tv Charleston A.M.E. Church Shooting Part 1 CSPAN December 24, 2015 10:00am-11:11am EST
children born who are not welcome. and i think i'm much more interested in taking care of the children may have been wearing about, you know, abortion and stuff. i really am pro-choice, and that is one of the big reasons i am a democrat. not the biggest reasons, but one of the big reasons. i am a health prison. i believe that children are healthier when they are born to people who really wants them. host: thank you so much. that will wrap it up for this morning's program. take you for all your calls at comments this morning. we wish you a merry christmas and a happy new year. and we welcome you back tomorrow morning at 7:00 eastern here on "washington journal." [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2015] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. visit ncicap.org]
announcer: on the next "washington journal," a look at how campaign 2016 has differed from past presidential campaigns in terms of media coverage and rhetoric. glastris.is paul then authors week continues with craig shirley, author of "last act." live every journal" morning at 7:00 eastern on c-span. you can join the conversation with your calls and comments on facebook and twitter. tonight on c-span, christmas at the white house. we will see first lady michelle obama speak to troops and their families in the east room, plus a tour of the white house holiday decorations.
house,as at the white christmas eve, tonight at 8:00 eastern here on c-span. coming up today on c-span, the mother emanuel charleston ame church forum -- charleston ame church form on gun violence. -- forum on gun violence. after that, the role of physicians in presenting -- preventing gun violence. three days of future programming this holiday weekend on c-span. friday evening at 7:00 eastern, congressional republican leaders honoring dick cheney at the capital with the unveiling of a marble bust. hadhen the vice president his critics going off the deep end, he asked his wife, does a buggy when people refer to me as doth greater? and she said, no, it's humanizes
you. >> [laughter] [applause] announcer: saturday night at 8:30 eastern, a in-depth lookn at policing and minority communities. speakers include red at hudson, and kathy linear. >> most people get defensive if they feel like you are being offensive. andeing very respectful requestive. request versus demand. those things change the dynamics. announcer: and sunday afternoon at 2:00, race and the criminal justice system with valerie jarrett and others. at 6:30, portions of this year's washington ideas festival. speakers include al gore. >> we've got to banish the word
he is helping at home. helping is not actually taking the burden off your. whatre still figuring out needs to be done, and you are asking him to help. he is not the agent, he is the assistance to men do have to be lead parents or fully equal coparents. announcer: for a complete schedule, go to c-span.org. announcer: in june, a gunman killed nine people at the mother innuel ame church charleston, south carolina. the church hosted a symposium on gun violence and public health. gun policyter, center director and public health professor, delivering the keynote. this is one hour. >> good morning, everyone. on behalf of the entire college
and charleston community, welcome to moving from crisis to action, an approach to reducing gun violence. a special welcome to our friends and sponsors from mother emanuel ame church, the american bar association, and the medical university of south carolina. thank you all for being here. my thanks to the following organizations for their support. the american academy of family physicians, the american college of physicians, the american sector actor can -- psychiatric association, and the law center to prevent gun violence. i am so pleased to be able to take part in this event at the college of charleston. the college of charleston is particularly honored to have a role today in this event. we are committed to serving as a center of reconciliation and a
place for dialogue for our community in the aftermath of the tragic and horrific shooting that took place here in june. in which we lost one of our long-time great employees, cynthia. , a belovedibrarian member of our campus, and she is deeply missed by our campus. we at the college want to do arguing and will continue to do -- to do our doing and will continue to do our part to advance our society four. the college is a place where everybody can come together and heal, and a place where we can have frank discussions about race, culture, and differences great the college was founded more than two centuries ago to serve the needs of the community. higher education has always been at the forefront of convening these much-needed conversations and conducting research into the most pressing issues facing our
society. and today is no different. in the ensuing conversations we will have, i know we will discover we have much more in common than what we think separates us. and if we can find a way to see ourselves and each other, we can and will build a more tolerant and more inclusive country. today is going to be a tough day of conversation, but i know we have the capacity and strength of character to handle our emotions and actively listen to all sides of the issue. growth comes from being uncomfortable, and we should all be a little bit uneasy today when engaging in these conversations. that is how we know charleston will move forward from crisis to ease. further, we are a better society when we communicate with each other, learn from each other, and support each other. is best of our human spirit in our capacity to grow and change, to be lifelong learners.
