>> i'm monica malpass for "inside story." what can we do to stop the mass shooting epidemic? should president obama close the background check loophole? let's get the inside story. good morning, and welcome to "inside story." let's meet our insiders this week. they are george burrell, attorney and nonprofit executive. good morning, sir. jan ting, law professor. welcome back, jan. brian tierney, marketing executive. good morning. and sam katz, documentarian. thank you all for being here today. a horrible incident again last week in san bernardino, california, with 14 dead, 21 injured. but now we are up to nearly one a day of these mass shootings in the united states, based on some calculations. if you don't calculate where it could even just be a local incident in a city on a saturday night, unfortunately, in a tough neighborhood. if you count it differently, it's still one every three weeks, based on the old

calculation. and what is so ironic to some people is that gun-control support is actually down. so people either want to arm themselves for safety, or they just don't know how to attack this problem. what in the world can we do here? what do you think, jan? >> well, universal background checks, i don't think, are gonna have any significant impact on the fundamental problem, which, i think has been characterized as domestic terrorism, certainly in the most recent incidents. i mean, all the individuals who are concerned would have been legal buyers, even under universal background checks. all the weapons used in the recent terrorist incidents, as far as we know, were legally purchased. so i don't see that universal background checks are the solution. and statistically, while mass shootings are certainly up, the overall -- i think if you study over the past 10 years, the incidents of gun violence on a per capita basis in america has actually gone down. more guns, more mass shootings, but overall shootings per capita gone down. i think it's a tough problem.

personally, i think we need to, as a result of this most recent shooting, think about immigration. and i think we need to control the number of new people coming in because i think it creates more problems for law enforcement, keeping track of people. i think this most recent shooting involved devoutly religious muslims, who are susceptible to internet proselytizing. >> however, the male perpetrator was american-born, and he married a pakistani-born wife from an internet relationship. so that maybe would not have prevented his interest in having mass shootings be done. >> i think we draw too easy conclusions about this. i don't think not letting people into the united states of america -- we're a land of immigrants, and now we're talking about not letting people in -- is problematic. and i think you have to separate the mass shootings, where we have these group activities, from what goes on. and a per capita analysis doesn't talk about what's going

on in the minority communities. if you do it on a per capita basis, in the minority communities, the numbers are much higher. but i think this whole thing -- and we can get to gun control and all of that stuff, and i think that's a debate that will go on. but it's a character flaw in america that is -- you know, nobody's acting with discipline. our congress doesn't act with discipline. our state legislators don't act with discipline. so if you have no leadership, and the country believes it's all about "me," then what do you expect these other folks who have bigger problems and bigger -- you know, mental issues -- i mean, they believe it's okay. "if those guys can do it, why can't we?" >> so there are two possibilities that are being batted around, among many others, but two big ones. president obama says he may want to personally use the executive order to close a loophole in background checks so that people walking up to a gun show or going online, who currently do not have to have a background check -- they could be criminals. they could have mental-health issues and could just buy a gun anyway instantly. 40% of gun sales would be stopped, or at least delayed, if a background check were done on

everybody. good idea or bad idea? >> i think there's a lot of numbers and statistics. and one of the things we're talking when we talk about one a day, you're talking about some of the typical sad-but-happened urban violence in every city that occurs. so that makes the number higher. the background-check issue -- to do away with that would be more political. look, i'm not a gun nut, but the fact of the matter is for the president to do that wouldn't solve this problem. this guy legally had a gun. >> right. >> so i think to solve the problem that we're looking at or begin to work towards a solution, you really have to break down, okay, what are the boxes of it? some of it is urban violence. how do we address that? some of it is recruited terrorists online, which seems to be a part of this, at least, in terms of the wife, and the fact that we can't track people coming from certain countries. you know, they're not coming -- i mean, they're coming from pakistan. they're coming from certain areas. if you go to syria and you come back, they should give you heightened scrutiny than if you went over to france and just kind of were on vacation, et cetera. so i think to solve the problem, you have to kind of break it down into the pieces. and the kind of across-the-board thing that the president is being urged to do, or is considering, wouldn't solve the

