THE SUPREME COURT RULED A DECISION THAT THEY ANNOUNCED
TODAY THAT RECKLESS DOMESTIC ABUSE STILL COUNTS AS A
MISDEMEANOR OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WHICH THEREFORE PROHIBITS
YOU FROM BUYING A GUN.
UNDER THE LAUTENBERG AMENDMENT WHICH CONGRESS PASSED IN
1996- UNDER MAIN LAW PERSON WHO ACTS RECKLESSLY WHEN HE OR
SHE CONSCIOUSLY DISREGARDS A RISK THAT THE PERSON'S
CONDUCT WILL CAUSE SUCH A RESULT.
AND THE SORT OF CASE WHERE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT RECKLESS
DOMESTIC ABUSE IT MIGHT SEEM A LITTLE BIT CONFUSING.
SO OFTEN TIMES WHEN THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT RECKLESS ABUSE IT
IS LIKE O THE PERSON FLEW OFF THE HANDLE, THEY WERE OUT OF
CONTROL, THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE DOING RATHER THAN
TRYING TO HAVE A PRIOR INTENT TO ABUSING SOMEONE.
IT MAKES SENSE THAT THIS WOULD FALL UNDER WHAT A DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE MISDEMEANOR LOOKS LIKE.
THIS IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS
POSITIVELY CORRELATED WITH GUN VIOLENCE.
THERE WAS A STUDY THAT WAS PUBLISHED EARLIER THIS YEAR THAT
FOUND THAT SIMPLY LIVING IN A STATE WITH A –
THIS IS
PARTICULARLY PERTINENT RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE TEXAS SHOOTER
HAD A HISTORY OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AGAINST HIS WIFE.
ADDITIONALLY MANY ARE SAYING THIS MIGHT'VE BEEN MOTIVATED
BECAUSE OF A DOMESTIC SITUATION WITH HIS MOTHER-IN-LAW.
RIGHT NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS, BUT WE SHOULD OF BEEN
TALKING ABOUT THIS ALL ALONG.
ONE IN SIX MASS SHOOTERS ACTUALLY HAVE A HISTORY OF
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
EVERYBODY FROM JAMES HODGKINSON, THE MAN WHO SHOT AT CONGRESS AT
THE BASEBALL PRACTICE, THE PERPETRATOR RESPONSIBLE FOR
VIRGINIA TECH, FOR POST NIGHTCLUB, THE BOSTON MARATHON
BOMBER, EVEN THE MAN WHO DROVE INTO THE RALLY AT
CHARLOTTESVILLE ALL HAD A HISTORY OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
THIS SEEMS LIKE A PRETTY COMMON THEME HERE.
WHAT YOU GUYS THINK?
>>THESE ARE NOT ONE OF STOP THESE PEOPLE SEEM TO HAVE SOME
SORT OF BACKGROUND THAT SUGGESTS VIOLENCE.
THE DOMESTIC ABUSE ARGUMENT AS
WELL AS VIOLENCE AGAINST ANIMALS
WHICH IS AN ODD CONGRUENCE, THAT REALLY HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE A
PRE-INDICATOR OF A POSSIBLE VIOLENT OUTCOME.
AND NOW WE'RE SEEING WITH ALL OF THESE CASES –
THESE DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE CORRELATIONS OF THE SORT THAT HANNAH IS TALKING
ABOUT, THEY ARE REALLY ARE NOT DOING WELL.
THEY MIGHT BE PREDICTOR OF WHAT CAN HAPPEN.
>>IF YOU THINK ABOUT IF YOU'RE WILLING TO INFLICT HARM AND
VIOLENCE ON SOMEONE WHO YOU SUPPOSEDLY LOVE, OF COURSE YOU
ARE ALSO CAPABLE OF THEM HAVING SOME SORT OF VIOLENCE ON
STRANGERS.
I DO THINK IT IS A PREDICTOR WHERE IF YOU HAVE THOSE SORTS
OF TENDENCIES OR CAPABILITY, IT MAKES SENSE UNFORTUNATELY.
>> THAT ONE STAT I THOUGHT WAS SO TELLING WHERE IF THERE
IS A GUN IN THE HOME, THEY ARE FIVE TIMES MORE LIKELY.
>>I AM FROM SOUTH CAROLINA AND PEOPLE LOVE THEIR GUN LAWS
IN MY HOME STATE.
SO THAT KIND OF STRUCK A NERVE WITH ME.
AS FAR AS SAFETY IS CONCERNED.
I THINK THIS IS ON A RIGHT PATH WHEN IT COMES TO GUN LAWS AND I
DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY WE CAN'T MAKE MORE SENSIBLE LAWS LIKE
THIS TO CONSTRICT GUNS FROM JUST BEING IN PEOPLE'S HOMES.
>>WHEN YOU LOOK AT THINGS THAT CAN ACTUALLY CURB MASS
SHOOTINGS, OBVIOUSLY UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS HELP.
