they are still at that house, still working through any evidence that they might find on that scene. we may hear more about that process, what is going on there in this press conference that is coming up, we may not. we'll wait to see what the chief of police has to say. >> alan stand by. if you are just now tuning in, we are awaiting a news conference from the san bernardino police department concerning all of the questions we have been asking about this situation throughout the morning. just moments ago president obama talking about the shooting from the white house. he called it a disturbing pattern of gun violence in america that he says has to be addressed. >> we all have a part to play. and i do think that as the investigation moves forward, it's a going to be important for all of us, including our legislatures to see what we can do to make sure that when
individuals decide that they want to do somebody harm we'll make it a little harder for them to do it, because right now it's just too easy. >> this by the way the 15th time president obama speaks out after a mass shooting in america. mike viqueira listening to the president's address from the white house. and as i was listening to the president, i was thinking about the issue of the new normal. we don't have mike right now. so we'll go to alan and ask him the same question. what is the mood in california, and is it getting back to normal and is that disturbing? are they starting to feel like nothing stunned america when it comes to gun violence, because there have been 355 mass shootings in the united states in 342 days this year alone. >> reporter: well, del, those are all very good questions. i have not been out on the streets of san bernardino this
morning yet to talk with people. but we can assume that this is an area that is in a little bit of shock, as much shock as we all get in nowadays when these things happen. and as you say these things happen with remarkable and alarming frequency in this day and age. how people are going to handle it here, we'll have to wait and see how things develop this the next days and weeks. clearly an object of concern, clearly a very tangled knot of issues, involving gun rights, limitation of gun rights, et cetera. at this point we don't know in this specific case the details about whether the firearms, the four firearms that these two shooters were alleged to have in their possession that they used in their killing spree were legally obtained or not, or whether some were and others weren't, we just don't know that. but obviously as we heard the president make a point of this morning, it does spark that
discussion one more time, a discussion we just keep having, you know, after roseberg, after sandy hook, after this one, a discussion we're going to continue to have. what the feeling is here now, obviously people in san bernardino and redland are going to be a number numb, and how they deal with it is going to mirror the way the nation deals with it as we move forward. >> alan thank you very much. we want to show you these live images coming out of california. this is the press gathering of the reporters awaiting the word from the sheriff there. also any more information we have concerning the two suspects and how they managed to get as many weapons as they did, and any update we may receive concerning the victims and their conditions. we have reestablished contact with mike viqueira. mike as we were talking to alan schauffler the question i was
going to pose to you, is this one seemed to be different. there did not seem to be much of a gap between the shootings and the rhetoric in washington. is it now the new normal that no matter what happens both sides are going to dig in and stick to the sound bites. >> reporter: that certainly seems to be the case. that part of the message, just that very scene, because as the president noted it's still an active investigation, obviously, and the motives could have been mixed. the president suggesting they don't know yet, but they will get to the bottom of it. he was getting a briefing from loretta lynch, and the fbi director, and others, but when you heard the president say we have to go back as individuals and do some soul searching, and as legislatures, plural, the president referencing that in washington the sides are dug.