problem. >> but if the president were to do something like that just to send a signal that guns -- we need to take more careful attention to background checks before we move, you know, into everybody having a gun, is that a political issue that's gonna impact hillary clinton? is he gonna make the nra so mad that hillary's on his back now? like, "what are you doing? you're leaving office. i'm coming, hopefully" -- according to her, she's like a good shot at it without the nra breathing down her neck. >> i don't think the nra could be any more breathing down hillary clinton's neck when she runs -- as she runs for president. and i think for the president -- this would send a signal. what kind of signal would it send? it wouldn't send a solving-a-problem signal. it would just send a political-message signal, and i think there's other signals that he could send. >> there's also the mental-health issue. should people with mental-health issues have their backgrounds opened? that's a h.i.p.p.a. issue, where your medical records are sealed. but if you're asking for a gun and you've been in and out of facilities with issues, perhaps they should be unsealed? >> this strikes me -- george, i think, put his finger on something. this sort of feels like an unraveling. it's unraveling in the inner

city. it's unraveling in suburban riverside. it's unraveling in so many places, in some of these -- columbine and newtown that we seem to have un-tethered ourselves from a certain level of sanity. and this is becoming the new normal so that we don't have such outrage. the shock of paris was overwhelming because of the coordinated attack on multi locations. but i heard police commissioner william bratton, recently, i think on "60 minutes," say, "it's coming. this is coming." so i think that this can't be a one-solution-fits-all. universal background checks strikes me as something that's prudent. i mean, look at the things that parents do to prevent their children from falling down the steps. [ chuckles ] and we do virtually nothing to prevent people from picking up guns and walk-- not rifles to shoot deer, but assault weapons

to take into schools. >> and let's not -- let's also not make this about muslims and all about terrorism. the person who walked into a black church in south carolina wasn't a muslim and killed a bunch of people. in columbine -- there are lots of these mass events that are happening that are not terrorist-related. they're just crazy-people-related, and we all want to make it simple. that's our way. we want to make it simple and say, "this is all about terrorism," and stopping people from coming into the country. that's not gonna get at -- and sam is hitting it on the head. this is an unraveling. >> i agree with what some of what george has said, but the reality is we have had terrorist incidents propagated in the united states by american-born muslims, or u.s. citizens who are naturalized, like the tsarnaevs in boston, major nidal hassan, who was a u.s. army major when he, you know, responded to islamic proselytizing and struck out at his fellow soldiers.

so we've had numerous incidents like this. and it's true that you can vet people before they come in, but you can't vet their children. you can't vet the children that are gonna be born in the united states, who, you know, the parents may be grateful to be here, but the kids have no knowledge of the advantages of being in america versus other countries. they just don't have that knowledge. >> if they grow up here, why do they become that way? something drives. they're not living over there. >> they're targets of internet proselytizing. they're uniquely targets. >> because they don't feel they fit in, because they don't have economic opportunities? >> the new york times did a fascinating story about a few months ago about a young 20-year-old girl in a remote part of washington state. grew up with her grandparents taking care of her, a very christian family. she was lonely. and these people -- and she happened to go search about something about a mass shooting somewhere overseas. all of a sudden, around the clock, dozens of people were contacting her, reaching out to her in this remote village, sending her gifts. now, the fact that she's getting gifts from london to some

remote -- it was finally her grandparents said, "what's going on?" she was being recruited for terrorism. so, you know, like most complicated problems, there's no easy solution. part of it is doing background checks for people who are crazy -- shouldn't be able to get a gun. come on. that's an easy one, i think. right? and things about where you've been and being able to do some kind of appropriate monitoring of people going online who are using online tactics to prey on innocent, young women who are lonely and have a mental issue. >> and we've already made buildings, schools, offices, hospitals more secure. if you make them that much more secure, people maybe can't even get in there that work very easily. so this would not have affected the san bernardino shooting because he was supposed to be at that christmas party and then left. i mean, how do you secure buildings and make people at least feel safer, like they have a chance at not being injured? >> that wouldn't have done anything here, right? >> we're in part losing the war, if you will, to isis because we're not doing any of the smart things that they seem to be

doing to recruit people to their cause. the other day, i read this article reminding me of a book that was published in 2000 called "bowling alone" by a historian, or a sociologist in new england about how the internet and our whole society has basically isolated us. we don't do what you just describe was happening as isis, or some radical group, was recruiting this woman living in a remote area. we separate. many of us don't even know the names of our neighbors. and i think that this is part of my view of this unraveling that's happening. we're all living in this electronic isolation. >> it's a heavy lift to reverse sociological trends. i mean, the reality is isis is making direct appeals to people -- if they can, come to syria and join the fight. if they can't, strike out at the nearest target that you can find and strike a blow for the faith. and for these people in san bernardino, this christmas party was the biggest target that they had access to.

