want to point out from the foxbusiness report, and they write that the lawsuit should have been dismissed. the federal law that gives brought immunity to the gun industry but under law, remington could be sued under state law. the supreme court declined that case -- the case. guest: that would be the way to do it. the reason why the law was passed to protect the gun industry is because plaintiff started to make the same case against gun manufacturers that people were making against the tobacco industry and those lawsuits against the tobacco

industry change the way cigarettes were sold and marketed in the gun industry was worried that these lawsuits were going to radically change the way guns will be manufacturers and -- manufactured and marketed and sold as well. congress cut the legs out of these lawsuits. host: let's go to darlene in las vegas. caller: hope you are both well. there are almost 40,000 gun laws in the united states and no one seems to give a darn about enforcing them. they want to come up with new policies when they cannot be bothered to deal with loss on the books. --laws on the books. we don't get to sue car

manufacturers because people want to get drunk. it is absolutely ridiculous. let's build faster and quicker car so we can race down the road and see how many people we can hit. i gun is no -- a gun is no threat itself. it is about the user. i have never had to hurt anyone in my life. guest: let me talk about the 40,000 gun laws. most of those laws are laws to make it easier to buy and sell and transfer weapons and to use a gun so most of those lost our loss --laws aren't enforcement loss --laws.

you can sue the gun cart -- car industry and that's why we have safety in cars. and -- let's talk about how we should be able to sue the gun industry. the caller that we talked to has owned guns for 32 years. she is a responsible gun owner. there are gun stores that are the source of thousands and thousands of guns that end up being used in crimes. maybe that is happenstance. people who go into the stores, they are near high crime areas and that is what happening -- is happening or maybe they are selling lots of firearms to people who they know they are traffic them -- trafficking been. --them.

if gun manufacturers, the way you -- we make drug manufacturers aware of what is happening with the legal problem of opioids and how doctors are distributing them, if they were made responsible, legally, for knowing which distributors and which gun stores whether source of the lion share of the guns that are being trafficked, they would alter their procedures. they will feel -- would feel they would have to alter procedures to crack down on it and not send guns to them but they don't, because there is no culpability and accountability and responsibility anywhere in the chain of the legal gun market. host: let's break in another topic here. the report is the crime of the

crime narrative and some of the details of that report is that contrary to the medium -- media narrative, overall crime rate decrease in 2020 compared to 2019. there appears to be no difference in crime trends between republican and democrat let states and no change between those with police reform and those that don't. we talked about violent crime across the country. what is your third way report ascribed that rise to and help concerned -- how concerned should we be about it? guest: we don't know all the 2021 numbers. those numbers come in at a --

late. the murder numbers are reliable. we are seeing spiking in murder. it is concerning. other crimes, clark that -- car theft, they don't seem to be going up. we will know more about that in the months ahead. here is another statistic. the homicide rate is 40% higher in states that voted for donald trump then states that voted for joe biden and the homicide rates in many republican states have been habitually higher than in democratic state so there is a narrative that cities like new york and los angeles and san francisco and chicago and are watching crime. in the case of chicago, it is true. the crime rates and the murder

rates are far less then other parts of the country. the point of our report is that not that we shouldn't be concerned about crime. there is a narrative that is happening in certain places because of certain liberal policies and that is not the case if you look out there. you look at a place like jacksonville, florida, republican mayor and republican governor. voted for republican in the last several presidential election. that has a higher murder rate than new york city and los angeles and other cities in america. i feel that the crime meme in the stores that we are seeing -- and the stories that we are seeing our focus in particular places and have a political angle to them that is designed to benefit one party, not to

enlighten policy makers. host: caller in colorado. republican line. caller: i would like to talk about the assault rifle definition first and i have something to read for you. this is a definition by the u.s. army -- a selective fire chambered first -- an assault rifle -- they are capable of automatic fire. that is november 14, 2018. i am just going to read this thing that i have pasted on the wall because i am a gun on it that reminds me of something. it says it was in a gun or a bomb or a machete.

it was a -- in two or three minutes, a mode down people. --mowed down people. do you understand now? it is not the weapon, it is the ideology. host: ok. any comment? guest: i don't think anyone is saying we should not rent out drugs and cars. -- truck's and cars. we have a entire system to put out safety measures. you need a driver's license and you need to have the car registered. i not saying meets -- every gun needs a license and registration

let's realize that most of the world is -- most of america is under pretty common sense regulations and didn't guns get a radical exception. -- and guns get a radical exception. it is the guns. i am not a ban all guns and repealed the second amendment person. -- repeal the second amendment person. i do have eyes. i can see in front of me. we have a massive gun prime -- crime problem in the united states that is unique to the united states and to say that there is nothing we can do on the gun front and on regulations on it and on some loss --laws.

i think it is rigid thinking. host: i have a question from mark on twitter. " what is the percentage of violent crime done on a legally purchased weapon? " guest: the answer isn't quite as simple as the question. every gun begins as a legal object and distributed to a gun store legally. from that gun store, it is generally sold legally, through a background check, etc.. most of those guns stay legal but some drift into the black market. let me give you an example. these statistics are out of date but it is from a report i did years ago. if you look at the guns that were used in crime in new york

city, 90% of the guns used in those crimes were bought from another state. bringing guns from state lines is illegal. what that means is 90% of the guns used in crime in new york cd -- city were somehow trafficked to the city. most of them came from five states. there is an iron pipeline where people buy guns in states where the guns are more lacks -- lax. they drive them to places to new york or boston and from chicago, they come from indiana and mississippi. those guns get sold for cash or for drugs.

that illegal market is really one of the places where you would want to do crackdowns. we don't have a gun trafficking statute in the united states. gun trafficking is a term of art, not law. there is no federal gun trafficking statute so it is almost impossible to go after those people, buying a hundred guns in georgia, selling them in new york city, on the streets. host: call from georgia next. we have maria in i went to -- atlanta. democrat line. caller: he says the second amendment -- amendment is going oh -- anywhere, and that is the problem. americans have a love for guns.