OBVIOUSLY LOOKING AT MENTAL HEALTH.
OBVIOUSLY LOOKING AT IN TERMS OF DOMESTIC ABUSE AND
PROHIBITING PEOPLE WHO HAVE A HISTORY OF DOMESTIC ABUSE
FROM ATTAINING GUNS, EVEN THOUGH SOMETIMES THERE ARE
LOOPHOLES AND THEY CAN ATTAIN THEM THROUGH PRIVATE
SELLERS, THEY CAN ALL MITIGATED TO SOME EXTENT.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE THINGS THAT ACTUALLY CURB MASS
SHOOTINGS, IT IS REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF GUNS.
THAT IS THE TRUTH.
IF YOU LOOK AT STATES WHERE THEY HAVE REDUCED THE AMOUNT OF
GUNS, THEN YOU SEE THERE IS A REDUCTION IN VIOLENCE.
>>GUN VIOLENCE.
>> YES.
I THINK THAT IS A NO-BRAINER.
AMERICA HAS MORE GUNS PER CAPITA THAN ANY UNDER OTHER
DEVELOPED COUNTRY.
AMERICAN WOMEN ARE 16 TIMES MORE LIKELY TO BE SHOT AND
KILLED SEVEN WOMEN IN DEVELOPED COUNTRIES.
WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE NUMBERS AND THE FACTS HERE.
WE ALSO NEED TO CHANGE YOUR LAWS ACCORDINGLY.
IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE THAT THERE ARE MORE GUNS.
I UNDERSTOOD THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO FEEL THAT IT IS A HOBBY.
>>IT IS PART OF THE CULTURE WHERE I AM FROM.
>> I LIKE YOGA, IF MY HOBBY WAS KILLING PEOPLE I WOULD SAY
LET'S CLOSE DOWN SOME YOGA STUDIOS, I GET IT.
>>WITH SOME PEOPLE BEING FROM THE SOUTH, IT IS JUST
EMBEDDED IN YOUR CULTURE.
IF THEY ARE NOT GOING OUT AND DOING HARM, THEY DON'T REALLY
SEE – ULTIMATELY THIS LAW WILL AFFECT EVERYONE.
AND IF THEY ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING, THEN THEY DON'T
REALLY SEE WHY THEIR GUNS NEED TO BE TAKEN FOR SOMEONE
ELSE'S ACTIONS.
IT BECOMES LIKE THIS HUGE DEBATE AS TO – WHAT IS MY GUN HAVE TO
LEAVE?
I DIDN'T DO ANYTHING WRONG VERSUS SOMEONE WHO –
>> I GET THE LOGIC THERE, BUT TO MASS SHOOTINGS WITHIN A
MONTH ESSENTIALLY.
AT SOME POINT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WANT OTHER PEOPLE'S
ACTIONS TO AFFECT YOURS, BUT WE HAVE TO SAY ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
>>AND WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT THIS ARGUMENT THAT THESE TWO MEN ARE
ACTUALLY COMING TOWARDS –
THAT WE ACTED RECKLESSLY AND IT WASN'T PLANNED.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THAT?
I THINK THAT IS A SCARY DEBATE TO HAVE.
>>DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE TYPICALLY IS A CRIME OR ACT OF PASSION, ANGER.
IT IS NOT PREMEDITATED TYPICALLY.
SO OFTEN TIMES ALCOHOL ACCOMPANIES IT OR THERE IS
AN ARGUMENT AND NO ONE ANTICIPATED IT.
IN THIS CASE, THAT IS WHERE THIS BECOMES VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE A
LOT OF PEOPLE CAN SAY I WANT A GUN TO PROTECT MY DOMICILE
OR MY HOME.
BUT THERE IS CERTAIN HISTORIES THAT SHOULD ACCEPT YOU FROM
BEING ABLE TO OWN A GUN.
AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SHOULD BE ONE OF THOSE THINGS.
THAT IS WHY WHAT HANNAH MENTIONED IS SO IMPORTANT.
YEAH, YOU CAN HAVE YOUR GUN FOR YOUR HOME BUT IF YOU HAVE A
HISTORY OF DOMESTIC ABUSE, WE DON'T WANT –
>>THE FACT THIS IS EVEN BEING ARGUED IS CRAZY TO ME.
I THINK DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND OTHER TRACTS OF HISTORY
GOING HAND IN HAND.
I AM FOR IT.
>> IF YOU'RE A PERPETRATOR OF VIOLENCE REGARDLESS OF WHAT
WEAPON IS IN YOUR HANDS OR WHATEVER IT MAY BE, YOU SHOULD
THEN NOT HAVE THE ACCESS TO HAVE SOME SORT OF OTHER TOOL TO THEN
PERPETRATE MORE VIOLENCE OR POTENTIALLY FATAL VIOLENCE.
I'M GLAD THE JUSTICES RULED AGAINST THAT, I THINK IT IS
AN IMPORTANT RULING ESPECIALLY RIGHT NOW.