because that intellectual growth and forms not only our minds, but it shapes our empathy and it creates our connections to others. it is in that spirit of connectivity and growth that we come together here today to explore and advance the conversation and action on gun violence, crisis, in south carolina and our nation. this is an important topic to tackle, and i think all of our panelists, national and local public health professionals, faith leaders, legal experts, and other guests for participating in the event. we appreciate you taking your time out of your busy schedules to be here and contribute to thoughts and ideas. toay, we look toward engaging and thought-provoking conversations to ensure more goodness and life emerge from the hateful and dark ask that occurred here and in far too many other places across our
country. change cannot be made in a vacuum. it takes all of us working together from all sectors, public health, government, business, higher education, and more. we must have a unity of purpose and a sense of urgency to act. and i'm confident with of of the bright minds that are in this room -- with all of the bright minds in this room that we will lower the prevalence of gun violence in america. once again, thank you all for being here. i will now turn it over to reverend dr. brenda nelson. we will hear from paulette brown , president of the american bar david carr. and thank you. >> [applause]
>> good morning. good morning. i want to be sure i am in the right place. reverend, thehe reverend -- [indiscernible] -- currently serving as the interim pastor of mother emanuel ame church, the clergy and members, it is my privilege this morning to welcome you to mother emanuel methodist church. we are indeed humble that the planning committee for this historical event convened together at mother emanuel as we , a church, a community, a state, nation, and world prepare for what i call the six-month point in the journey from june
17, 2015. it gives us so much comfort to know that june 17, 2015 was not an event to soon forgotten by those outside of the immediate circle of the emanuel nine families and survivors, the church, and the episcopal church that the, but instead events of june 17, 2015, after too many horrific events that have followed, have spiraled -- inspired so many to not get stuck in crisis but to move forward in deliberate and strategic action. we do look forward to today's conversations, the information to be shared, the wisdom, and the beginning of the development of an action plan for the reduction of gun violence. to transform the history of this community, state, and nation. a history where we will never have to again experience the horrific acts of violence that
have occurred since june 17, 2015. or -- at a worksite for local television in virginia or at a college campus in oregon, at a planned parenthood center in colorado, and finally at a disability center complex in san bernardino, california. yes, since june 17, 2015. please let me know if i or any member of the emanuel baptist church could be of assistance for you today. want your visit here to be a wonderful one, and please consider mother emanuel not only our home, but your home for this day. best wishes. thank you. >> [applause]
>> good morning. >> good morning. >> i am glad you got warmed up from dr. nelson. nelson and mother emanuel, for allowing us to be here this morning. it is a privilege to be here with so ready thoughtful people and with all of you to discuss a critical issue affecting the health and welfare of our country. i am humbled to be here at this church, the site of bravery and grace in the face of terror and evil. guns have become such a divisive issue in america. gun ownership has been debated, lobbied on, and politicized. i am not here to debate those issues. the american bar association has concentrated how numerous effective measures to reduce gun
violence could be enacted and enforced without in any way infringing on anyone's second amendment rights. gun violence has truly become america.america -- in more than 33,000 people in our country die from firearms. takethan 21,000 of them their own lives with guns, and more than 11,000 are murdered by guns, and there are more than 500 accidental deaths. in addition, more than 80,000 americans suffer nonfatal gun injuries every year. people innd young particular are prone to gun violence. in 2013, people under the age of 25 accounted for 36% of all firearm deaths and injuries. this is clearly an issue affecting the public health of our nation. the people of charleston know it all too well.