until you get rid of guns, you will be talking about this for many years because there's nothing anyone can do until you get rid of guns. these families will be crying because america has a love for guns. we can arthur -- argue. until you get rid of guns. host: mike in ohio. independent line. caller: i have two comments, first of all about the second american -- amendment, i believe our forefathers were well-intentionedut the last word -- all of our rights happen infringement, including the first amendment. the nra was founded in 1871 by

general burnside. he was a union general in the senate will -- civil war. he started the nra as a organization about the safety and the scientific use of a firearm. it was not about gun rights. it was about gun safety. i cannot believe -- i believe the civil war is proof positive that you can't really have an armed insurrection because -- they went through georgia like a knife through butter. -- the best way to not be attacked by your government is to elect people who will not turn against their own citizens. host:" the pact between the nra

-- lies spread by the gop. it is always about the money and we do not matter. " your response. guest: the nra was a different group many years ago. there was a coup within the nra in the 90 -- 90 -- 1970's and be came radicalized and others splintered groups grew out of it. to compete for membership, which is what the nra needs, it has become a radical organization even from the point where it was too far gone.

it is a powerful organization. i have fought the nra for 30 years. they mostly win. they are -- they have a lot of legislators in their pocket. nearly all of them are republican. they used to play in both parties in the past. they have abandoned democrats. i think they are part of the toxicity that is in washington dc. host: let me ask you about a story in the new york post. high capacity magazine a crazed gunman used killed a rookie nypd cop. ed -- it was a weapon that might have been found in a war-torn

afghanistan. the so-called drum magazine allows the block to hold an additional 40 rounds to the firearm's usual 10. would that have been illegal under the assault rifles ban=? n? guest: most likely. host: jim in pennsylvania. republican line. caller: good morning. first of all, the right to self-defense is not a rights granted by -- right granted by government. it is one of the unalienable rights granted to us by the constitution. our society is changing very rapidly. the facial recognition ai pretty

soon, you won't be able to do anything without being surveilled. you know? you see through the pandemic, how to radical governments -- karen nicole -- tyrannical governments, or places you can't have a gun, how to ran nicole -- how tyrannical those governments became. guest: that was the first time i heard australia and new zealand you because -- because -- be called tyrannical.

stand your ground loss --laws -- you can be the -- take offense and it is a license for white people who are afraid up like people to shoot them. that is what we have seen in the last few years throughout the country finally coming to light. within our second amendment rights to firearms, i hope we can add responsibility to it where this situation gets worse. host: jim kessler, executive vice president for policy at third way. appreciate you being here. looking at crime and policing issues continues. we will hear from -- rafael

mangual. later, from hans menos. ♪ >> american history tv

saturday on c-span two -- two. author bruce offers his thoughts. the founding father and the question of family. at 2:55 p.m. eastern, conference on the international conference of world war ii. with discussions on women reporting on world war ii. watch american history tv, saturday, on c-span2 and find the full schedule on your program guide or watch online any at c-span.org/history. >> "washington journal" continues. host: what does is rafael mangual best with this is rafael

mangual -- with us is mark the almond wall -- rafael mangual. who hurts it the most. we are spending the morning here talking about these related issues and i appreciate you coming on. get your take on the crime rate that has gone up over the last couple years. is it a blip or something to be concerned about? guest: hypothetically think it is something to be truly concerned about. -- i think it is something to be truly concerned about. if you look at 2015 and 16, i think that could very well be the start of a longer trend. in 2015 and 16, homicides and

shootings went up significantly. we saw things level off in -- and in 2019, things pick up. in 2020, there was a big explosion followed up by a more violent year, it looks like. the data is not out. host: that -- the pandemic has caused a bigger sale in guns. how much of that contributes to crime? guest: i don't think there is a lot that can be say that said about that. there is a graphical connection on where purchases happen and where the violent crime rates increase. we have saw the proliferation of guns through the 2000. --2000s.

-- gun ownership rates were much lower. the gun issue is alternately a distraction on -- ultimately a distraction on likely a bigger crime trend which is a shift in public policy. one that systematically lowers the transaction costs of breaking gun laws. it defanged the credit normal justice system in a way that leads to a loss -- or defenders -- offenders finding their ways back to the streets and police feeling like they cannot do their job and get a fair shake. i think all of those factors are more important than recent personages. host: -- did that trend begin in the wake of the murder of george

floyd? guest: it was starting to build, although what happened after george floyd was a radical acceleration. the new york times put out a piece saying that 30's states had passed many reforms after torch happened -- george floyd happened. just in that month and there were a significant list of reforms that have been enacted in years prior and cents. i think the move to d police -- de police is a trend that accelerated and if you look at 2019, the prison population's

was about 17%. in 2020, it declined about -- 20%. in jails, we saw a decline. between 2009 and 2019, 8 25% in arrests. there have been a recruitment and retention crisis for at least the last five years. in the police. host: you go back to your term in your book, they push for -- what de carson ration gets wrong. -- d carson ration --dec arceration gets wrong. -- guest: we saw court systems slow

to a halt. cases were not being prosecuted and people wars the spending more time on the street as in post position, which could include jail. we saw people being expedited in prison and jail to minimize the disease spread within these facilities. i think that contributed to the crime problem. i do think that the broader trend is much more important and it is driven by policy. host: rafael -- rafael mangual is with us. what is the mission of the manhattan institute? guest: we are a free market think tape -- tank that promotes personal responsibility. our initiative is dedicating --

dedicated to identifying the right policy approach particularly but not exclusively in urban areas across the country. that manhattan institute is somewhat while known for its role or climb the crying -- declining -- crimes declining. host: we welcome our viewers and listeners to join our conversation. public in -- republicans, (202) 748-8001 democrats, (202) 748-8000 independence, (202) 748-8003. guest: 30 states has passed 140

police and -- some of those will have included funding bills. a lot of the defunding happen at the city and the local level. the lost -- l.a. city council -- this is more state legislation which we are trying to get the idea of the scope because be on states, we have localities acting. host: that was ground zero on reflecting whether that was the right course with the election of adams. do you anticipate changes in laws in new york city and new york state? guest: it is early to say. we are learning that the mayor in new york only has so much power. a lot of these policies are

enacted at the state level and we have not seen albany any signal any willingness to budge to consider any reforms and raise the age. all of these are systematically lowering the transaction cost of criminal conduct, making it less likely that you will be arrested. and if you will be arrested, your case will be possibility -- prosecuted. we had juvenile cases getting diverted to family court, making present -- prison sanctions less likely. eric adams can use -- he is putting pressure on democrats and all the things that so far, they do not seem willing to budge. you have prosecutors who are at office with adams --

host: bail reform is killing new yorkers and in your piece, you write that sweeping changes in 2019 to the state laws, governing pretrial lease were thought to reduce the number of defendants -- the reforms made it more difficult to -- for judges to require defendants to post bail. new york is not the only state in which judges cannot remand defendants to reach out the tension based on the danger -- they can only consider risk of flight. can you relate that directly to the crime rate in new york? more these people can't be held so is that one of the root

causes of crime on the street? guest: i think it is a contributing factor. it is not the main driver but at the margins, i think we are seeing more crime than we would have seen. one of the statistics that indicates that is the growth and share of violent arrests that are constituted by people with violent cases. if you look at just violent felony arrests, we see the percentage of arrests constitute people who have open cases increased by 25% in 2020, relative of 2019. 2020 is when the veil reform went into effect. it is hard to understate how much new york is an outlier. there was an equity of book in our pretrial -- afflict in our

