tv Washington Journal Representative Barry Loudermilk Discusses Security for... CSPAN June 28, 2017 12:33am-1:12am EDT
the middle class in the tribute >> 20 discussion -- on c-span two live sunday at noon eastern. >> next, georgia congressman berry loudermilk on his legislation to allow concealed carry weapons in washington d.c. this is 35 minutes. >> joining us now, berry loudermilk. the morning to you. er house administration committee. we're here to talk about your interest in concealed carry in d.c. take us back a couple of weeks congressional practice, congressional baseball game. shooting that took place there. where where were you guest: i walked up to home plate. i been in the batting cage left field. being the designated hitter for the republican team, that's where i try to spend most of my
time. i wanted to get some live hitting before we ended practice. we had a full 48 of players fleet of players on the field. somebody pitching from the mound and so. i was waiting to get up to bat. i just put on a batting helmet when i heard the first shot. you start processing, we're in alexandria, virginia. back in georgia, people target practice, especially in rural areas. why am i hearing a gunshot. i turn to look at steve scalise's security detail two officers he had with him. is there a problem. they were exiting their vehicle. they were trying to figure out what's going on. right after that, when i heard representative gary palmer of alabama workforce at third base, hollower he's got a gun. everybody started breaking to run toward the dugout.
i started running to get out the fence. i wanted to get some more distance between me and the shooter. of course, that day for some ren it's wearing a bright yellow jersey. i'm not a small guy. i was trying to put as much distance as i could between me and the shooter and look for some place to conceal my position and get my eyes on the shooter. as i was running, budgets were impacting the ground around me. i knew he was trying to target me as well as everyone else. several surrounds were going off. there was a wooden shed building. it's about 20 feet outside the fence behind the first base dugout. i went and got behind it. realized it's not going to stop. several bullets went through that building during the shooting. my intention was to get there. reassess and find an escape out the park. when i came around the corner, that's when i saw micah.
one of the staff members was laying on the ground about ten feet in front of the shed. he was bleeding very badly. chest wound. i immediately ran up to him. i got fairly close to him to see that he was very badly wounded when somebody, brian kelly and other staff member, actually had his eyes on the shooter. he holler for me to get back. the shooter moved from his position by third base dugout down behind home plate. he was trying to target the people in the dugout. there were holes in in the galvanized metal fence post. brian hollered for me to get back. he started shooting in our direction. brian held in that position throughout the shooting. he saw where the shooter was. i was staying with matt.
i felt matt was severely wounded. i didn't think he would make it through with the amount of blood he lost and the severity of his wound. if that was me, i wanted somebody close by. i continued to talk to him throughout the shooting. every time we try to get him to drag him back, the shooter would turn and fire again. there's numerous bullet holes around that shed in the ground. we had the security details suv was only thing between us and the shooter. he was 40 yards in front of us. he must have fired twenties 20 to 30 rounds. agent bailey went around the vehicle and tried to engage him. he would immediately turn and fire back over to where we were. one round went under the suv and
hit agent gry lee in the ankle. over eight minute period. it seemed like eternity. host: what did it teach you about security for those on capitol hill. you step you trying to make about having concealed carry capability here in the district. guest: first of all, if we didn't have a member of leadership on our team, there would have been no security out there. none. it would have been a little blood bath. we would have been talking about a lot of former congressmen here today. we had five injured and everybody will be fine. he a chance to go visit with him before they released him. everyone is out to the hospital except for our whip, steve scalise and our prayers are for a quick recovery for him. if he had not been a part of the team there would have been no one there with the ability to
defend themselves. you compare this going to combat. my son has been airborne, we were talking about this couple of weekends ago. he brought up an interesting point. when we go into combat, we're expecting to be shot at. we have a way of shooting way. we have body armor. you have none of that. we were the target. the shooter expressed representative jeff duncan who left practice early, encountered the shooter. he had no idea who this guy was. he asked are these republicans or democrats. he said these are republicans. the shooter thanked him. he went to his car and got his gun. he was targeting us. there were some individuals that were not part of the team or staff walking their dog this this park. it's a very popular park. recalled one lady laying in field covering her dogs. she was screaming somebody help me. she was clearly in line of fire.