and no one here or anywhere in our country should except these -- accept these statistics as business as usual. for nearly 50 years, the american bar association has a knowledge the devastation caused by gun violence and has expressed strong support for meaningful reform. 1965, the delegates have considered and approved nearly 20 separate resolutions aimed at reducing firearm related deaths and injuries, which have included a variety of policy recommendations. aba put on three gun violence programs. looking at gun violence as a public health problem and addressing solutions. aba is is also -- the also involved in school programs. this program today is another step in the ongoing cooperation
between medical-professional organizations and the legal professions to focus on the toll that nonviolent possesses in our community, and importantly to discuss what it is that we can do about it. we don't want to leave here today without some viable solutions as to how we can curb this trend in gun violence. we know that our role as the nation's preeminent organization, we seek to educate its members as well as the public at large about the true meaning of the second amendment. earlier this year, the american bar association joined with the american college of physicians and seven other organizations to issue a series of recommendations in a paper. a call to action from eight health professional organizations and the american bar association. it has been published in the
journal of internal medicine. the aba have considered -- confirmed that the resolutions are sound and do not interfere with the second amendment in any way. the paper stressed a number of points and how violence is a major health public -- public health problem and calls for more criminal background checks for all firearm purchases. and -- and as we look to commonsense approaches for , manufacture, and sale of large capacity magazine firearms, which features are designed to increase their rapid killing capacity, we need to look for solutions and make decisions based upon the best possible evidence. the american bar association believes that the recommendations set forth in this paper provide a path forward to help stem the tide of
gun violence in america. more than 30 health care and consumer organizations have endorsed the recommendations so far, and we are obviously looking more in that regard. we hope that at the end of the day that we can all walk away knowing that each of us has contributed something significant to help reduce the incredible, extraordinary gun violence in this country, like no other place in the world. and now it is my pleasure to introduce david clark, chair of the american bar association committee on violence, and who has been recognized as a national leader in civil justice reform. as chair of this important commission, david has helped both lawyers and the public understand the controlling law, including the law under the second amendment. he has helped establish
coalitions for the purpose of educating the nation's communities about lawful processes on the sale, and ownership, of firearms. please welcome david clark. [applause] >> good morning. i am david clark, and i live and practice in jackson, mississippi, so i talk like a lot of you and will have some other similarities that we will talk about perhaps with mississippi and south carolina. first, a couple of things. i want to give some special recognition for helping organize this program, pull this thing off, get it done. , dean of the honors college here, and justin, the operations manager of the school of education. they have done extraordinary , in issuingning
that this program occurred as planned -- assuring that this program occurred as planned. but i would really like to give a special thanks to dean and justin, if we could, for their work. [applause] i want to mention one other thing. there will be after this program today -- there will be a service in this sanctuary starting at 6:00. i think it will be a healing and memorable experience. and everyone is certainly invited. let me give you first a brief overview of today's program. you have a lot in store for you. we start with dr. daniel webster of john hopkins school of public
health, probably the top public health researcher and writer on gun violence in the world. we are fortunate to have him here today. this program revolves around taking a public health approach to curbing the plague of gun violence in this country, and it is so appropriate to start with dr. webster. among other things, he is the professor of health policy management at the john hopkins school of health, and is the director of the john hopkins center for gun policy and research, and other things. professor ron sullivan of harvard law school is the next featured speaker, although as i will mention, this program -- professor sullivan's flights got mixed up. he will be here. it is possible after lunch. so we will be shifting some of the panels and speakers up a
bit, and we will get to him. but professor sullivan is a leading theorist and criminal law, criminal procedure, trial techniques, trial practice, legal ethics, and race theory. he is the faculty director of the harvard criminal justice institute and the harvard trial advocacy workshop. without meaning to slight anyone, but running out of time, i encourage you to look at everyone's bios on the website. i will add just a brief mention to some of the regional authorities and public health and medicine. youwill also hear from president of the american college of physicians, the president of the american academy of family physicians, and i might mention these groups in particular are helping lead the effort, the renewed effort of the medical community in
seeking to curb gun violence and try to get something done about that. i will speak to those two organizations in particular. we have the legal director of the law center to prevent gun violence, the coordinating attorney the four lawyers for a safer america, the general counsel of the coalition to stop gun violence, the founding chair of the department of public health sciences at the medical university of south carolina, the executive director of a faith-based a grassroots movement to prevent gun violence, and other notables. there will be others. pose some, if i may, questions to help us think. these are some questions we may have had coming in, questions that will arise during the program, questions we hope we can answer a lot of.
