Global  

Celebrating 10 Years of Trusted News Discovery
One News Page
> >

Business Matters - BM20190114

Video Credit: WFMZ Allentown, PA - Published < > Embed
Business Matters - BM20190114Guns: the Conversation Continues
0
shares
ShareTweetSavePostSend
 

Business Matters - BM20190114

Will ?

?

>> "business matters" starts now.

>> hey, hey, hello.

Good evening.

We are talking about guns, big thing in this nation, and really in this world, so i want to start with you, josh prince.

Every time we see another incident, pittsburg and i could go on and on.

It's ramped up to why don't we have common sense approach to gun laws.

Your thoughts on that?

>> common sense approach to gun laws makes us able to defend against heinous acts.

You won't talk with a law-abding citizen that wants to see the heinous acts committed, but there are plenty that can defend themselves that wouldn't be able -- >> are you saying if someone was carrying a gun?

>> we have seen that.

Fbi statistics show where there are individuals armed as a civilian death rates are substantially lower.

>> what do you say?

>> that's so debunked, it's not worth debating.

Look at america, 5% of the world's population and 50% of the world's guns and by far the worst gun violence problem in developed nations.

>> are you saying it's the wild west?

>> i won't say it's the wild west, but we lost 36,658 people in 2016 to gun violence.

That's a public health crisis.

>> dave, your thoughts on that?

>> first of all, common sense is never used as the same sentence as guns or firearms. we have laws.

There are laws against killing people.

There are laws against carrying firearms into certain places.

All of these things are already illegal.

How much more illegal can you make these things?

To your point, 36,000 -- >> 23,000 were suicides.

There is a causal reaction to a firearm and suicide.

>> do you think those others wouldn't have committed suicide?

>> it's more lethal with a firearm.

>> you say we have enough laws.

We need more guns?

>> i think that's beyond absurd.

I think the feel for this is paranoia.

The arc of the history of the nra, when it was taken over by radical factions in 1977 by the first president, alton carter, who was in prison for a short time for killing a mexican teenager with a firearm.

After that time laws were radicalized and there has been a push to believe that more is better.

The nra seeks to protect the individual rights and is the arm piece of 22 gun manufacturers.

>> you say it's about economics.

>> largely about economics.

>> your thoughts on that?

Bologna.

The organization that represents those companies you are talking about are the shooting foundation.

They try to get legislation for firearms dealers, businesses like that.

Nra could care less.

>> the nra gets huge amount of money from gun manufacturers.

They have a million dollars club to award the people.

That exists.

Talk about the laws, one of them prevents the atf from requiring gun sellers to conduct annual inventory and report it honestly to the atf.

Tens of thousands of guns go missing from arms dealers.

You think that's a good law to have?

>> this is going to be a great show.

We'll be right back.

A lot of discussion.

Stay with us.

"business matters."

>> you are watching "business matters" because if it's business, it matters.

Want to enjoy the show on the go?

Subscribe to our podcast, www.wfmz.com/"business matters" for more information.

Now back to tony iannelli.

>> we are back, "business matters."

We are talking guns.

Josh, on this side they hear more guns.

That sits you off a bit.

You truly believe that we need any additional regulation is really the trojan horse, the beginning of more regulation?

>> absolutely.

If we agree the current laws are not work, why don't we have cause to repeal the existing laws.

If they don't work, we should agree they shouldn't be there.

We are talking about a constitutional right.

I think that's an important thing to interject here.

We don't have the same restrictions on the first amendment, four .ament, can you imagine a social media background before you can speak, before you were on "business matters" -- >> in district of columbia versus teller, the opinion by justice scalia, while narrow decision, he recognized the individual's right to have a gun.

I don't think we are arguing there should be a repeal of the second amendment.

What he did leave the barn door open for is the idea of any of our other ten bill of rights all have, every one of them can have a restriction on them, including the first amendment.

