i started covering the national rifle association in 1994. the national rifle association was founded in order to deal with future possible threats involving european military forces. they organize nid shooting competitions to be applied to the battle field. >> the marksmenship is map taned is a result of the rifle association. >> that remained their main focus rivalry and hunting to expand the shooting sports for over a century. before the nra changed. >> it will be a matter of minutes before he arrives at the mark. it appears as though something has happened in the motorcade. >> president kennedy has been assassinated. it's official now. >> the 1960s is a decade in which the gun comes to symbolize the chaos and disunity the nation is experiencing as a whole. for the first time you get signs there is going to be a push for racial equality. you get signs there will be a push to say women have equal rights and see at the same time this incredible dramatic gun violence up surge. >> the sassassination of john f kennedy to malcolm x, martin luther

second amendment in very contemporary terms about arguments we may be having about the national rifle associationr even school violence or some of those very contemporary problems. but this book takes us in the way back machine centuries into the and talks about the seeds that were planted that led there. maybe we cupid of begin with where you start this their iftive and how you kind of saw the arc of this story beginning. >> what launched this book, actually, was the killing of philando castile in 2015, because here you had a plaque -- a black man who was pulled over the by the police and he said is, officer, i have a licensed weapon. and the officer started shooting and killed philando castile. so he gunned down simply because he has a licensed weapon. he wasn't threatening anyone, he wasn't doing anything that was perilous, but he died, and the nra went silent. and that struck me, the virtual silence of the nra. and you had this journalist saying, look, don't black people have second amendment rights? and i thought as a historian, that's a great question. my research covered the civil and huma

i think that if you remember of the national rifle association you have nra rights. if you believe in the supreme court decision you have scalia rights. you don't really have second amendment rights. and so the question that our writer our listeners are saying is originalism complicates complicate things i surely the founders could not have envisioned guns that can fire 900 rounds per minute. right right 1776 could fire about every second not only that yet, but all the founders who commented on this issue said the same thing for god's sake. don't freeze the constitution based on our opinions. none of the founders believed in originless. jefferson said if you you know, the the constitution should evolve in its understanding and its interpretation. he said if we go back to to the try to go back to us, it'll be as if i tried to put on the same coat i wore as a child. so that the irony is the doctrine of originalism is something that the founders themselves found unacceptable. and they would be surprised that that's what and think about this in great britain. let's say n

this book, i think a lot of times we think about the second amendment of arguments and the national rifle associationr school violence or the contemporary problems. but this book takes us in the way back machine, centuries into the past to talk about the seeds planted and where you start that narrative and see the arc of the story beginning. >> it was the killing of castellon in 2016 here you have a black man and you said officer i have a license weapon and the officer started to shoot and kill him and he has gone downn simply because he is a license weapon he doesn't threat anyone doesn't do anything that was careless but castillo died. and that struck me the silence of the nra and journalist say don't black people have second amendment rights and i thought that's a great question. my research covers the civil rights of african-americans and those that i have not explored ending up in the 17th century virginia and south carolina looking at the slave codes and the laws that the white colonists had for black people the fear of the enslaved of the uprising and the laws in the architecture put in place

amendment and very contemporary terms about argument delete we may be having about the national rifle association, school violence for some those very contemporary problems. but this book takes us away back machine centuries into the past and talks about the seeds that were planted. maybe we could begin with where you start this narrative and how to sell the arc of the story beginning? >> what launch this book was the killing in 2016. because here you had a black man who was pulled over by the police and said officer i have eight licensed a weapon. the officer started shooting and killed him. and so he is gunned down simply because he has eight licensed a weapon. he was not threatening anyone, he was not doing anything that was perilous, but he died. the nra went silent. that struck me the virtual silence of the nra and their journalists inc. don't black people have second amendment rights? i though as a historian that is a great question.ts my research covered the civil and human rights of african-americans. i am looking at what i call a fractured citizenship. this i had not explored. so i went