-- pretrial -- -- waiting for their case to make it through the system. that was criticized as inefficient and i think that was right. the question is how we remedy that and what new york thought to do is to make it likely that they would be imposed and if imposed, it would be an amount that was unaffordable. my proposal of that proposed -- approach is that we should center the entry around danger, rather than wealth. you get around the inequities and inefficiencies while maintaining some ability for judges to exercise their discretion and keep the public safe when they are confronted with a defendant that poses

danger. host: i wish we had the woman who called from queens who son was in pre-tout the tension in new york. not sure which jail. for four years. guest: it is incredible and upsetting. it is a really big problem and one of the things i wrote is that one of the things is significantly refund the criminal justice system so that people stand to spend much less time in a pre-tile -- pretrial detention. it is the function of how much it takes to -- it is a ridiculous amount of time. there are other reasons why other cases where delayed. covid and defense attorneys will

submit motions that will slow down the disposition of the case so that has to be taken into consideration. what is a good thing about the new jersey bill is that there bail reform games with -- time -- came with a increase of the criminal says -- funding of the credit normal -- criminal justice system. i think it needs more attention. the degree in which we crowded out spending for core functions like the criminal justice system, is a scandal. host: let's go to sharon. caller: thanks for the topic and i was trying to get in with the last gentleman. i am not quite sure that mike

questions are befitting -- my questions are befitting but i hope you will let me give it a shot. i have had -- it seems common sense to me that we note that a male's brain does not develop until they are 25 but by the time they are 12, we let them go into gun safety classes and i think if we can raise the age limit to 25 years old so we have a few more that are mentally able to handle the gun and then my last one would be, is it not possible that everyone who wants a weapon at least -- a fifth grade equivalency test. as an text school --ex-school

teacher -- at least a fifth grade equivalency test to own a weapon. guest: i am not a constitutional lawyer but i do know there are presidents that should reject the idea of having a competency test for the constitutional rights. i'm not how that will -- i am not sure how they will apply to similar things. we see gun crime as a national issue and i think that is right in some ways but wrong in others. gun crime is extremely concentrated in the united states. guns are held in private hands throughout the country. in most american cities, we have

the rule of crime concentration, were about 50% of all crime concentrates in just 5% of all street segments. in new york city, about 4% of street segments see 50% of all violent crimes. the vast majority of americans live in safe enclaves without any gun violence to speak of. when you realize that, you realize it is actually quite possible to combat gun crime by simply concentrating police and resources in those places with problems and identifying a small percentage of the population that is driving this problem. most gun owners, non-gun owners, most americans are not violent individuals. it does not matter their ethnicity or what socioeconomic strata they belong to, the vast majority of american citizens are law-abiding citizens. we have to target those areas and individuals, and then we can

make real progress. the proof is in the pudding of what we did throughout the 1990's to get the gun crime problem under control and to keep it there for a significant period of time. host: rafael mangual all got his law degree from depaul university in chicago. next to greenwood, florida, republican line. caller: yes, i have worked in the prison system and stuff and have been around some of the younger ones that was incarcerated. and a lot of them, we're going to go back to the basics of the home life. it has not been taught when they was younger. a lot of them was fatherless and they belonged to gangs. now gangs run more than you think in this country, and i think a lot of your crimes -- i think they should really be looking at some of the gangs and drugs. basically, drugs bring some of

the crime rate, and i think we should control our border a little bit better and concentrate on some of the harder crimes there. i think it would end a lot of your real violence. host: ok. rafael mangual? guest: i do think there is quite a bit of evidence to show that really aiming at gangs is an effective way to keep crime down. there was a recent study out of new york city looking at the effective king takedowns -- gang takedowns in the post 2010 period, and there was a significant decline in gun crime, almost by a third, i think. i would encourage you to take a look at that out of the university of pennsylvania. that model requires a commitment on the part of prosecutors to targeting these individuals, who are the drivers of a significant amount of violence not just in

new york city but cities across the country. one of the troubling things we have seen is that there is a new movement of progressive prosecutors being elected on platforms that involve commitments to nonprosecution and to lowering the transaction cost of anger activity -- of gang activity. george kass cohen in los angeles county has committed to that. it will have a meaningful effect on your public safety picture. it is one of the reasons why say ultimately looking at the means by which people commit crimes is a distraction. we know how to target individuals who are driving crimes and know-how to incapacitating them. we are systematically choosing not to do that in a broader scope of cases over the last 10 to 20 years. the question is how long we will allow that trend to continue. host: next up is dennis in lincoln hills, illinois, independent line.