>> where do you have to go to get a license before you speak for the first amendment purpose?

>> do you drive a car?

>> that is a privilege, not a constitutional right.

>> s scalia was clear in his opinion nothing shall be used to overturn laws prohibiting the possession of firearms nor laws placing conditions and qualifications upon the commercial sale of arms. background checks would pass and have passed constitutional muster.

>> we have background checks.

>> we have huge loopholes.

>> we have no loopholes.

>> what are you talking about?

You know there is a private sale loophole.

>> show crimes in relation to private sales?

You can't.

>> let me ask this question, those are all good points.

When you see a pittsburg or what happened in las vegas, do you think to yourself -- in other words, after the emotion passes there has been no change.

Your thoughts?

>> i would argue that.

There would be a lot of argument since the shooting in florida, park land, that created a new wave that has been stronger than anything we have seen since the brady laws passed in the 1990s.

There is a wave and probably will be seen later, young people, some of them are already voting in the mid midterms have voted.

>> does it make you think, we have to move on this thing?

>> it makes you think we have to make sure there is security in place to protect anyone.

>> if a teacher had a gun -- >> it would have reduced the likelihood of the attack or if the armed security guard went in instead of staying outside, we could have a different situation and many lives would have been saved.

>> it created 50 new laws in the united states on restrictions including bump stocks.

Most happened in states with republicans.

The governor in florida was happy to sign the legislation.

>> you are not saying you want to repeal the second amendment.

You want common sense approach to it.

>> look at states like california, new york state, new jersey, massachusetts, connecticut.

They have the most restrictive gun laws of any state in the country, almost anywhere in the world.

>> how about hawaii?

>> yes, hawaii too.

What happened in california?

What happened in san bernardino?

>> they have more gun laws this those states.

>> they do no.

Not.

>> what percentage of gun deaths are suicide?

>> 2/3.

60%.

Your argument is if they didn't have access to guns?

>> it's well known in the suicide field, if you have -- if you prevent the means to commit suicide, the person who is impulsive will likely rethink it.

90% of the time, they'll never try again.

Firearms are 85 to 90% lethal.

>> how do you know who will become suicidal or when?

I have had times in any life i was down in the dumps, had stupid thoughts.

I'm not a criminal.

I could pass a background check.

>> how about getting guns away from them.

>> there are individuals that want to seek help, you restrict them of a constitutional right -- >> hang on, wha one at a time.

>> we should pass red flag laws so if we know there is a problem or they are showing signs of hurting themselves -- >> on an anecdotal level, last year a young man close to me, lived in texas, bought a gun to protect the family.

One of those people that gets volatile.

Had a couple of drinks, got in a fight with his wife and went upstairs and killed himself with the gun.

He didn't buy the gun their that purpose.

I lived in ireland several years.

Police do not carry guns.

There is no gun violence.

I'm not making a correlation, but it's in your premise that more is safer.

That's absolutely not true.

>> in england they have strict gun laws.

Now they want to ban knives.

Someone who is determined to commit a crime is going to commit the crime.

>> i'll take my chances against a knife anytime.

I'll ask anyone here, gun or knife?

>> if i was in a fight, i would take the knife.

If you have taken training, you would know that.

>> are there studies that show being more restrictive in countries has in order had an impact on lives?

>> the death rate in more if not substantially more in those states and droints.

Countries.

Australia is calling for the right to have firearms because they have had suchry strictive care and the people can't defend themselves and police can't protect them.

>> your point is that only the bad guys have guns.

>> that's always going to be the case.

>> australia put in a semiautomatic weapon's ban after their first episode of a mass killing, which means you have to kill four people, not even the perpetrator to be a mass killing.

Back to australia.

I challenge those statistics.

That's not the case.

They have not had another mass shooting after they put in place and acted appropriately when the first national tragedy occurred.

>> fritz, i want to ask you, what would you like to see?

It's clear on this side, we have enough laws.