and in this program and also in the vast body of research, there is a huge amount of research out due tond a large part dr. webster and his team at john hopkins and others, but there is so much evidence-based research and study that has been done on gun violence and ways that are being used to help curb gun violence in different places, the effectiveness of those measures, samples -- measures. samples of those are on the website. under resources, you will see a number of those articles. to start off, the sort of framework before the questions, we know gun injury and death in the united states is far higher than anywhere else in the
developed world, by far. over 30,000 gun deaths each year. over 60,000 injuries. think about this. some of those debilitating. 30,000 plus 60,000. that is about 90 a day. 90 every day. we think of some mass shootings, we don't think about the 90 a day. more people have died in the u.s. just in the last four years than the american -- then the number of american soldiers that died in korea, vietnam, afghanistan, and iraq combined. think about that. korea, vietnam, afghanistan, iraq combined. the last four years. take the four years before that.
it is stunning. it questions why does this happen? does it have to happen? why do the murders occur in this church -- did the murders occur in this church almost six months ago? whited colorado, oregon, -- why did colorado, oregon, and san bernardino occur, not to mention sandy hook? 22 children plus their teachers at sandy hook. about that number of children die every day. why are south carolina's gun like my ownes, state of mississippi, so much higher than most other states? there will be some handouts. i think they are being copied. they will be at the back of the room later this morning. just indicating it is something we don't think about in a state
like mississippi or south carolina. we cannot stop all the gun deaths, we know that, but if there are things we can do to stop a many of them, shouldn't we try? . we have to try if there is something we can do? try ifldn't we have to there is something we can do? what about public health research on the subject? what does existing research into gun violence, its causes and effects, tell us? does such research point of factors, including laws, that influence the levels of gun violence in different states? what does the research show happens to levels of gun violence, including gun violence by criminals, when gun safety laws are passed? does the research so that was
designed to keep guns out of the hands of high risk people make it difference? do logic a difference? that even criminals respond to gun safety laws? and if that is what all of the research says and concludes, why do some people keep saying laws can't help? mean less violent? we have heard that from some. what is the verifiable real -- what does the verifiable real research say? is there any evidence shows that having guns everywhere reduces gun violence or any kind of violence? and if there is no such evidence, what should we do when we are faced with that more guns claim? guns in the home. does keeping a gun in your home really protector, really make your family safer?
would it make a difference to you if all the research and legitimate studies on that question reached the same conclusion? and what if we increased or required people with guns in the home to store the guns securely where children or other vulnerable family members could not accidentally or impulsively use them? smart guns. what is the feasibility of smart guns? by athat can only be fired certain person, by a certain fingerprint. so only by that person. if smart guns are not only feasible but could be made available, why are they not available for purchase? who could be opposing the sale of such smart guns? the second amendment. this second amendment is something, as -- we feel it is
sort of a special obligation in the aba to speak out about thatse there are so many are saying things that are so untrue about the scope of the second amendment. it is what our supreme court say it is, it is not what somebody on their own, contrary to the court says -- this is what i think is my second amendment right. are there legitimate concerns that gun safety laws violate second amendment rights? whatif the courts said -- did we do when the courts have said almost all measures to control gun violence are yet a vocalal, group continues to say every restriction related two guns violates the second amendment rights? what does it mean when certain groups still mount challenge after challenge to any
regulation of gun sales or possession even though about 95% of those challenges have been rejected by the courts? do most laws designed to keep guns out of the hands of high risk people even have anything ,o do with the second amendment much less violate somebody's writes? public opinion and polls, what does it mean if substantial majorities of the public say they support universal background checks and other reasonable measures to keep guns out of high risk hands but legislatures in congress won't take up the issue? what if substantial majorities of gun owners themselves -- what if they say the same thing? andof those numbers came in