are you there? we will go to john who is on the republican line in mastic beach, new york. welcome. caller: good morning. my opinion is if your child does a crime, the parents should do the time. that would straighten out a lot of things in this country. everybody should be able to have a gone, but bullets should cost at least $5,000 apiece. host: let me ask you about a tweet from lee who says, i live in new york city, which is awash in guns traffic from southern states, always felt safer in london. and this one calls it and iron pipeline, firearms freeway of traffic guns from the south to places like new york city, but that there was no federal trafficking law, trafficking

statute. do you think there should be? guest: it is certainly a federal crime to sell guns to people who are legally not allowed to own them. it is also a crime at the state and local level in many jurisdictions, probably every jurisdiction across the country. again, ultimately pointing to that phenomenon, a distraction from the real issue, which is new york is choosing not to enforce these laws that are already on the books with the same vigor, and that is what is at the core of this problem. in 1990, we had 2260 murders in the city of new york with significantly fewer guns on the street and coming into the pipeline. ultimately, we decreased demand for those weapons by targeting and incapacitating the individuals that were driving that crime. we were able to get crime under

control for a significant period of time and keep it there for 25 years and we can that again, no reason why we can't. but the idea is purchases in the south are somehow driving violence that would not otherwise occur, i am not sure it makes a ton of sense. the idea that someone would be otherwise nonviolent until they are given a gun recently purchased, there is no demand for that gun to begin with, i think that is a mr. -- misunderstanding of the dynamics at play. host: to baltimore, curtis, independent line. caller: thank you for taking my call, only been trying to get through for the last four months. i am glad to say what i'm about to say, and i know i will be speaking for a lot of people. i hope a lot of people call to back me up. first of all, from the previous conversation or this conversation, no one wants to

defund the police anywhere in this country, first of all. i want to say that for every true american and real american that there is. nobody was ever calling to defund the program, i mean the police officers.we just want the police to do their jobs like they were law-abiding citizens and be held responsible like law-abiding citizens when it comes to their actions. second of all, i want to speak on all the guns in the community, and we know which communities i am talking about. they are not getting there on their own. there was a problem with the drugs in our communities, i am talking about a black communities, people of color. there was a problem with drugs in our communities, and we know after so many years, it has been proven that the cia was putting all these drugs in our communities.

we know that. we do not have a problem with people being held responsible for their actions of murdering, killing, rape, robberies, or anything. but we want a justice system that not just focuses on black people committing crimes, because we know that black people just don't commit crimes. if you go to any prison practically in this country, you will find that 70% to 80% of the prison population are people of color. and why is that? when we know that there is european's in this country that commit crimes, just as well as there are people of color that commit crimes. and please, c-span, and for future reference, stop screening your calls and keeping black people off your lines. thank you very much. host: ok, your thoughts? guest: the first thing to say is

there unfortunately were a number of jurisdictions that did defund their police departments, and in new york city we cut our police department by about $1 billion over several years, and minneapolis and los angeles also cut their police budgets by millions of dollars. that was a real thing that happened, and there are people not just calling for the funding the police but for abolishing them altogether. i do think that is a real phenomenon and also think it is largely a fringe position, thankfully, even today despite the sort of right -- radicalization of the criminal justice reform debate. the other point he was making was one about racial disparities and enforcement, and i do think that is a real concern. it is true that the costs associated with enforcement of our criminal laws are not distributed, and the phenomenon of this, we have to understand it drives a lot of the disparities that we see in our prison populations, in our

arrest data, in police using force data, etc. i mentioned the geographic concentration of crime in the united states, most cities with 5% of street segments and 50% of all crimes. it is also demographically concentrated. we know black man in the u.s. constitute about 7% of the population but also constitute close to half of homicide victims. the black male homicide victimization rate in this country is 10 times the white male rate. in new york city, going back more than a decade come every year a minimum of 95% of all shooting victims are either black or hispanic, minimum, sometimes as high as 98%. we have to understand that those are the data that are driving where police resources get deployed and where they get deployed will affect arrest rates and ultimately incarceration rates and prosecution rates.

when we concentrate on enforcement, particularly on places with the biggest problems, we can have the biggest impact, and that is in crime reduction, and crime reduction is to the benefit of black and brown communities in this country. 1990 22014, there was a significant decline in homicides across the united states. if you look at the impact on the decline of homicide rate on the left x becton see -- life expectancy of white men, .4 years. and it is 4.04 black men. something we cannot sq without -- we cannot look at without consequences for the communities we are talking about, and it goes to the subtitle of my book, what the push for d cursor ration and dipali policing gets wrong and who it hurts most, it is in and around urban centers. i would like to see as much

fervor forgetting the prime prop -- crime problem under control as we see with other crimes that get more news coverage. host: the question on twitter. we are systematically choosing to ignore the fact that most horrific crimes and mass murders are not perpetrated by inner-city youth but are carried out by white suburban males. how much time have you spent studying that? guest: quite a lot of time. and i will say that it's simply incorrect you are the vast majority of violent crimes, particularly homicides, are not committed by white suburban males. there concentrated in and around u.s. cities, and black males alone account for nearly half of all homicides in this country. so i would say that is just incorrect. it does not mean that white people do not commit crimes are that asian or hispanic people do not commit crimes, of course they do.

but yeah, there is an undeniable racial disparity in criminal victimization and in criminal commission. host: next is frank in jackson, tennessee. caller: good morning. here is the whole problem, i totally disagree with rafael. to quote john adams, it is more important to the community that innocence should be protected then it is guilt being punished, for guilt and crimes are so frequent in this world that all of them cannot be punished. i could go on. and to quote thomas jefferson, i did a trial by jury was the only thing ever yet managed -- imagined by man in which government can be held to the principles of its constitution. rafael can back me up on this, 98% of our federal cases are plea bargains.

that is not justice. only 2% of felonies go to jury trial. so that is total injustice. also, the chief mandate of the criminal justice system is to not convict the guilty but to safeguard the innocent from wrongful conviction. this is the whole problem. we have decimated the black community. talking about the black community committing all the crimes, they have been decimated. the "new york times post quote in 2016, 1 .5 million black men missing from life, people like rafael make me sick. they make the problem worse. also, another quote here, a russian proverb, law is the flag and gold is the wind that makes it wave. host: i will let you go here and hear from rafael in response to some of his comments. guest: i mean, it is no secret that the vast majority of

criminal cases in this country go to plea guard -- plea bargain. there are strong cases in which the perpetrator is guilty, and it pays to bargain. they get a significant benefit, one that i think that is often too big. i disagree with the characterization of our plea bargaining rate as a grant injustice of sorts to it one of the things we know is that studies have been done looking at and trying to assess the wrongful conviction rate, and regularly finds it is less than 1%, which is not perfect but no system is. ours is pretty darn good. god forbid i were ever on criminal trial, i would hope it was in this country more than any other because our system, while not perfect, works better than any other. one of the things we should understand is that there has been a proliferation of technology that has made the procurement of evidence in