>> but, jan, we have a pretty good story to tell. people may not always agree with america's exceptionalism, but it's a very powerful story. when it's not told -- >> we don't sell it. >> go ahead, george. >> it's not just about telling it. we don't have leaders. >> i agree. >> there's a book that was just written. i can't remember who wrote it. but it's -- think about who are the leaders that are really respected in america today, elected or unelected? there aren't none. "there aren't none." there aren't any. but, you know, there are no kennedys. there are no lee iacoccas. there are no people who establish what the integrity of this nation is all about and it's not embodied. everybody follows leadership to some extent. >> so, brian, basically, you said should schools be looking out for the youngsters who seem like loners, who don't seem to have many friends and social experiences and make sure that they are somehow making that happen for them? i mean, is that one more thing schools should be doing as a safety measure? >> i don't think we should be looking at it as, like, schools should be doing that 'cause it's

gonna stop incidents like this. but i think the idea of community, of people kind of keeping an eye out for each other and ending the isolation and just looking at your cellphone constantly, that's part of it. i do think there's an issue of leadership in the country, too. there seems to be a hesitancy, frankly, starting with the white house, to talk about american exceptionalism. i mean, we have a great thing -- "all men are created equal." that's what the country -- freedom of speech, freedom of press. in china, they're arresting people now -- lawyers who try to defend people who have been arrested. they're put in prison. and we don't seem to -- and i remember an era -- i'm gonna say i was right out of college when reagan got elected -- when we talked about exception, and when president clinton talked about how great this country is. and we seem to be, like, "well, who are we to say?" no, this is a great country. freedom of speech, freedom of the individual, freedom of the press. thdate praises america, says god wants america -- >> but don't you think this president isn't saying that that

often? >> but the problem is, i think, much deeper. we don't teach american history in high schools anymore, not the way we studied it, from the beginning, chronologically. >> if we did, we would all know about the alien and sedition act. >> all right. last comment. >> the greatest moment this president has had -- when he's talking about race in america and what american values are. those are probably the two times that he's gotten the greatest attention. but with this absence of leadership, it's everybody's at everybody's throat. it's not about bringing things together in america. and we're unraveling, sam. we're unraveling as a nation. >> all right, we're gonna take a break. more "inside story" coming your way right after this. stay with us. >> "inside story" is presented by temple university. temple fuels students with academics and opportunities to take charge. plugged into the city. powered by the world. temple.edu/takecharge.

>> welcome back to "inside story." let's talk about the final price tag, which is now in, on pope francis' historic visit to philadelphia. we're being told it cost about $17 million to stage that event over several days. that includes, of course, police overtime and fire services, among other things. the city is gonna end up paying $8 million of that, almost half. world meeting of families is gonna cover $9 million. but some people are crying foul because mayor michael nutter, in selling the event to the world, to the world meeting of families, and to the city of philadelphia, said that wmof -- world meeting of families -- would pay the whole thing, from beginning to end, soup to nuts, and the city would owe nothing.

now he's saying something different. what he meant to say -- he said, "they would be billed for additional costs on the two-day event." so that doesn't count the lead-up days of wednesday, thursday, friday. it's only that world meeting would cover saturday, sunday. did we lose something in translation here, brian? >> first of all, let me disclose my company, briant communications, was involved with the world meeting of families. so saying that up front. this follows -- the way that this is being billed is the way the precedent, according to what's been said, that for welcome america and other events. you pay for those days that you had your event. and the world meeting of families raised almost $45 million or so to pay for all -- the port-a-potties, all those other kinds of costs. what the mayor's saying is he's charging for those two days, and the lead-up, et cetera -- which the world meeting of families had no -- able to kind of say, "yes, i agree to that," or, "no, i don't agree to that." the fact of the matter is tens of millions of dollars, as well as permanent improvements were it follows the precedent of other events similar to this.