there were some very recent polls, some of the results without in the back -- put out in the back. can we not dowhy anything if a substantial majority of everyone, gun owners, republicans, say they want to do something about it? the most frequent issue, because you know this, we hear about background checks. let me put this in context. background checks are required for purchases from federally licensed dealers. about 60% of gun sales. those have background checks, that does not mean that somebody won't catch a force id, it happens all the time. what about that other 40%? somebody can buy a gun at a federally licensed gun shop, or
by 10 guns, walk around the corner and sell it to someone else, no questions asked, no id, background check. -- one of the things that has been asked is called universal background checks, that means expanding the background check from that dealer to allnsed gun sales, gun shows and the like. or is the south carolina law mississippi law that prohibits a terrorist watchlist person from buying gun, who could possibly challenge that? it is being challenged and you know the usual suspects. why is it that the same politicians who demand tougher background checks for all syrian refugees also oppose any
background checks are somebody buying gun -- for somebody buying a gun? most from gune violence, what group in our society knows from first-hand experience why keeping guns out of the wrong hands in the hands of high risk people is so important? why would -- lawmakers not agree on a provision that provided that background checks must be completed and passed before a person made by a gun? that is not the law. if they have not completed it in three days, they can still sell the gun, whether it is a terrorist, convicted felon, or whatever. this is something that you in south carolina know in particular because the three days had passed for dylann roof.
prohibited.ve been why is there not more research by agencies such as the cdc into the causes and possible remedies for gun violence? we know that certain groups oppose any funding for any research into gun deaths and violence, such as research by the cdc. what is the resistance to research, to knowing more about the problem? what is the logic? ask your congressman. why is the gun industry so opposed to the cdc being allowed to study the causes and effects of gun violence? even when it is more deadly than other types of injuries the cdc .oes study
does this have to continue, are we doing anything? in the newn op ed york times that said we are not really even trying. we are not pushing hard enough. what can we do? we can't prevent all gun deaths, we know that, what can we do to bring down the risk? for the indication today, before the program begins, we are fortunate to have rabbi stephanie alexander internal send, a cairo founded in 1749, this is one of the oldest jewish congregations in the united states and it is the noblest and recognized to be the birthplace
of reform judaism in the united states. [applause] good morning. let us pray. resolve and wisdom, power. diversether today, a and determined cross-section of this great city, we dedicate ourselves to the primary task you have set before us all, not just today but every day, to safeguard the health and well-being of our community. body and soul. ,s we learn and reflect strategize and deliberate today, grant us the wisdom to see with focus and clarity, have the proliferation of gun violence
threatens every part of our well-being. confirm our resolve to reject stealstus quo that blameless life and terrorizes innocent souls. solidify our power to shape a new reality. hope,ere fear yields to acquiescence becomes courage violence gives way to peace. a modern-day isaiah might tell us to beat our handguns into plowshares, our rifles into pruning hooks, but today, let us aspire even higher as the israeli poet has written, don't stop after beating your weapons into plowshares. don't stop. and make musical
it is a great honor to be with you today. place, andis sacred to talk about solutions to gun violence. i have a tall task, i have to, within about a half-hour, encapsulate how you apply public health to a problem like guns gun violence. i actually do this in a nine week course. if you miss anything here, you can sign up for my class that starts in january, i would love to have you participate. i cannot see if my slides are up. i'm going to start mentioning about the information
public health impact of gun violence in america. i'm not really going to dwell on that. i will show you a lot of numbers, but each one represents a life. we can't lose sight of that. many, as was too indicated. we have more than 33,000 a year in the united states to die by gunfire. don't realizele is that almost two thirds of those are by suicide, which is a very preventable type of death. have over 11,000 homicides with guns per year. when you look at nonfatal injuries to gun violence, you see very few that are
self-inflicted. that is because the best majority of the time that someone is so desperate to attempt to take their lives, when they have ready access to a firearm, they succeed. nonfatalmajority of and -- the basque majority of nonfatal injuries in the united states are from acts of violence against one another, criminal acts. to get some perspective on what this means on the public health of the population, you can begin to get a feel for this as leading cause of death for males. i should say out of the gate that gun violence in america is very much a male phenomenon. we could spend a whole day talking about that.