criminal cases easier. we have cameras, body cameras, something like 80% of all criminal cases now involve some kind of video evidence, which is much harder to push back on if you are a defendant. so i just disagree with the mischaracterization there. host: and we're talking about his upcoming book in july, "criminal (in)justice, what the push for decarceration and depolicing gets wrong and who it hurts most." is this your first book? guest: this is. host: roy in greensboro, north carolina, democrats line. caller: thank you for c-span. the big thing to me is every other developed country in the world has got off there butt and some form of license, registration, and insurance, now people, the gun worshipers compare cars to guns, that cars

can kill people, too. yet, but cars have a million purposes. the only purpose of a gun is to kill, maim, intimidate. sometimes rightly, but that is the only purpose. that is not the same thing as an accidental death, of course there are many of them with guns, too, but we do not have crimes using intimidation's, robberies, etc. but license, registration, and insurance, if that was done anything like cars, we would just look -- is having to do it, that would get like 99% of these, like iron pipeline guns, coming from the gone worshipers to everywhere else, arming their criminals. and rafael, you did not answer that caller before, that twitter about most of the mass shootings

are white suburban guys. that is true. it is, most of the mass shootings, school shootings, everything, a lot of ex-military -- host: we will leave on that point. do you want to respond? guest: i think it is really important to understand that the vast majority of violent gun crimes committed in the places with the highest concentration of gun crimes are usually committed by people who are already prohibited from possessing and purchasing these firearms under the regimes already in the systems in those restrictions. there is an enormous amount of gun crime committed by people under the age of 18, who are not committed to carry a gun. in new york city, we do not have legally licensed carriage yet, and we have many people walking around with firearms and they are already breaking the laws on our books. we have had significantly fewer gun controls in place throughout the 1990's in that the city, but

we were able to get down to 292 murders in 2017, and much of that progress was made without any real changes in gun policy. so i think it is really important to keep that in mind and understand that the enforcement mechanisms, our police, our -- our prison systems, these are avenues available to us to get this problem under control, and it is out of political will. host: and is it true that most of the mass shootings in the united states are committed by white men? guest: it depends how you define mass shooting. if it is simply shootings in public places were more than

four people are wounded, it is not clear to me, i know there are a lot of drive-by shootings in the cities across the country , so i just cannot tell you. host: here is ryan in the nation's capital, independent line. caller: good morning. your guest has talked about the good old days in new york when the crime is low. a set when they talked about stopping frisky, finding it was totally illegal, and it was aimed at the poor black people and poor brown people, and also, you cannot arrest your way out of crime. if that is what you are thinking , you really kind of missed the whole point. i do not see that happening. in china and russia, those are

supposedly two criminal regimes. again, you do not want to talk about guns, but here in d.c., we have some of the strictest gun laws in the country were all guns come from somewhere else. yet, the program i saw on 60 minutes, the atf is unable to get to these dealers who are selling guns that they know are coming into our communities. host: thanks. guest: i would not equate broken windows with stop and frisk. the nypd stop and frisk was ruled unconstitutional by a district court judge, and that is a function of a supreme court case in ohio which has not been overruled, and the nypd still conducts stops, questions, and frisks to this day because it is a perfectly legal tactic. i would note that it is not --

stop and frisk is not a strategy, it is a tactic, a tool. i think there is a strong case to be made that it was, but we also know that it helped in a lot of places, particularly places with the highest crime rates. a study was done looking at the impact of stop and frisk on crime in new york city at the micro geographic level. if you look at the crime hotspots were a lot of these were concentrated, you saw a significant effect on crime in those places. i would not necessarily just get rid of a tool like that in its entirety, and that is not what is being done. we do have some reported stops by the nypd, and we were still able to maintain some of our public safety in the wake of that decline, but i do think we are seeing a broader safety policing problem, and i think the caller is wrong.

it is not that we can entirely arrest our way out of a gun product -- gun crime problem, but we know enforcement matters, and when we do enforcement the right way, we can decrease crime to a significant degree. i would remind the caller that we had 2262 murders in 1990, and we went down to 292 in 2017, and i think enforcement had a lot to do with it. host: rafael mangual has a new book coming out in july, his first. it is called "criminal (in)justice, what the push for decarceration and depolicing gets wrong and who it hurts most ." he is with the manhattan institute. thanks for being with us this morning. morehead here on our focus on crime in the u.s. we will be joined by hans menos, from the center for policing equity, focusing on policing and public safety issues. that is ahead.

>> on almost all present jeweled jewel ranking lists, warren harding will be at the bottom -- on almost all presidential raking lists. historian ryan walters says while harding had his faults, his accomplishments are often overlooked, including bringing the country back to normalcy after world war i and an economic plan that led to the roaring 1920's. in his book, he lays out his case for why president harding should rank higher. >> he has finished last in a more presidential surveys and rankings than any the president. he and james buchanan ain't our neck and neck. -- our neck and neck. harding has come up a bit in recent years, but there are a lot of myths and falsehoods about him and outright lies. when you look at his true record and what he actually accomplished as president of the united states, it is actually

quite impressive. >> historian ryan walters sunday night at 8:00 eastern on "q&a." you can listen to q&a and all of our podcast on our free c-span now app. >> weekends on c-span2 are an intellectual feast. every saturday, you will find events and people that explore our nation's past on american history tv. on sundays, but tv brings you the latest books and authors, television for serious readers. learn, discover, explore, weekends on c-span2. >> washington journal" continues. host: we have been focusing on u.s. crime throughout the morning here on "washington journal." we have targeted on the policing aspect, and hans menos is next,

vice president of law enforcement initiatives with the center for policing equity. when it comes to policing, what does that phrase mean, equity? what does that mean to you? guest: it means a lot to different people. host: what is the goal of your organization, the center for policing equity? guest: cpe, we are a research and action center. we understand that we can use data as a leverage for social change. same way attorneys might use the law for social change or other forms use funding, we use the data, and that is at the heart of a lot of our issues that go toward public safety. host: you spent some time with the philadelphia police, executive rector of the advisory commission there and philadelphia. how does the policing -- executive director for the advisory commission there in philadelphia. how are you working for police

forces on issues of public safety? guest: we are working with some police forces, for sure. one of the things we pride ourselves on is the idea that we center in communities, not necessarily law enforcement agencies. we work with communities and law enforcement and minister polities to understand what issues are important to the community, important to law enforcement, and how those issues impact the relationship and impact equity in public safety and what solutions from the community can be utilized to improve the way they experience public safety and to increase public safety. host: almost two years after the george floyd murder and the social justice protests after that, what are those big issues in public safety that you are hearing from communities? what are top priorities? guest: a lot of those issues are