cover a lot of times we think of the second amendment and in contemporary terms about the national rifle association or even school violence but this book takes us in the way back machine centuries into the past to talk about the seeds planted. so maybe we began with where do you start this narrative and how do you see the arc of the story beginning? >> what wants this book is the killing of castillo in 2016 you have a black man pulled over by the police and officer i have a license weapon and officers starting shooting and killed castillo so he was gone down simply because he had a license weapon. he was not threatening anyone are doing anything. that was careless but he died in the nra went silent but the virtual silence of the nra to say don't black people have second amendment rights and i thought is a historian that's a great question my research covers the civil and human rights of african-americans. looking at that fraction citizenship and that is what i had not explored so i went ended up in the 17th century virginia and south carolina looking at the slave code and the laws that dealt with t

about the second amendment in very contemporary terms arguments we may be having all the national rifle association were school violence or those contemporary problems . but this book takes us in the way back machine centuries into the this was the killing of philando castille because here you had a black man that was pulled over by police and he said officer, i have a licensed weapon . he kills philando castille so he's gone down simply because he has a license. was anything that was careless but the guy. the hand or a website that struck me the virtual silence of the nra. and you have this journalist saying second amendment right . my research covers the civil and human rights of african americans. i'm looking at what i call fractured citizenship and this was a lesson i have not explored. so i went back and i ended up in the 17th century. in 17th century virginia and south carolina, looking at the slaveholding laws that really dealt with the fear that the white-collar colonists had of black people and the fear of beingenslaved , the fear of uprising and the law and the architecture put in place t

second amendment in very contemporary terms about arguments we may be having about the national rifle association or even school violence or some of those very contemporary problems, but this book takes us in the way back machine, centuries into the past and talks about the seeds that were planted that led there. maybe we can kind of begin with where you start this narrative and how you kind of saw the arc of this story beginning. >> what launched this book actually was the killing of philando castillo in 2016 because here you had a black man who was pulled over by the police and who, you know, he said officer, i have a licensed weapon, and the officer started shooting and killed philando castillo. so he's gunned down simply because he has a licensed weapon. he wasn't threatening anyone. he wasn't doing anything that was perilous, but he died, and the nra went silent, and that struck me, the virtual silence of the nra. you have then journalists saying well, don't black people have second amendment rights? and i thought as a historian, that's a great question. my research covers the civil and huma

amendment and very contemporary terms of the arguments that we may be having about the national rifle association or even school violence or some of those. contemporary problems but this book takes us in the way back machine. centuries in the past and talk about the seeds were planted that led there. so maybe we can begin with where you start this narrative and how you kind of saw the ark of the story beginning . >> what launched this book was the killing of lando casteel in 2013. because here you have a black man who was pulled over by the police and he said officer, i have a licensed weapon. an officer started shooting and killed him. so he gunned down simply because he has a licensed weapon. he wasn't threatening anyone, he wasn't doinganything . that was perilous. he died. and the nra went silent and that struck me, the virtual silence of the nra. and they're saying don't let people have second amendment rights and i think that's a great question. my riresearch covers the civil and human rights of americans and i'm looking at what i call citizenship but this was all right that i have not expl

. >> reporter: the national rifle association is a powerful force in washington. >> semiautomatic firearmor 100 years and they're the most popular guns for hunting, target shooting, self-defense. >> reporter: in the 1990s, the nra convinced congress to cut all of cdc's funding for gun esearch, a loss equivalent to millions a year. fearing further cuts cdc leaders were all but silent for decades as tens of thousands of americans died from gun violence year after year. but now, in a stunning turn, the current director of the cdc is announcing a plan to reduce gun violence, sharing it exclusively with cnn. >> this is actually a stunning moment that a director of the cdc is even talking about this issue, is even using the word guns. it hasn't happened in years and years. >> every day we turn on the news and there are more young people dying. i swore to the president and to this country that i would protect your health. this is clearly one of those moments, one of those issues, that is harming america's health. >> but there's a reason why your predecessors didn't address it? >> perhaps. >> rep