he never took a shot at her. host: legislative proposals you're asking for, what are they? guest: i haven't introduced any legislation. there are several things we need to look at. there were numbers of police officers on that scene. after the shooting took place. we hadn't had the two details there. it would have been a different story. once the alexandria police were notified, they were there in three minutes. it took a lot of time to call the police. there's a possibility if there hadn't been some bystanders in the park or my chief of staff was in his car trying to call 911, it possible it would have taken longer. if you look at that, number of police officers showed up were there to investigate. our law enforcement does tremendous job. they put their lives on line everyday. more often they're investigating a crime. especially in today's day in time. we're clearly a target. not because of who i am.
but because of the position that the people in my district have asked me to fulfill for them. i've asked them to allow me to do this. i have become a target. other members have become a target. even some state legislators have become targets. we have to have a way to defend ourselves. in georgia, this would have been a different story. my chief of staff, who was there in the parking lot, would have likely had a handgun with him. which is in georgia, you can legally carry a firearm. which you can in virginia. the problem here in washington d.c., this is where we reside. it's illegal for us to carry. we're looking at how members of congress defend themselves. there's several proposals out there to do that. one is richard hudson's reciprocity bill. if your state has a concealed carry program, you have license in your state then it's
recognized in all states. you still have to follow the laws of the state which you're in. it's recognized in all states. some of the other bills actually are geared for members of congress. there's some out there, i think are basically, there's one that allows us to carry anywhere in the united states except for the u.s. capitol where the secret service is. representative from texas have intriguing one. i like some of the details. it gives more flexibility to capitol police. the secret service and it allows flexibility of where guns can be and can't be carried. i think we have to look at that. if we're going to open up for members of congress, to carry there's going to be areas like in georgia you can't carry if you have a concealed carry. that actually are higher target areas for us. such as large political gatherings. we're going to have to look at
how do we address some of that. host: let me ask the folks if they want to ask questions about representative loudermilk what he said about conceal carry. the amount to do -- the ability to do so in the district. for republicans 202-748-8001, for democrats 202-748-8000, for independents 202-748-8002. when it comes to security matters, is there money allotted for security matters for you and your staff? guest: not at this time. we're looking on the house administration committee we're looking at how we can allow four them to be used. some our funds to be used for security, for official events. that would to the cover anything on a campaignevent. we're also looking at the the federal elections committee. to loosen some of their restraints to allow members to use some of their campaign funds for security. we have to really take an objective look at it. it's one thing for me to be able
to carry. which i generally when i'm in certain areas back home. if i'm at an official event, i usually not. there's some security there with me. there's some areas that you can't. my focus is usually on the people. it's not standing in the audience looking who maybe a problem. there's staff members that will be doing that. when we look at this we also going to have to look at can we provide certain training for a member of our staff back in the district who would be able to carry at these events. whether they become reserve law enforcement officer. that lot less expensive to the taxpayers than having capitol police go with 435 members wherever they are. host: we have people wanting to talk to you about this. independent line ken you're on with our guest representative
barry loudermilk. caller: good morning. appreciate your time. i believe that would be a poor decision to arm members of congress. at least in regards to the hypocrisy a people that live in the district of columbia aren't allowed to carry concealed. unless you extend the same right to other people, i don't think it should give you the right to have it. not to say you aren't entitled to security. there are other people that are more vulnerable that don't have anywhere to go. i'm not quite sure now that you've been involved in something of this nature. i've been police 25 years in the city, i'm well aware of shootings. to date in chicago, there have been over 300 people murdered this year over 1600 shootings. now you're a member of that select group of people that have been involved in violence. i would hope that it would be more outcry from people vulnerable due to where they live or the circumstances they happen to be in as opposed to
something that makes national news. i'm not sure you're aware of that. there are over 3 behind murders in one city in this country. guest: i don't disagree with the caller. reciprocity bill actually is for every citizen. thomas matthias introduced legislation franklin for d.c. we have two legislation. richard hudson reciprocity bill which i'm a cosponsor as well as thomas massey. the problem we'll run into with just those are those states that do not have conceal carry. we have members of congress from states that do not allow for carrying of weapons in the reciprocity bills would not provide anything for the members from those states because under reciprocity it means for you to keercarry in d.c. and virginia.