>> but can the city afford to do these sorts of things at that level? i mean, we have the dnc next summer. can we afford to be world-view-ish in our approach to these conferences? >> there probably should have been a more aggressive effort to raise those monies in the private sector to defer that expense. but at the end of the day, you know, the city of philadelphia is in the destination city business. and so at the end -- and so we're competing against d.c. we're competing against new york, other cities around the country. so this was a reasonable investment because you couldn't pay for this marketing opportunity, even if the event, other than the weekend part of it, didn't turn out quite to be what it was sold to be. and i think we were impacted also by the fact that the pope's folks added washington and new york, where he did much more substantive stuff than he was originally supposed to do, which hurt the people coming to philadelphia. >> and that took some of our audience potentially away. but i guess the macro issue is in a city that can't afford its schools and has crime issues, terribly, and enormous poverty that's eating us alive, programs

are needed for those three things at the very least. should we be building this reputation worldwide to attract other businesses at the cost of these other three things? >> i think this is more about, for me, transparency. if the mayor had said, "we're gonna spend money to clean up and that's gonna be off of our books and we're gonna have these other costs because here's the benefit," which i think, unarguably, this was huge for philadelphia. it's too bad that so many people stayed away because they missed a spiritually and emotionally impactful experience in philadelphia those two days. i've been producing the film, watching it. every time i see this guy, he really is an inspiring character. so we should have told people. i mean, michael could have stood up and said, "look, it's gonna cost us 8 million bucks, but look at the return on investment," which i think george is making a good point. >> but i think the mayor clearly gets the blame for underestimating the cost that was ultimately gonna end up in the city, and he's opened the

door for critics to come in and use this as an anvil to bash him personally and the cost to the city of philadelphia. >> all right, last comment. >> if butkovitz would be -- if he orders a tuna sandwich, he was, "ah, you should have gotten ham." >> this is city controller alan butkovitz. >> alan butkovitz. so whatever the mayor -- he does, and the fact of the matter is 20,000 people came for the week beforehand, staying in hotels, went to the conference. washington post said the five most iconic moments of the entire u.s. trip -- four were philadelphia. you can't buy this sort of visibility on the world stage. >> all right, let's talk about porngate. kathleen kane, big headlines again. last week she did appoint a special prosecutor, a former attorney general from maryland, who is now gonna take this case of tens of thousands of e-mails that allegedly were homophobic, misogynistic, and hateful, racist in every level. it could really have tentacles that continue for years to come, despite her own legal issues, whether she is removed from office or not. this special prosecutor may take this thing a long way and bring down many more careers. what did you make of what

happened last week? >> i think that you've hit the nail on the head. i think she's opened a can of worms, regardless of what her motivations may be. she's opened a can of worms that's gonna lead to a lot of doorsteps today. and today i think there are probably a lot of nervous people about -- and some of the things that i've seen and people i've talked to have seen more of the e-mails than i have. it's really repulsive. and it says something about the character of people we're putting into public office. >> it's extraordinary, though, that -- you know, i can't project what's going on in the trial. that issue of leaking information -- sealed information from a grand jury to the press is a big, complicated thing. thinking a jury will find no reasonable doubt -- she has a good lawyer, so that could be interesting. but the public-relations part of kathleen kane's story has definitely shifted in my mind. there's much more happening for kathleen kane's benefit because of this pot-stirring that she started to do almost immediately when she took on the sandusky

case. >> so where people originally said, "this is just bad blood. it's her not getting along with the philadelphia d.a. seth williams and other people that he took from her staff, et cetera, that it was just a little tempest in a teapot." she has now turned it into a high boil of a kettle that's gonna bring a lot of people some aggravation and legal problems. some of them could go to jail. >> i don't think anybody's going to jail. i think -- and i haven't been -- but i mean, we're talking about things that are perhaps racist or anti-women or whatever. that is horrible, but it's not a crime. the fact of the matter is kathleen kane is the only person right now who's been accused of a crime. >> but if the e-mails show some leaking of grand jury information, for her, that could be an issue, as well for them. >> it could, but the fact of the matter is this started out when she dismissed the prosecution of eight elected officials, and six wound up pleading guilty. and that's where this began, right? >> more people are gonna lose their jobs, but the people need to understand that there are two different cases here. one is the porn that's out there on the internet, and the other is kathleen kane's alleged