for young males, ages 15 to 24, it is the leasing -- the leading cause of death. for the age group just above that, it is the second leading cause of death. we know that there is great disparity in life expectancy across racial lines for a fast -- racismreasons being one of them. because of that disparity are for men is men -- firearm homicide. of course, females are very impacted, not only as victims, of lost lovedrs ones.
i will now talk about public health, what does it bring to this problem? as a doctoral student in public health in the late 1980's, and a time where gun homicide involving youth was skyrocketing. it was going up at a rate we had never seen before. public health rose to the challenge. honestly, while i think there were a lot of good ideas and perspectives at that time, i think we were kind of feeling our way around. what does it mean to approach this as a public health problem? i think we have come a long way since then, but we are still struggling. to talkleagues want about the public health approach more in terms of what it is not.
it is not a law enforcement or criminal adjustment -- criminal justice approach. it is one that is rooted in prevention and changing conditions in communities and families. stronglye, feel quite that law enforcement, the right type of law enforcement is very consistent with public health approaches and with the right type of law enforcement, we have had substantial gains in a number of public health crises, including drunk driving. i am unable to see my slides. modelsmention some key of how to think about this problem that come from public health. we start with our studying risk.
approaches to understand how and is different across different demographic groups, differences in space and how they are connected to one another, how your wrist isconnected to -- your risk connected to individuals you closely associated with. -- associate with. respectiveortant that public cap -- perspective that public health as brought -- to as thet referred agent, the agent of injury. we are talking about guns. to make guns less
lethal, make them less available in high risk context? a very productive way to look at this problem that has been adopted by criminologist as well as in public health -- criminologists as well as in public health is to look it how gun violence in particular acts as a social contingent. a looks very much like infectious disease. it populates among close social networks. it will escalate like an epidemic. at the appropriate time with appropriate intervention, it similarly rapid manner. gives us insight
into how we might prevent gun violence, but also gives us hope about that downward slope. before, as i mentioned we have a long tradition of applying laws to protect the health and safety, to create safer environments and i think that is clearly needed if we are going to have a large impact in gun violence in the united states and we will also have to be able to change social norms with the right type of persuasive measures. we have had great success in a number of different domains in public health. to the to apply those problem of gun violence. i will now walk you through some examples, but first, layout -- out what i think
was mentioned earlier, how do we visualize a different reality from where we are now with gun violence? andme, it is not that hard, i think we have been conditioned to believe that gun violence is not solvable. we see on a regular basis, horrific act of gun violence -- acts of gun violence, but we cannot see when effective policies and programs are put in orce and people are saved that active gun violence is prevented, it does not show up in the news. we have to apply the right kind of research to examine whether we can reductions when we apply some of the principles that i just talked about. policy, imes to gun
believe we will make the biggest gains in reducing gun violence ideas andg two key values. one has to do with our standards for legal gun ownership. this is something we will delve into and a panel following my discussion, but currently, i believe there is good evidence that our standards were legal gun ownership are too low. secondly, the idea and accountability and value our gun at the and large, federal level and in many states, including south carolina, are written by people with interest in reducing accountability. reducing accountability, background checks is the most glaring example, not the only one. we will talk about how we address accountability more to
reduce access in high risk context. this isr way we will do to address social norms, particularly in high risk context. finally, very focused law enforcement that is geared inard deterrence, which is public health terms, prevention. let's start with thinking about the standards. we published a study in 2012 when we looked at a large database of surveys of inmates at state prisons and we look at the 13 states with the weakest standards for legal gun ownership to determine individuals who were cars are -- incarcerated for committing violent acts with firearms, were the legally prohibited from
possessing a gun at the time they carried out that act? what we found would be surprising to some which was that what he percent of those individuals were legally prohibited. the most important part of this piele eye chart -- chart, who was prohibited and who was not and would not have , but 29% ofstate those offenders would have been legally prohibited in a state with higher standards. if you think about the capacity for background checks as an example, as a way to reduce gun violence, think about how much greater impact you can have looking at the simple chart when you combine the black slice with the red slice.