actually shared by community and police, yet it is generalized that police are doing too much. most police officers we encounter will tell us that, and most community members are saying that same thing. that when they have a mental health call, they do not want a police officer showing up. they want someone who can solve that problem, why they call that magic number, calling 911, they want that solved. and police recognize they should not be involved in some situations and they do not have the resources to do something about a homeless person, and people in those communities recognize that the police will not solve that problem for them, do not have the tools. same with drug addiction. those are the big three. the police are not able and do not have the tools or resources, the position or authority, to address those issues either. so communities and police

officers are seeing the same problems, which is that they are doing too much, involved in too many things. there are things like low-level traffic offenses and the correlation between that and public safety. how is a young man, something hanging from his visor, if he is pulled over for a conversation about that, how is the public safety increased by that? and what other things can we utilize to enforce traffic penalties without necessarily forcing an interaction between police and people of color or people moving and going on with their business? host: we welcome our viewers and listeners comments on policing and public safety, with our guest hans menos. (202) 748-8001 for republicans. democrats, (202) 748-8000. independents and all others,

(202) 748-8002. particularly in the wake of those protests, as your organization sees it, it is not just an issue of how much funding the police get but how you reimagine public safety, particularly in urban areas. guest: the police should not be thought of as a separate entity on an island. they are part of a public safety apparatus. if we start thinking about what we're spending on public safety and defining that as all things with impact and influence for keeping people safe in communities, we are rethinking the idea that police are there and the department of health is over here. our spending should be thought of in that way, for the right responders, for the right problems in each community and each city around the country. host: can you see the police being reluctant in the wake of these d funding calls, these

criticisms of the police, particularly after the last couple of years, as sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy in terms of crime rates going up, and after that, with police going back from doing the job they are tasked to do? guest: there are ongoing conversations that depolicing might be contributing to a crime wave. but that is not true, there is not a crime spite, so to speak. it is important in some select sees -- some cities, some not rising. but there is a conversation for that. i do not think there is any evidence, and as an organization that uses data, i do not think we can endorse the idea that de policing are causing police officers to pull back and that is causing crime. but i think there's something there, the idea that police officers, if they are reluctant terry magic -- to reimagine public safety, they are

concerned that the funding or the resources they have will go away and nothing is going to fill that gap. so they have just as much work they had before the resources were taken away. communities, particularly black communities, are afraid of the same thing, so we tell them we're going to reimagine public safety, and it is tough for them to say if i have less of a police response, how do i trust that something will take that place? i would rather have police they and nothing. so they communities are really agreeing on the idea that we have to fulfill these promises. host: which communities do you think are getting it right in terms of the balance between the proper amount of police presence and the concern -- their concern for the public safety needs of their residents? guest: it is important to note that no two communities are really the same. i came here to philadelphia from

new york city, and one of the first lessons i learned was that any effort to compare these two cities is fruitless because they are so different. that is true for any city around the country, so everyone is doing some the different. but certainly, we have partners around the country that understand that the way of doing things, certainly in terms of public safety and policing, have not been impactful. our partners have been working for the best part of two years trying to reimagine what it looked like to have a public safety system. they want to send the right responders, send a responder to a call that requires a police officer and then an unarmed responder to a call that does not require a police officer, that requires someone to come help, come sit, come do something. so those folks are in the process and they have worked through complicated issues. they have done that by letting the community lead. i want to stress that, the idea

that community members form the working group and lead the working group and drove the creation or recommendations in the report, that got down into the details of what it would look like. so they went through a process where they said for this type of call, police officer, and for this type of call, unarmed officer. for them, that process, that long process of letting communities lead is a great example of what we can do if we really rethink the structure of power and rethink decision-making on public safety. host: sounds like in some way you are saying we have asked police officers to do too much, be social workers in some cases, intervene in domestic service -- disturbances, be immigration officers in some cases. guest: i do not even think you needed me to say that. i think they police officers around the country are saying that. most police openly say that they

are asked to do far too much. and it is not just a matter of volume but a matter of capacity and training and ability, a matter of resources that they can deploy, and they recognize that. you mentioned domestic violence, a good example of a police officer might go to ensure someone safety, but how do we rethink the problem of domestic violence to address that upstream? we could identify families or children affected by domestic violence, so how do we make sure there is not a second third 911 call or 10 more because of the problem they are experiencing? that is something police officers will tell you, that they cannot resolve the problem and it is constantly going back. that kind of issue exists all throughout the public safety system. host: our guest is hans menos with the center for policing equity. we go first to peggy in

washington, democrats line. caller: good morning. i really feel sorry for the police. i think they are being asked to do way too much with too little thanks and with a huge penalty if they make a mistake, and especially when they are overworked and overrun, understaffed. police are problem-enders, not problem-solvers. each state and each county needs to start changing the policies. yeah, anyway, that is what i wanted to say. host: hans menos? guest: i think it is appropriate to say we have concerns for police officers who are asked too much, but let's not forget the people who are experiencing these. if you live in a municipality, you expect certain things from your government, and some of that is the right response to issues you might have as a person who lives there. so yes, the police are probably

sent to a problem and they are the wrong person, but the community members are still experiencing the problem. so i support the idea that we should be thoughtful about our police officers, but we should be doubly thoughtful about the communities impacted by a lack of services, a lack of ability to solve or address the problems they are experiencing. and even worse, the framing of those problems as their fault, some kind of personal feeling. so we want to keep communities centered in this conversation to make sure we're are not saying it is a conversation focused on how police are being harmed and mistreated. i agree, too much, but the people there asking too much for are also suffering in the communities. host: john in manchester, connecticut, republican line. caller: thank you for taking my call. i would like to add to the definition of equity. equity is nothing else more than

yield affirmative action, which is nothing more than preferences or quotas for everybody except whites, especially white males. and thanks to biden, equity nowadays means giving up on standards. a local community is no longer enforcing laws in the books, and we all know how that has turned out to be. an increase in crime. in 2020, we had riots all over america. and we were watching them on tv. in the common thing is they say they are quiet, peaceful protesters. so it is the standards allowing all kinds of -- what biden calls -- i forget, antifa, he calls

antifa not a movement but an idea. well, it creates an awful lot of crime. host: response from hans menos. guest: i think it is important to first note that the continued insistence that crime is universally rising, that is not actually accurate. i understand people feel that way and i am sensitive to community members feeling that way. but by and large, it is untrue. i do not know specifically which laws on the books are not being enforced that the caller is referencing, but i do not know that the universal suggestion is just. there have been plenty of laws that were on the books, and we're all pretty happy with them for a period of time. i think it is a really important idea that we think through.