disclosure of information and crimes that she's been charged with as a result. i do agree with the analysis that she's trying to blur the two together in some way. but i think if people understand the really two separate issues -- and i agree with george. porngate could be around for a while. >> and can an outsider untangle the mess that has now turned the state attorney general's office, the state supreme court, the judicial conduct board, and the philadelphia d.a.'s office into a circus? can an outsider untangle that? >> an outsider, too, who ran for governor and was embarrassed by images of him going to a teenage drinking party when he -- that's the reason he didn't become governor of maryland. he ran for governor and lost. and now he's gonna come up here and bill us $2 million. he said it wouldn't cost more than $2 million to do something to embarrass local people here. the fact of the matter is if i was kathleen kane or advising her, i would say, "let's focus on the criminal charges against you. let's try to show you're a good attorney general in other ways, and to try to get out of this crazy vendetta." >> i actually don't agree with that. i think that this can of worms that she's opened, as i said, for whatever reason, needs to be

pursued. >> all right, we'll leave it at that. >> and if we had a respectable court system, we wouldn't need an outside prosecutor. >> all right, inside stories of the week coming your way next.

>> "inside story" is presented by temple university. temple fuels students with academics and opportunities to take charge. plugged into the city. powered by the world. temple.edu./takecharge. >> we have a small clarification from last week's "inside story" program. one of our insiders, a panelist, said the mayor elect, jim kenney, had appointed someone who was not an engineer to head l&i, when, in fact, dave perri is a licensed engineer. we apologize for the confusion. all right, inside stories of the week, and let's start with george. >> during the reagan years, bill gray, as budget committee chairman, almost single-handedly saved funding for amtrak. they're naming -- the station has now been renamed by him by the united states congress, signed by the president, and his name doesn't appear anywhere in the station.

they're doing patrick moynihan in new york. they should do bill gray in philadelphia. >> all right, jan. >> donald trump is holding a series of monster rallies all across the united states, including in the early primary states. i see a level of enthusiasm out there that's comparable to what i saw in 2008 in the obama campaign. people are energized and enthusiastic. and i think it's because trump is the only candidate out there who thinks, like a lot of americans, that immigration is a problem that needs to be addressed and talked about. he's the only one. >> all right. brian. >> following up on trump, a rare error by the republican state committee, inviting trump controversy next week to speak at the pennsylvania society. a lot of people are upset by it. they think he's not the kind of candidate who could win in pennsylvania. they're upset that trump criticizes people like mccain -- senator mccain -- for being a war hero and being captured. bad error. >> all right. sam. >> to trump the trumpers, i think the republican establishment believes that trump will fade and worries that cruz will be the beneficiary and wants to keep trump around as

long as possible so the oxygen fades for cruz in the hopes of electing -- or nominating marco rubio, who they think has the best chance in november of defeating hillary clinton. >> hmm! a little strategy and a decoy. all right. and that's it for "inside story." hope you have a great week ahead. our thanks to our panelists. we'll see you again right back here next sunday morning. i'm nydia han along with evening eve. president obama will address the nation in a prime time speech days after the mass shooting in california. a pedestrian is fighting for life after being hit by an suv in camden county. hundreds of people come together to remember a local firefighter and marine taken too soon. those stories and the exclusive accuweather seven-day forecast all next on "action news."

(dramatic music) centrum brings us the biggest news in multivitamin history. ( ♪ ) a moment when something so familiar becomes something so new. (impact on metal) introducing new centrum vitamints. a multivitamin that contains a full spectrum of essential nutrients you enjoy like a mint. new centrum vitamints. go to centrum.com for a $4 coupon.

new centrum vitamints. sunday, december 6 i'm nydia han along with eva pilgrim. >> here's some of the stories we're following on "action news," philadelphia police are searching for three men who led officers on a overnight chase and got away. >> president obama will outline steps to protect the nation in a prime time speech tonight. temple fall