underlying this is an important thing we cannot lose sight of. , i'myou are looking at now sorry you cannot see the numbers , that is the age of offenders, these are age specific homicide offending rates. what you see is a very inredible, rapid rise adolescence that declines afterards, particularly 30, the risks become reasonably low. that slice of the pie had to do with individuals who were in this 18 to 20 range and too good -- and who could
legally possess firearms. another part were individuals who were prohibited temporarily because they had committed serious acts of violence -- as juveniles. when states have expanded their prohibiting conditions for having firearms, to address we haveeas of risk, commonly seen reduction in violence as a result. when states prohibited individuals from having firearms when they had a restraining order for domestic violence, studies show significant homicides,in partner between eight and 9%. when california expanded its firearm prohibitions to individuals convicted of certain violent this -- misdemeanors,
they saw a 29% reduction in violence by the infected group -- affected group. in a study published in a book 2013, it was found that when the state of connecticut expanded -- but their records in the system so that individuals who were prohibited because of serious mental illness, that the affected group, their rates of violence were cut in half. finally, another study found that when you compare over time and across states, as states started to expand the type of conditions for which they were screening and prohibiting people , you sought greater reductions in gun homicide. accountability measures, how in the world do we keep runs -- guns from people who should not
have them, at least temporarily, that is the real conundrum. awant to talk about condiment, how do guns get to criminals? 99.9% of guns used in crimes start out in -- rum an initial sale by a licensed gun dealer. what we know is the commonplace of diversion is right at that next is, right at the initial retail sale. a very small percent of gun dealers that account for the large majority of guns used in crime. the best majority of licensed gun dealers seem to be completely law-abiding and careful individuals and it is relatively rare that they sell a gun that is used in crime. that is not the case for 5% or lionshan account for the
share of guns used in crime. we have published two studies that conducted undercover stings of problematic gun sales. when they made illegal sales and they were sued, in some cases, criminal charges were brought and will we found was in chicago, a reduction in diversion, of 62%. a similar approach in detroit yielded a 36% reduction. in the -- in new york city, where we had slightly more specific records, we were not able to look specifically at the dealers who were targeted, with the lawsuits and in the new york city case, it was not asking for a time, what they asked for was to change the way you go about selling firearms. they had a coat of business conduct -- a code of business
conduct, 82% reduction in probability that the guns sold by these dealers ended up in crime. 82% accountability. many may havee, seen in the news, a gun shop in milwaukee with a lawsuit relevant to an illegal purchase that led to permanent disability of two police officers. the gunshot had a long history. back in the late 1990's, the atf published research showing that no gun dealer and the entire nation sold more guns that were later recovered in crimes then badger, right outside of milwaukee. simply acknowledging that
in dealersd to those changing the way they sold their firearms. i will show you that in a moment. congress came to the defense of problematic gun dealers and passed a set of amendments that did a variety of things to shield gun dealers from anybody knowing what they were doing and how many guns that they sold that were used in crime. they eventually lost their wasnse in 2006, but that then handed over to a family member that led to them getting sued. this will be hard to see for some of the back, but what we are tracking here is the versions of guns to criminals right after a retail sale. the solid line is for badger firstnd ammo and the
vertical line is where the announcement that they sold the most guns used in crime, we inumented a 77% reduction guns going from badger into the hands of criminals following the acknowledgment and the gun dealers voluntarily takings -- taking steps to improve their practices. they were given protection along with many other bad apple gun dealers in 2003, we there was a 200% increase in the flow of guns coming from badger into the hands of criminals after congress gave badger and other gun dealers that protection and lack of accountability. other case studies i will tell you about, two changes in state laws that mirrored one affectedn which
background check requirements, universal background checks, through a permitting process, where you had to go to local or you had to go through local law enforcement to get ent to get your handgun. they decided to reveal that law. so rather than either go to a gun shop, excuse me, rather than go to the local law enforcement first, you went into the gun dealer or you found somebody online or some other way permit to purchase handguns, we had a law for such -- such a law for many decades before they decided to repeal that law in 2007. rather than go to a lawnmower -- local law enforcement, you make into the gun dealer or you found somebody online or some other way where there was no background check. i don't haveented, time to go through each of thee, but this tracks proportion of guns that ended up being used in crime shortly after retail sale. to winrrelate perfectly this law changed, you saw a
twofold increase in these diversions, shortly after a retail sale. what we tracked here is the percent of guns used by criminals that originated within the state of missouri, the red line, versus the yellow line of guns that originated from other states. this correlates perfectly for when they changed their law so that guns became far more readily acceptable to criminals within missouri. this graph shows you the difference in missouri's gun homicide rates minus the rest of the u.s., and what you can see here is a very abrupt change that coincides perfectly with the change in them getting rid of their background checks and permit to purchase system.