you will be licensed to carry in your home state. for those states that do not have cop seal -- conceal carry. these other bills would provide ability to arm themselves. host: from texas democrats line, john is next. caller: good morning congressman. my question is, as a convicted felon, i think in texas, a person cannot defend myself in my own home because a federal law said if you get caught with a gun, you will go to jail 5 to 10 years. i don't think that's fair. i think individual change their life around with two college degrees something in happened 25 years ago, something should be done with people like me, after two years they're on my record. i should be able to allow to get
me a gun. so i can protect myself and my family in my home. i think congress needs to pass a law like that. it's not fair to us in my situation because we're treated like second class citizens. we're supposed to be all equal in this country. if one can defend themselves, i feel like i should be allowed to defend myself as well. guest: traditionally the federal government rightfully so, has always as far as details the gun laws left that to the states. i think that's really the idea of this second amendment and the constitution was. the federal government pretty much stays out of any prohibition of the ability of somebody to carry. that was always left to the states. i am a proponent of still allowing the states to set the standards for those states. in georgia the state legislature just passed legislation this last session to expand the carry
laws. to allow certain college students to carry a college campuses. that isn't for the federal government to step in and say whether or not that is right for georgia or not. in his example, i think that is something he should be taking to the state legislature. host: north carolina, laurie is next republican line. caller: good morning. my comment is on your reciprocity bill. what my question is, i etotally totally concur with the independent caller . members of congress are elected officials. therefore they represent the people. if they come from a state that does not allow conceal carry
but the elected official gets basically what would be an exemption for all general purposes, how does that represent the people when the laws are different in their home state? guest: to be clear, i haven't introduced any of this legislation. i've been tracking a lot of it. as you state, the reciprocity bill applies to everyone. so does the d.c. reciprocity bill. does not single out members of congress. i'm speaking on behalf of those who introduced the legislation and their thought process there's clearly elected officials, no better than anybody else you're right. they have no more rights than anybody else. become targets.
targets of evil, targets of people who are singling out. not me because of who i am. he was a deranged individual and he was radicalized here by radical ideology. he was targeting me because of position i'm holding. when i leave this position, the next person will become a target. what happen we're -- what we're addressing is the current status. we can spend whole lot more taxpayer money to put a whole lot more armed law enforcement officers, federal officers all across the states just to ensure that we have some level of protection. or is there a way that we can provide for the ability of a member of congress or a member of their staff to carry to provide some type of protection in these areas that currently
don't have the ability to do that. because of state laws. i agree with you, every citizen and every state ought to be able to carry. it's not to exclude anyone. the states are the ones that have already stated that made their own laws whether you can carry or not. we're looking from a federal perspective. is there a way that we can take these high profile people that are clearly targets today and provide them of some ability to protect themselves without having to spend lot of money. host: there's a group called mom demands action for gun sense. they talk with concealed carry proposals. these proposals are the first step towards enacting gun lobby federal conceal reciprocity legislation which would not create a national starred who can carry. guest: it's a false statement.
all of these bills actually recognize the individual sovereignty of each state. it does not override the state laws where you can carry. doesn't override state laws who can carry. there isn't a federal under reciprocity bill, there's not a federal carry license issued. you have to be issued from your state and it's just saying, just as a driver's license, you're issued a driver's license in north carolina, it's recognized in georgia. we're saying the same thing with these concealed carry permits. if it's issued in one state it's recognized in another state. but you still have to follow the laws enacted by that state. host: are you spooked now when you go out to public events? guest: maybe a little more alert than i was before. i've always before very security conscious. i remember seeing the shooter sitting on the bench at one of the previous practices. i didn't realize that it was him
until obviously after the shooting. i saw his face. he was sitting on the bench. trained security personnel who are with members, they pick up on some of those cues. they're very observant. i've gone through security training. one of the reasons didn't run into the dugout is because some of the training that i had received. refer to as a kill box. you get observant. i've gone through into an enclosed concrete area like that where a bullet can come in, bullets can bounce around and get you. as i was running, immediately i thought about that in my training. don't get in that dugout. i'm not criticizing those who did. they were getting to cover. i wanted to get something that provided me a better escape route and was i was not boxed in. you do find yourself more alert. my family members are more get something that provided alert. very conscious of what's around
you. host: john from ohio, republican line. hi. caller: how are you all today. i make it brief. sir, i'm full person that believes that you ought to have the right to carry firearms anywhere you happen to be. i would like to see the congress and senate put up constitutional carry throughout the united states. get rid of the patch work of laws that lot of our states have. heller and mcdonald case up in front of the supreme court. unfortunately lot of the courts don't abide by it. i don't know if you put pressure on the court to take up the case out of california. that would be nice. thank you sir. guest: it's an interesting argument there. one of the hesitations that we
have, speaking to myself and constitutionalist, the federal government taking on more national standards. it becomes a tenth amendment and second amendment argument. i would much rather leave the laws in the hands of the states because state legislatures are much more responsive. they're much closer to the people. they move things lot quicker. i got a simple bill that introduced my first year in congress three years ago. democrats support it, republicans support it. it transfers a property that a county wants to give to a national park that's a civil war historical site. everyone wants this. it should be a no brainer . i'm working my third year just to get this bill passed in the state legislature this would have been done. i believe the state legislature i'm a strong believer in federalism and i'm very hesitant for the federal government to take on national standards unless it's something that has to be done. host: from baltimore, maryland
democrats line. caller: good morning. i remember gabby giffords shooting happened, there was a guy that almost shot the wrong person. that was open and carry state. we listening to the tape of the shooting in washington, there was a guy who had automatic rifle. he was able to shoot a lot of shots. that could have killed a lot of people. why don't they do something about the gun laws to restrict some of these guns? that's my comment. guest: thank you for that. it was a semiautomatic rifle. this type of rifle is readily available. very familiar with that rifle. in a situation like this, there's no way that you can come out and i believe constitutionally ban a semiautomatic rifle. they're used in various areas.