We don't want to budge.

It's a trojan horse.

First law leads to the second.

What would you like to see?

>> we need to close the background loopholes.

They are enormous.

In the rocky mountain states, no regulation whatever.

It's when all criminals who track guns, if the police trace the guns and they ask, where is the gun, mr. smith, all they have to do is be smart enough to say, i lost the gun.

>> hang on.

One at a time.

Go ahead.

>> where else do we revictimmize the victim?

Where else do we mandate if someone doesn't report a criminal act that occurs to them that they should be the criminal.

>> brook?

>> how about less victimization?

Semiassault weapons, we saw what happened in las vegas last october, i believe it was, the biggest mass gun shooting in the united states, 58 killed that.

We have a new winner, folks.

How about not creating victims?

How about not turning semiautomatic assault weapons -- putting a bump stock -- >> let's talk about salt.

Assault.

>> there is no such thing as an assault weapon.

The report in the last two weeks said there is no such thing as an assault weapon.

I lad a picture of an ar-15.

I showed a picture of a ru rugar.

>> we have to go to break.

We'll be back with our final segment of "business matters."

>> you are watching "business matters" because if it's business, it matters.

Want to voice your thoughts on this week's topic or guest?

Sound off on social media, hash tag "business matters" tv.

Now back to "business matters."

>> we are back with a very emotional show, a very important show.

When you see this as a student, do you feel like we are arguing this while young people are dying?

What are your thoughts watching so far?

Both sides think that they have not all of the answers, but i wonder if both sides are right.

Maybe it's okay to disagree but we have to find the common ground.

>> the common ground might be in a sense what you are say, second amendment good.

Have common sense restrictions, rules on this.

>> we have them.

Since 1934, we had the national firearm act, 1968 the gun control act.

We have plenty of other laws.

>> you have heard this before.

>> yes.

Same song.

>> he brought up to '84 and '86 laws.

When was the last time we heard about someone being killed by a machine gun.

It works well.

>> case in point where people -- i guess we represent people in the firearms world.

Lack of a better term.

Thoughts on defending yourself and so on.

Does that concern you that people lose the right to defend themselves?

>> absolutely.

We had a case where i was successful establishing that a individual can have a weapon on school grounds.

It was by the superior court in pennsylvania confirming that an individual can have a weapon on school grounds and an individual such as a teacher can protect him or herself and students now.

>> the additional ricks, additional common sense approach will do nothing?

>> things like so called assault weapon bans are ludicrous.

What they classify as an assault weapon is a scary looking semiautomatic rival.

When we have non-scary looking shooting at the same velocity.

Because these are black, they are dangerous.

>> that's what you are saying with an ar-15.

>> those other weapons that fire the same rounds with the same mode of velocity, nine times the connecticut energy because of the bullet and speed and damage, those are the g guns we have to get rid of.

>> i want to get ben.

>> that's an interesting point.

I agree with the clinton ban, it's no longeer an assault weapon.

>> it's how fast you can pull the trigger.

>> i'll ask the questions.

I want to ask you a question.

What do young people think?

What do you hear?

>> young people are scared.

You can walk in and have a gun in your backpack and if someone is mentally ill, they could unload the bullets on you.

>> is it not anover statement to say you go to school fearful?

>> it is, yes.

I di don't know that guns in schools are the answer, but i think people should be looking for metal detectors.

>> young people are scared.

We sympathize with young people.

We want to protect young people.

I'm a parent.

I have a son -- he's older now.

I was a teacher for many years -- at the college level.

I fiercely protected my students.

I taught in new jersey, so god helps you, you carry a gun in new jersey, but had i had the opportunity to protect my students from some lunatic, you're damn tooting i would have carried a gun.

What if the teacher develops a mental illness.

>> we can do what ifs all day long.

>> that's a logical point with arming a teacher.

>> when you hear this, does it drive you crazy that we hear the same arguments that we don't get anyway?