yes, there are issues happening in our communities, but the idea that because it is a law and it is therefore just, you have to rethink that and reconsider it. host: next is stephen in windham, connecticut, independent line. caller: thanks for taking my call. to my brother in manchester, people of color have lived under slavery, apartheid, for hundreds of years, so please, brother. my issues on aircraft and policing and the policy side, we have seen an explosion -- i work in aircraft manufacturing, but my brothers and sisters in the airlines, they are gathering posses to take down people.

one guy at american airlines tried to open up -- on the side of people of color to step in and help us out -- i do not believe in lifetime bans, but there should be some sort of policy we can use to send a message to people. it has exploded. host: any thoughts? guest: not a lot of thoughts on airline safety. but as someone who occasionally flies, some of the solutions to these issues have been structured. it is a good example to pull apart. now alcohol is not served on planes they determined this was a contributing factor, those who

are intoxicated or bringing their own alcohol. now they are not serving alcohol beverages, but they remind you that it is no longer permitted. they remind you repeatedly from the moment you walk into the airport that a mask is required. so there are structural downstream issues that are intended to ensure that there is not conflict. clearly, it is still happening, and i do not know that we have the numbers to see if solutions are effective. that the general idea is we are picking upstream in this microcosm of public safety, but i do not know if it is comparable to the challenges communities face. but it is important that they address this problem. host: next up is denise in washington, democrats line. caller: good morning. do you think that there could -- this is for both of you -- do you think that there could be

any correlation between the pandemic or the virus here in the united states and abroad and the uptake in criminal behavior? host: hans menos? guest: so i think it is a good question, because we are at a point now where we do not know what could be driving any criminality. if we are talking about uptake in behavior on the gun violence question, we do not know the answer to that. i think that is really important. is it the pandemic? possibly, that is one theory. but it will show up on screens, on twitter, on facebook, people saying i know what is causing this, it is rhetoric around policing or some other issue related to criminal justice reform. i look to other evidence. it is not clear to me how anyone

can conclusively say x is causing this, this is causing this. we are not there yet. i am sure there are scores of criminologists and social workers who are eager to provide an answer. i also know we really do not have a clear answer on the last time violence spiked in the 1990's. people are still suggesting that this is what caused that. so we may not know. i think it is a good thing to think about in our communities and immediate areas, wondering what might be impacting us, but no one can tell you conclusively. host: what role does america's incarceration policies, federal and state, play in the crime across the country? guest: once again, folks suggest the idea that our efforts to decarcerate, which disproportionately impacted black and brown communities, are causing a spike in crime. eric adams has said this and

other folks in other countries, that there are people now on the streets that are criminals. they were arrested and are now on the streets and they are creating more crimes. there is a stronger evidence to suggest that is not true, people who are let out on bail are not committing more crimes. there is a suggestion that it is true. but none of us really understand the true cause of this paired we can pick out a view things that suggest the narratives that are forming are not accurate. host: to alex, ashburn, virginia, republican line. caller: yes, hi, it was a rape in philadelphia last year, and a homeless guy raped a woman in the subway, and 10 people were on the train and nobody intervened. so what can we do to avoid this

situation, to make sure people do something in this situation? i am thinking for most people, this guy has image of victim, and this is wrong. i think everybody should intervene in this situation. and this is a shame for the whole society, that we are scared to intervene when crime occurs. thank you. host: hans menos, do you think that is a new phenomenon, where people have been reluctant to get engaged in reporting crimes like that? guest: i want to give a little history, and i will address that. there was a story about a woman in queens who was supposedly attacked while her neighbors watched, and the police commissioner at the time commented on a social apathy, that folks no longer care about their neighbors. that story carried the day and

was discussed widely and was ultimately disproven, proven to be completely false. neighbors were calling 911 and were attempting to assist her, left their homes, and they tried really hard, and there was actually a police response. that certainly fed into a narrative that people just do not care and we do not know our neighbors anymore. unfortunately, it happened again here in philadelphia in 2021 were a story about a woman getting raped in front of a bunch of other passengers, and it was again folks don't care about their neighbors and will not get involved, and that was also, by the prosecuting attorney, proven to be untrue. so i do not know if folks care more or less about the community now. i have trouble believing in philadelphia that that is true. and in new york, i saw a lot of love and care in that city, too.

but i can tell you these two stories used to suggest this are false, and that is from the people directly involved. i encourage anyone to do deep diving on the stories, fascinating. and it will also tell you about what the prosecuting attorney for the cases had to say about the residents at the city who were impacted. host: break in clarksville, tennessee. independent line. -- rick in cooksville, tennessee. caller: if you legalize all drugs, coke, heroin, that would cut down on police brutality, murdering unarmed black man, unarmed white men. you should not have to worry about cops breathing down your neck because you want to get high sometimes. host: we had a former police officer calling us earlier who spent 30 years on the force and

suggested the same thing, came to the conclusion that that could be a major solution to crime in the u.s., to legalize drugs across the board. guest: earlier i mentioned the idea of enforcing low-level traffic and the idea of, what is the public safety effort there? what is making the city or states more safe if i pull you over for a low-level traffic offense? the idea is that the context can be problematic for communities, and it relates to other areas. on a case-by-case basis, if you think about what we're doing to increase public safety, and is something that is happening, is an enforcement action, drugs or anything else, actually increasing public safety? this general idea may impact some communities significantly more than other communities. so someone in the suburbs right say, sure, let's legalize drugs,

and the impact on them may be minimal. someone in the city might have a different feeling about what it looks like to legalize drugs and what that might do to their immediate surroundings. all these decisions, while thoughtful and creative, the thinking in terms of big picture and how we decrease contact and how we think strategically about public safety, the reason why it is important in new york is because they bring in the community to discuss that and how it will affect community members, making them part of the decision-making process. legalizing drugs may work for certain areas of the country. but we have to make sure the folks who will be most impacted have a significant seat at the table as the change is discussed. host: a you on that from twitter says we cannot describe causation from many correlations, but i think we know the war on drugs has an impact on violence in the u.s..