one more popular is the ar14, the m4. one of my sons uses one hunting. it's also you got to remember, what is the purpose of the second amendment. it isn't for sporting. it's to be able to defend yourself and defend your family. win the bad guys have guns like this the good guys ought to have guns like this. this is the problem. banning these weapon will not keep them out of the hands of the bad people. that is one of the things we have to remember. laws are there, should not be there to restrict the law abider. bah the law breaker. when someone like this guy, he's basically going to commit a capital offense. he is going to kill people. he is going to commit the greatest atrocity in span of our human history which is to take the life of an innocent person. he is going to commit this crime. he can care less what your gun
laws are. most of these criminals that get their lands on guns get them illegally as well. what the restricted gun laws do just keep out of the hands of the law you you a law-abiding citizens. he's about to commit even a greater offense. host: what are the rules as far as capital complex as far as guns. is there a case improving capital security rather than the concealed carry route? guest: it's something that you do simultaneously. we're looking at the capitol security. other than capitol police, you're not allowed to carry. we have plenty of security on capitol complex. what about that staff member who is walking 15 blocks to get to the capitol and may go through a fairly dangerous area. there's no way for them to be able to carry because at system point to get work, they'll go to
capitol complex. same thing happens to members of congress. these are types of things we're looking at. i don't support carrying on the capitol complex. we have plenty of security there. there's everyday, capitol police are everywhere. we're increasing the number of cap poll policecapitol police officers here in post shooting incident. because reality of how volatile the political environment is right now. i think these are things that go hand in hand. we have to consider those. brian's bill does consider that. it gives the capitol police the flexibility to designate what areas members of congress could and could not carry. again, i think we have to expand that in our district to consider potentially allowing a member of our staff to go through some law enforcement training to be able
to actually be that assistant. host: here's jim from richmond, virginia, independent line. caller: good morning. glad to have this opportunity to be on. i think that i have gun. i don't want to get rid of my gun. i don't think anybody needs to have ak47 or whatever. my real concern is, i think i should have the same rights you do. if able to carry a gun in d.c., and carry one to the capitol, i should be able to carry women to carry one to the capitol. i think i should have the same healthcare you voted for yourself. you want to take my healthcare away. i feel like my life is in danger, that gives me the rake to say, i'm in danger for my life. should i be able to shoot you. i don't think so. you can use that scenario. if you can carry a gun, why can't i carry one? guest: let me clarify again
reciprocity bill are not for members of congress. they're for everybody. they're for any citizen. there's a lot of misconception out there on these bills. they are not specifically for members of congress. the other bills out there that fill those gaps, that's what they're intended to do. as far as healthcare, we don't fall under any other laws that anybody else. members of congress are more restrictive than the average citizen when it comes to healthcare law. as a member of congress, you're not allowed to take anything other than the exchange if the federal government is going to pay for of it. you have to go to the obamacare exchange. i just continue to pay for my own health insurance. i did not want to support something obamacare. i knew it was going to fail. restrict the access to healthcare to people across the nation as this thing is failing. premiums are skyrocketed.