we have already been seeing people play to form. conservatives from the right side of the political spectrum. ted cruz holding a second amendment rally, making that announcement in the hours after the tragedy and the ghastly horror of what happened, the latest in a series of ghastly horror, and democrats calling press conferences to call for gun legislation, to call for restricti restrictions, expanded background checks, assault weapons ban, we have heard it all before, del, they are trying to attach it to the spending bill to keep the government open. that's on december 11th. their chances are probably slim to none that they are going to be successful in that regard. but the president again talking about legislatures, and i think that was significant and intentional, because the progress that is being made if you are an advocate fof further
gun control, the action is on the local and state level, and that's where many folks who are -- who are advocates of more legislation are focusing their attention right now. as it stands, we have seen the president after many of these shootings in charleston, and elsewhere, in colorado springs, and alan was mentioning the community college in roseburg in oregon appear in the briefing room and offer a frustrated reaction, telling interviewers this is the number one frustration of his term. this time the president obviously much more somber, because the investigation is still -- there are still so many questions unanswered and could still potentially have larger ramifications if it is a terror plot. so i think you saw an effort from the president not -- to lash out as we have seen in the past, but a much more measured response. >> and mike as we watch the
reporters gather, i was struck by the others in the room, and i'm going to ask the same question of j.j. green after youanyou answer, and that is the third-party in this debate seems to be law enforcement, because regardless of how one party or the other feels, law enforcement is caught in the cross fire, if you will, of having to defend themselves against a growing arsenal in america. is there a sense that they are getting frustrated with the back and forth between republicans and democrats? >> reporter: i think -- you know, everyone is getting frustrated from those on the front lines like law enforce to the average citizen on the street. you know, traditionally when we see washington events and press conferences and rallies for gun control, typically what we have seen in the last 20 years or more, is presidents and top officials in congress appears
against a backdrop of police officers in uniform whether they be around the washington area or around the country, and many police officers and police unions have advocated for some sort of coherence to america's gun laws, and that translates to further restrictions and we have seen in the aftermath of this latest mass shooting, where it said that the more guns that are on the street, the greater for the potential for those guns to be used against law enforcement, for casualties to be incurred. on the other side of that, you have seen -- it largely mirrors the partisan divide around the country. there was a sheriff in oregon that joined many other sheriffs in writing a letter i believe to president obama not too long ago, saying any restrictions would violate the second amendment and be
unconstitutional. so law enforcement has a bigger stake in this than the average citizen, but i think you see division there that mirrors the division we seay among the american public as well. >> and j.j. green, as we await that news conference in san bernardino, california, what are you hearing from your sources concerning what appears to be the new normal which is regardless of what it is termed by the fbi or other law enforcement agency, age engineers on the streets are finding themselves being con fronted with bad guys with big arsenals. >> reporter: that it is being driven by precedence. a lot of people are reading the net news. they watching the news, watching al jazeera, and watching and listening and reading all sorts of news accounts, and every day what they are reading are more and more sophisticated or more and more diverse attempts by people with issues that may be
disgruntled for one reason or another, taking out their frustration on the general population, using a variety of ever-sophisticated plots, plans, and devices. this is the thing that is really driving the problem for law enforce and counter terrorism officials out there. they are starting to see a preponderance of people looking for opportunities and ways to research and find technology that can help them conduct a better attack or more efficient attack, and they are finding more and more evidence of this as each day passes. when you look at each attack that takes place in the u.s. it's more and more sophisticated each time. bigger weapons, vests, ied's. et cetera. >> this is not the first time that law enforcement has found itself facing this particular crisis. in the '80s, during the drug wars, it was the officers complaining that the suspects had more sophisticated weapons,
weapons that fired faster than they did. and thoetz -- those officers then found themselves better equipped. >> reporter: dell there is a gap, but it's kind of the opposite of a traditional gap. the thing that is different now is it takes these bad guys or people who want to do things like this, engage in terror attacks, less time to figure out a work around for these scenarios that the authorities are putting up to prevent them from getting into a position to launch attacks. this years past there were laws and prohibitions and issues and situations that would get in between people who might want to do something horrible like this, but now because of the advent of -- of -- of technology, the internet, the how-to manuals that you find out there from groups like the islamic state and al-qaeda, they help people figure out much more quickly how