martin is next in maryland, republican line. caller: wow, i got to follow that call. i think a lot of the responses have been simplistic in how to manage crime. i think that we need more community policing, and i know that that phrase gets a lot of pushback from cops. but there are situations that do not necessarily need a god and a badge and a -- do not need a gun and badge at billy club all the time. i think police need to be more community focused and the neighborhoods need to be more community focused, and if we can find opportunities to reduce the broken glass situations that are a part of our everyday living, i think we can have police do the things we need them to do on a larger scale and not just be

there to enforce laws and things that are not necessarily needed for the police to do. so i just hope that we can find a way to reduce crime, small petty crimes, without having to always call upon the police to do those things for us. host: ok. hans menos? guest: i appreciate that call, the idea that we should really try and serve communities at a deeper level. i do not know that it always needs to be the police department. i do think that if we extend the idea of public safety, we can have other folks throughout the system understand what it looks like to engage community at a deeper level. we talk often, and on this program you discuss this, the idea of the nypd budget decreased last year. but we do not talk about how at the same time period, there were proportionately larger cuts to the department of youth and

community development and parks and recreation. so we think about this idea that we defund the police in new york city, no one is referencing defund parks and recreation defund the youth. so think about those agencies, parks and recreation and youth and community and public safety, and say that we are going to send not community policing officers but other folks who work in those two areas of the city to ensure the community is actively engaged and their problems are being dealt with by folks with skills and expertise in those areas. we are rethinking public safety in that way. so i agree with the caller, but i wonder that as we reimagine public safety, do we want to continue to shoehorn the public into policing? host: i heard talk about this recently and the idea of modernizing the nation's 911 system and to be able to do that

, it could be emergency fire, medical, police, some sort of emergency, some other type of call, are there efforts being made to do that? guest: oh, yes. i think most folks recognize around the country that when there is a fire, someone calls 911 and they sent a fire truck, when there is a medical emergency, they sent an ambulance, and for virtually everything else, they send the police. in philadelphia, we had a problem where the police were shooting way too many k-9 -- dogs, and the issue was really that the 911 dispatcher did not have many other people to send, so there was a dangerous dog, which is a problem in many cities, and the person dispatched is a police officer, and what is their weapon? a gun. that problem is when pulled apart, resources are not available, and it is significant.

we look at other areas like portland, oregon, they understand that mental health calls are a significant portion of 911 calls. so now they can be dispatched by 911 to go handle a mental health call, and they had the best training and expertise for that. as i mentioned already, that is coming to new york. when someone calls and says someone broke into my car and no one is here right now but someone broke into my car, so i have a problem that is a non-emergency but need someone to come. they can dispatch soon a person that is not an armed police officer. so there are other areas doing similar initiatives, mental health, addiction, focusing on homelessness, but it is nowhere near enough to solve or address the problems that exist. host: ned is next up in idaho. hey there. caller: hi, i love your program.

i love your initiative. they had it working in oakland, california, some years ago they had their murder rate drop to almost nothing. i think what we do not address in this country though is the influence of transnational criminal organizations, tco's, the drug cartels linked to the gangs. five different drug cartels from mexico and central america have influence in the united states with the drug trade, in cities with the most competition between those five drug cartels, you see the biggest crime rate and homicides. that is why chicago is that way. you have five different ones competing there. it is something we really need to address, and that would be

part of border security. it goes all the way through central america. it is a regional issue. also, mental health. in the 1980's, the federal government ran the mental health in the country. you called -- just a bunch of federal, you know, kind of repositories for people throughout the country. they were really bad, and a lot of that did not happen, so reagan shut them all down, and states were supposed to adopt their own mental health programs. they never did. host: we will let you go there as the phone is breaking up a little bit. hans menos? guest: absolutely, just to kind of go to that point, when we talk about reimagining public safety, if we take something

away, we take the police response which was not necessarily always a response, we have to keep that promise and send the right responder. otherwise communities will bear the brunt. it is significant, when we take away our systems of care, take away our mental health systems, something is going to fill that void. guess what it was back then and through the 2000's, our local jails and prisons. so mass incarceration became the highest in the world because of these issues or it at least was a contributing factor. we know this because our county jails, l.a. county, new york city, chicago, were simultaneously the biggest jails in the nation and the biggest mental health providers in the nation because of the comorbidity existing. a lot of people were homeless and mentally ill and had encounters with law enforcement

and found themselves in these places. when we talk about systems of care and reimagining public safety, it is taking that kind of problem and saying we have have a better solution. we cannot continue to incarcerate people for the crime of being mentally ill. we have to be better as a city and nation and see these problems and address them not how we have typically addressed them, we cannot go back to the old way of doing them. we have to reimagine. host: a call from southern california, oceanside, this is richard on the democrats line. caller: hello, my question today , i do not know if anybody will appreciate it, but it seems to me that things have gotten much worse on the crime scene over the last five years. i am just curious, there was a fellow on here, a guy elected for president about five years ago, and he made the statement publicly that he was so excited,

he could go out in the public and shoot somebody and nobody could do anything to him. and i wonder if you think that may have had an impact on certain kinds of imbalanced people's minds and they think now they can -- just yesterday 13 people were assaulted at gunpoint here in san diego in a nice area, robbed on the street, money taken. we had host: ok, richard, we're we're about to go here. hans. guest: how the leaders can lead us and impact our daily living and certainly the former's president's behavior, actions made us pause and wonder how that was impacting things like hate crimes and the willing inns for violence. i would say generally as we

think about reimagining public safety, i'll even try and say this -- my thinking on the president's responsibility there. and i want to make sure we're focusing on the data. we're focusing on what communities are saying. because that's important and we shouldn't let go of that. we can't underscore the communities' input and the lever for social change. host: at policing equity. hans menos is with the policing and public safety. more tomorrow at 7:00 eastern. we hope you can join us then. in the meantime, we hope you have a great day. we'll take you next live to capitol hill. just about to get under way. senate banking committee hearing this morning hearing about the state of the u.s. economy. they'll hear from the members of the president's counsel of economic advisors.

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2022] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]

chair brown: the committee on banking, housing and urban affairs will come to order. today's hearing is in the hybrid format. our witnesses are in person.