that is a misconception lot of people out there have out there. members of congress don't fall ender the same rules and laws as everybody else. i do. lot of times the laws are more restrictive for members of congress because of the ethics laws. host: you brought up the topic. let me ask you senate current work on healthcare. what do you think is going to happen? what do you see the process? guest: i'm really excited about the process that we've seen happen this year. you go back and look at the house and what the house did, it was back to the idea of the old addage of legislating is like making sausage. you never want to see the process happen. we got away from making sausage for a long time. when efirst got here for member leadership introduced a bill, that's pretty much the end product. when paul ryan released this bill, he made it clear to us in the house of representatives this is not the end product. it's the beginning. it was a bottom up process. you brought all kinds of ideas,
especially some good ideas came from former state legislators and people that we have in congress that came from think tanks. that brought good ideas together. s that our end product was a bottom up approach. we'll see some of that happen in the senate as well. i think mitch mcconnell come oout and said this is our start point. i'm optimistic. they'll be able to get there. i think this is something that american people we're going to have to be a little patient in that this process, our founders put a process in that's slow. we have to adjust some of our rules and processes and traditions to get back to that. founders intended is a real process that works not just ramrodding something through. one thing we may have to do is get away from these artificial deadline. if we're going to allow the process to work. the senate, they're on a real deadline. we need to get this done to get on to tax reform.
i think it maybe a little too optimistic to think they do it this week. they're not that far off to getting the voses they -- votes they need. host: we're talking with representative barry loudermilk of georgia. in washington d.c., democrats line. caller: you mentioned earlier that staffers have to go through dangerous areas. i live in washington d.c., i have to go through dangerous areas everyday in the area i live in. there's shootings three or four gunshots in my area every week. the supreme court in the heller case said the second amendment was a fundamental right. our city council has done everything it could to validate limit to restrict the decision of the supreme court. washington d.c. at this point, does not have a conceal carry
permit. why should we have equal protections under the law? it seems it has a lot to do with that washington d.c. is black. guest: i disagree with you on that. i don't know why the city does not -- there is a concealed carry ability in washington d.c. they have allowed for permits. they're turning down many more permits than they're allowing to go through. again, aagree with you, you ought to have the right to carry. that's something that the city needs to address. we're not trying to exempt anyone. the reciprocity bill apply to every citizen out there. i agree with you on that. the city needs to recognize the constitution and the ability of you to be able to protect yourself. host: this is from minnesota independent line, glenda go ahead. caller: hi. the shooter used a caliber.
it's a high velocity caliber. he he used the cartridges. listening to the recording performancepop.i like to know what type of side arm you will be carrying in that combat zone for that? he must have had unlimited, ten minutes worth of ammunition. he also thought you were part of the radical part of the government. all these arguments, second amendment people use are crazy. i know, i think it would tear up a deer. exactly what kind of firearm would you be using? i'm really curious. guest: anything would be better than nothing at all.
i've been shot at multiple times. she's right about that. one of those rounds hit about eight inches of my head. went straight through the building. i'm very familiar with that round. yes, you have a disadvantage of someone who has a semiautomatic high powered rifle. but at the same time, with a handgun, it was a handgun that took him down after he ran of ammunition. in this case there were more than one handgun there. would we had the ability to carry? there would have been more than one handgun. somebody who is well trained in the use of a weapon, the proper use of a weapon, at least has an ability to contain the individual. had there be at least a handgun there, capitol police was not there, you can contain that individual into one area. he didn't have the freedom of movement. he moved from the third base
fence after everyone ran out the first base side of the field, he moved down the fence to get to a better shooting position and started trying to pick off individual members of congress and staff members who were out on the field. even if you weren't able to take him down, which i think you can when somebody comes into to type of arena, lot of times they don't think anyone is going to be able to be armed. they have a tactical and strategic advantage. as soon as starts shooting back, it changes their course of action. they go into defensive mode and they try to hide themselves. you saw that happen with the shooter once the capitol police got engaged. he pretty much stayed behind this concrete building. even if you weren't able to take him down, you can defend yourself and you can actually put him in position -- once the capitol police got engaged, they didn't shoot anybody else.
he tryied. most of the people that were shot were shot before the capitol police got engaged. once you're able to return fire, you can contain an individual. host: representative barry loudermilk talking about >> watch "washington journal" live at 7:00 a.m. eastern wednesday morning. join the discussion. >> wednesday u.n. and testifies about u.s. interests at the netted united nations. watch, live starting it 10:00
a.m. eastern on c-span, this meant cspan 3, www.c-span.org. >> wednesday, the house armed of services committee gets to work on the proposed authorization which directs how d.o.d. funds should be spent. this begins at 10:00 a.m. eastern on c-span 2. >> c-span, where history unfolds daily. in 1979, c-span was created as a public service by america's cable-television companies and is wrought to you today by your cable or satellite provider. >> the senate judiciary committee examined the foreign intelligence surveillance act, and the reauthorization of section 702.