to circumvent law enforcement and counter terrorism obstacles, and that's one of the real concerns for authorities out there today. the fact that the gap between the knowledge that average every day people who want to become bad guys or terrorists have, and counter terrorism and law enforcement experts is getting smaller and smaller and evaporating much more quickly. >> j.j. stand by. we are now receiving news that that news conference that we are waiting for now has been pushed back to 12:30. we will bring that news conference to you live, but we are also following a lot of other news this hour. including breaking news coming out of the pentagon. ash carter speaking about the role of women in the military, and wlonth -- whether or not all roles will be open to women. jamie mcintyre live at the pentagon. what is the secretary expected
to say? >> we're waiting for the secretary to come in at any moment. we are expecting that he will announce that he has decided to lift all barriers to women in combat over the objections of some in the u.s. marine corps who felt there still should be some combat units restricted to men only. the secretary promised he would have a decision before the end of the year. we are told he has scheduled this news conference today to make that announcement, and all of the indications are at this point that he is going to lift the ban on women in all combat conditions. this has been an emerging consensus the idea that if you set a standard, everyone has to meet it. and if you are meet that standard, you can be in a unit, whether you are male or female. and that was demonstrated by the experiment that the u.s. army
conducted this year, where they allowed that women could go through training, and two women made it through the initial training, and a third came in -- i believe -- no, that's not the secretary. del, we are waiting for the secretary. i believe he'll be walking in any moment. so i'll throw it back to you. >> before you go, how contentious is this issue within the ranks of the military. >> reporter: i believe the news conference is going to begin. >> okay. i understand. when the news happens we will bring that to you live. also we are awaiting the news conference on the west coast, the san bernardino sheriff about to hold a news conference. in that will take place in about 16 minutes from now. we're going to take a break and be right back. ♪
this is al jazeera america. you are looking at the reporters that are gathered for an update from the san bernardino sheriff's department. they will be speaking in approximately 13 minutes where they will take questions about that mass shooting that left 14 people dead, 17 others injured. al jazeera's jennifer london is live for us in san bernardino. the big question for police now is what possible motive might there have been for the shooting. have you learn anything new? >> reporter: that is the question that people have been asking since the shooting
occurred yesterday in the late morning of san bernardino. and as of yet we don't have any answers. the press conference that occurred late last night, motive, motive, motive, what is the motive? that is what everybody is asking, and the police chief and the fbi assisting with the investigation both saying we cannot tell you now, but they are not ruling out terrorism. and president obama earlier this morning said that terrorism is a possibility. but authorities and investigators are also looking into whether workplace violence was a driving factor as well. we know one of the alleged victims, syed farook was a county employee here for five years. he was attending a holiday type party. he left suddenly, under circumstances that he was angry, and then he returned allegedly with the woman and began
shooting. so that's what they are looking at right now, del. and we are hoping to learn more when the press conference gets underway. >> and we are wanting to know why, and we are also wanting to know more about the victims. the victims not yet identifies, but we have received some information about some of the victims in the hospital. what do we know? >> reporter: a of the victims was taken to the loma linda trauma center. it's a level 1 trauma center. five victims being treated there are in critical condition, and three are in fair. the hospital would not give us anymore information about those victims. but perhaps we'll learn more about them today as well. >> jennifer thank you very much. al jazeera's national security contributor, j.j. green is standing by as we await that news conference on the west coast. he is in washington, d.c.
j.j. we are -- i understand j.j. is not ready yet. the news conference again, beginning at 12:30 east coast time. right now it is 12:19. that means we are awaiting that news conference in 11 minutes. and as i was speaking i understand we have reestablished our communications with j.j. green. so as we await this news conference, from a national security standpoint, can you walk us through what happened on the east coast while these events were unfolding on the west coast. >> reporter: well, there were conference calls, there were people texting and emailing, and there, standard telephone calls. i know the fbi, atf, and all of the federal law enforcement agencies here were very much plugged into what was going on. because the way it went, del, it was very clear that it wasn't a
random situation. there were at the very beginning of the situation signs and symptoms that suggested that this was something more than just a situation that got out of hand as a result of an argument between two people; that there was a level of planning, a level of execution, and a level of, shall, we say, premeditation when you look at there were supposedly ied's involved. supposedly planning was involved in that. so authorities started putting the pieces together that they could about what took place, so that they could then begin to move very quickly to figure out if there were other elements or people that might be involved. >> and how concerned were they in washington that they might have been seeing the beginning of something like happened in paris? >> reporter: i think every time
something happens these days, whether it's the shooting in oregon not too long ago, or the situation in nashville earlier in the year, and any other scenario, anyplace in the u.s., any time any kind of scenario happens like this, there are hallmark questions that authorities and investigators begin to ask immediately, and those questions are, is there some nexus? is there some obvious element of training, obvious element of -- of preparation? what about communications? what about witnesses? what about motive? those are the things that people begin to ask, questions people begin to ask immediately when situations like this take place. because they are wondering here in washington or in new york or in l.a. or in miami, anywhere in the country, small town america, if there is a nexus to something else that might happen that might be problematic for them. >> j.j. green in washington, d.c., standing by as we await