passing more restrictive legislation of the that obviously drew a lot of pushback from the national rifle associationgroups who thought he was a threat to their right to own guns. so republicans immediately lined up against him. democrats thought he would be the unique nominee to thread the needle, given his experience with the agency and his advocacy on behalf of gun control but independent senator from maine, angus king and others became wary of supporting someone like him. >> real quick, what's the biden administration's next move here? >> reporter: that's what we're waiting to find out. they do not have an immediate replacement for him. and they're trying to find a role for chipman in the administration, but it remains unclear exactly what that role would be. >> atf has had only acting directors for the last five or six years or so. tyler pager from "the washington post." thank you for your reporting and bringing it to us. >>> coming up next, interesting images from north korea breaking overnight. have you seen that this morning? dozens of troops in gas masks and hazmat suits during a parade. we'

in 2006, the national rifle association had successfully lobbied to remove the a.t.f. director from a presidential appointment and one that required congressional confirmation. since then, they've been in a near-perpetual cycle of acting directors with only one confirmed director in the last 15 years in the form of b. todd jones under the obama administration. because of this, the the g.o.p. and its allies have been able to really kind of hamper any sort of director from getting confirmed time and time again. so it's already a controversial position. and so when you look athis and anyone who has covered the a.t.f. for some time, that is kind of par for the course to see this level of resistance. what was particularly interesting with biden's pick, however, was because the position is so controversial, historically, there's a tendency to pick safer candidates. and in this case, biden felt he was very confident to try to push forward one that has some strong and vocal gun-control support and for many democrats and independent congress members who are in gun-friendly stat

that is if a person was getting campaign finance support from say the national rifle association they probably really were pro gun. if they were getting support from planned parenthood they probably were pro-choice. it was not this broad who cares. so there might be some disclosure thresholds. some have 10 dollar and 20 dollar thresholds. it might be argued that it is not compelling to the substantial is not narrowly tailored but i think that the core of campaign finance law disclosure of large contributions to political campaigns and parts is pretty safe for the time being. >> one more for tommy. it seems that everything got in the last advent of social media it is getting stranger with off campus versus on campus and do multifactor balancing test i see the next case will come quickly to the courtment would you agree? we have not resolved much. who knows with tiktok, snapchat. instagram will under great the on campus and off campus. >> it is also ironic this case was decided in an era when so many public school students wering to online school so literally there was no in person thin

that is a person who is getting campaign-finance say, the national rifle association. they're getting support from planned parenthood, or whatever and it probably really were pro-choice. wasn't this broad comparison so there might be some like disclosure thresholds and campaign-finance that are low $20 thresholds. it might be an argument that this is really not necessary to the state compelling interest or to the states substantial interest i should say. it's not narrowly tailored but i think the core of campaign-finance law that is disclosure of large contributions to gnpolitical campaigns and parties is ready safe for the time being. >> one more for connie, it seems to me everything in the last 50 on social media things are getting much stranger when ith comes to opting out . it was should do the multi factor balancing test and it seems to be the next case will come very quickly . would you agree western mark we haven't much . tick-tock, snap, instagram, whatever comes next. it would integrate the off-campus in a way that we can apply . >> it's also ironic that this

that is if a person was getting campaign finance support from say the national rifle association they probably really were pro gun. if they were getting support from planned parenthood they probably were pro-choice. it was not this broad who cares. so there might be some disclosure thresholds. some have 10 dollar and 20 dollar thresholds. it might be argued that it is not compelling to the substantial is not narrowly tailored but i think that the core of campaign finance law disclosure of large contributions to political campaigns and parts is pretty safe for the time being. >> one more for tommy. it seems that everything got in the last advent of social media it is getting stranger with off campus versus on campus and do multifactor balancing test i see the next case will come quickly to the courtment would you agree? we have not resolved much. who knows with tiktok, snapchat. instagram will under great the on campus and off campus. >> it is also ironic this case was decided in an era when so many public school students wering to online school so literally there was no in person thin