the difference is about a threefold difference from what it was during the years just before versus after. what we have concluded from our analyses is that if you look at the first three years of data, you see a 25% increase in gun homicides associated with this law. we very recently extended this out to 2013, we find an 18% increase that is very sick -- very significant. we rolled out a very long list of alternative explanations. we are also documented a 16% increase in suicides by guns. the mirror image of this experience occurred in 1995.ticut back in they adopted comprehensive background check requirements,
universal background check requirements for handguns and a permit to purchase licensing system. published, we estimated a 40% reduction in homicide rate in which a firearm was used, no change in homicides and in a separate study also published this year, we documented a 15% decrease in suicides with guns in association with that law change. about a i want to talk very important public health under the now goes brand name of your violence -- of cure violence. what the program looks like is
it identifies the most high risk risks and highest and they do outreach to those individuals with individuals that they refer to as credible messengers, people who are typically from those same communities and previously had some involvement in gangs or crime but have turned their lives around. one of the things they do is they serve as role models for how you deal with conflict without using a gun. they help to mediate disputes between individuals or groups, gangs, whatever you want to call them. i have studied this program in baltimore, we have seen great success with that.
not in every single site, but in most we have seen reductions in either homicides or nonfatal shootings are both. i am just completing some analyses looking over a dozen years in a variety of interventions applied in baltimore, mostly law enforcement along with the cure violence model. the only thing i'm seeing that has significantly reduce gun violence is this public health approach. this idea of focused deterrence that comes from a criminologist who had an enormous impact on how we approach and type -- try to prevent urban gun violence through a similar process of liesifying where the rest -- where the risk lies,
connected to networks of individuals, and they do call inns to confront those individuals to say we know who you are, if you don't stop it, you will go to jail, but we would rather not, we would like you to stop shooting each other. what is important with this model is is not only a message coming from law enforcement, it comes from the community, from individuals that these guys, almost all guys, respect. i should also say that these individuals are also offered a variety of services and assistance to change their lifestyle so they are not at risk. in recent iterations of this model, there is much more attention paid to legitimacy of
police so it is done in a fair manner. no other intervention has consistently reduce gun violence as much as this model. reviewed,ight studies a fairly large effect in reducing gun violence. when the model is applied to try to curb the selling of illegal drugs, the effects have been much less, although there was some success in high point, north carolina. i will conclude it there, because i want to make sure we have a few minutes for some , do wens or comments have any.
i got longer? ok, good. to summarize, the most important take away is there are things that work. levels of gun violence are not -- it is not something that we don't know how to address, we do know how to address these. these are cost-effective approaches. a in was theas high cost to our society, aside from the cost of lives. the biggest public health and fear,al impact is terror, when we apply these measures, whether they are policy to keep guns are dangerous people or -- behavioral after -- measures the public health or public deterrence, we see significant reductions in
gun violence. these are all approaches that have high acceptability to the public. we need to act. >> tonight on c-span, christmas at the white house, you will see first lady michelle obama speak to the troops in the east room. house,as at the white christmas even come tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span. on the next washington journal, a look at how campaign 2016 has differed from asked provincial campaigns in terms of maria -- media coverage and rhetoric. then, offers week on washington journal continues with craig surely, author of last act, the final years and emergency legacy of that emerging legacy of ronald reagan.