that news conference to happen in california. we want to go by phone to democratic congresswoman judy chu, she represents the 27th district in california, right near san bernardino. thank you for being with us. first of all our condolence to the loss of your fellow citizens there in california. your reaction? >> i'm horrified by the senseless violence and even more horrified by the senseless action that is taking place in congress. this is the time to do something to take strong actions to make sure something doesn't happen again. we are at the point where there is a mass shooting every day. in 2015, 355 mass shootings. this cannot be the future of america, and we have to stop this. >> but how do you as a democrat convince those on the other side of the aisle that your side is
right and their side is wrong? >> well, i think we have voices of the american people expressing their outrage. we have common sense legislation that we are proposing. in just a few minutes we will be voting on those on no-fly lists being unable to acquire weapons. that is a common sense thing. and why not have those kinds of actions, small steps indeed, but small steps that could prevent a death, so the public needs to get involved and make sure that -- that we do something about this. we -- we can't have a future where everybody lives in fear. >> small step yes, but yesterday your colleagues did not take that small step, so if not last night, when? >> then -- well, we -- we have to keep the pressure up. these -- these mass murders are
getting worse and worse. i can't believe that right after the colorado shooting we have this san bernardino shooting. one right after the other. it's -- it's -- it cannot be normal for us to hear about mass shootings every single day. and i think that -- that americans will rise up and say enough is enough. >> so i am going to ask a question that i asked our guest earlier this morning, as we have been continuing this coverage non-stop since the shootings themselves. and that is are you concerned that there are so many people with so many weapons in this country, that regardless of what legislatures do on capitol hill and in state houses across the country, america is so armed that anybody wanting to do harm can do so regardless of any laws on the books? >> i am concerned about that.
but there are successful programs, such as the buy-back program. when they had that in los angeles, i could not believe the numbers of people that turned in their weapons in order to get some sort of -- what i considered to be small incentive. i mean it didn't take much for them to turn in their weapons. but besides that we have got to start somewhere. we have got to make it a situation where it's more difficult to acquire a weapon. right now you could be severely mentally ill and acquire a weapon, you could be a terrorist, and acquire a weapon. this is not right. >> miss chu, and i am going to preface this question by saying a very loud if, if the suspects in this case were radicalized somewhere, anywhere, will you as a congress person be more concerned about what happens overseas and would that mean authorizing the president to put boots on the ground in places
like syria? >> well, that remains to be seen. i do take the threat of isis very seriously, but i think that we have to look at its step by step. i do think that having some sensible restrictions on the visa waiver program is -- is certainly a good first step. but we have to see where we go from here. i think having a united response with all of our countries working together is -- is the most important direction that we can go in. >> representative judy chu joining us by phone from capitol hill. thank you for being with us. she represents the district on the outskirts of san bernardino. again, we are awaiting the news conference on the west coast, but as we await word, i want to go to ben, an editor with aljazeera.com, and he has been reporting on the hike in gun
sales even following the calls for tougher gun laws. that's the case, the minute there was the shooting, gun sales skyrocketed. >> it often happens, del that when there is a big incident, many politicians, especially obviously on the liberal side will call for increased gun control, more restrictions and lots of investment professionals say, you know, there does seem to be a correlation between those calls and when the stocks of gun companies, the two biggest publicly held ones, smith and wesson, and stern lugar go up. >> in these days when so many are dying from guns, the brady center saying there are 89 shootings in this country each and every day, and yet as you
pointed out, two main gun manufacturers in this country, it is a major business. >> there are 352 mass shootings in 2015 alone. so that number is quite staggering. the influence of the gun lobby seems to be quite powerful on our society. we have about $12 million that the gun lobby spent in 2014. 3.7 on campaign finance in decision to that. so you are looking at a society where there are 300 million guns out there, and that's 100 million guns made by u.s. manufacturers in the last 25 years alone. so our rate of gun ownership is about one for every american. that's a staggering number. >> you heard the congresswoman
talking about that same issue. have we reached a point where there are so many guns out there with so many loopholes in the system that it would fuel a black market of gun sales among anyone that would want to get them, regardless of how tough they crack down? >> i think the rate of political polarization is so extreme at the moment that even when the instinct for liberal-minded americans is oh, there's a tragic shooting, we need to make it more difficult for people to get guns in our society, on the other side of the aisle there are loud voices calling for more guns to be owned. each time there is a shooting there is a rush to buy more guns. you have record breaking sells of $500 million last year for smith and wesson and tern and ruger.