>> over and over again.

Let's talk about guns in school right now.

I would delve into the statistics from 2003 to 2013, we lost a grand total of 26 children a year to homicide and fire side by any means whatever when they were in school.

At the same time, we lost 1700 children with firearms, 5-18, 1700 versus 26.

>> i hear the music.

We are going to commercial.

We'll be right back.

You are watching "business matters."

You are watching "business matters" because if it's business, it matters.

Miss an episode of "business matters"?

Catch up online, go to www.wfmz.com/"business matters" to watch the most recent episode.

Now back to tony iannelli.

>> we are back.

We have a student from high school.

Isabella, what are your thoughts?

>> i think that over 50% of the united states and even the majority of the nra agree with common sense laws even if it doesn't ban all guns.

I don't know why we can't adopt what everyone agrees with.

>> as a student you wonder why adults can't come to common ground?

>> anyone that understands what the founding fathers enacted would understand that it's a democracy and that we all have say, but it's also a republic.

That's an important distinction no longer taught in our schools.

It is to protect the minorities, including the minority views and listing of inalienable rights in the bill of rights were considered to be out of touch or not able to be regulated be i the government.

>> if isabella was to say to you, can't we have common sense your reply is?

>> we have had that since 1934.

>> i have to let ben talk.

>> the second amendment is a constitutional right, and i'm not proposing we should take it away, but we have to remember at the end of the day, if we don't have framework in place to be sure people that shouldn't have guns don't get guns, we have to make sure the current laws are enforced.

I think there is more we can do.

>> we have parting thoughts.

Everyone gets 15 seconds.

Your parting thought?

>> josh is expressing the view that the second amendment is like any other right, unlimited.

There is room for common sense.

>> isabella, parting thoughts?

>> yes, i would like to say, yes, i agree with the second amendment and it is a constitutional right, but like the first amendment, it's regulated.

You can't go into the movie theater and yell fire because you have freedom of speech.

The second amendment needs common sense regulations.

>> we have regulations on who can and can't have a firearm.

Background checks, all of the school shootings, they have all passed a background check.

We have tons of laws, stacks of laws on gun ownerships.

>> josh?

>> the right to keep and bear arms includes a firearm in one's pocket for armed self-defense.

We need reciprocity so individuals can stop the parting acts.

>> we have no time.

Ben, ten seconds?

>> it's important to find common ground and accomplish the same laws end of the day, to prevent gun violence.

>> thank you so much.

We are out of time.

"business matters."

We'll see you next week.

Thank you, thank you.

?



Recent related news from verified sources

Jared Kushner: Trump's son-in-law uses WhatsApp and personal email for official White House business, attorney says

Jared Kushner uses private messaging apps and personal email to communicate about official Trump...
Independent - Published

RESAAS Services announces board shift

RESAAS Services Inc (CVE:RSS) announced a change to its board of directors on Friday.  The...
Proactive Investors - Published


You Might Like


Recent related videos from verified sources

Business Matters - BM20190325 [Video]Business Matters - BM20190325

What's Going on in Downtown Allentown?

Credit: WFMZ Allentown, PAPublished

Business Matters - BM20190318 [Video]Business Matters - BM20190318

Why Should you go to the Lehigh Valley Auto Show

Credit: WFMZ Allentown, PAPublished

Environmentally friendly: One News Page is hosted on servers powered solely by renewable energy
© 2019 One News Page Ltd. All Rights Reserved.
About us  |  Contact us  |  Disclaimer  |  Press Room  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Content Accreditation
 RSS  |  News for my Website  |  Free news search widget  |  In the News  |  DMCA / Content Removal  |  Privacy & Data Protection Policy
How are we doing? FeedbackSend us your feedback  |   LIKE us on Facebook   FOLLOW us on Twitter  •  FOLLOW us on Pinterest
One News® is a registered trademark of One News Page Ltd.