TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST
TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST.
TEST.
TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST
TEST.
TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST
FESS TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST
TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST
TEST TEST TEST.
TEST.
TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST
TEST TETH TEST.
TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST TEST
HAD STEPHON HARGARTEN
>> Announcer: THE FOLLOWING
PROGRAM IS A PBS WISCONSIN
ORIGINAL PRODUCTION.
>>> CERTAINLY OUR INVESTIGATION
IS -- IS GONE VERY MUCH UNTIL
WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THE SHOOK,
WHAT CRIMO'S PLAN WAS.
INVESTIGATORS DID DEVELOP SOME
INFORMATION THAT IT APPEARS WHEN
HE DROVE TO MADISON HE WAS
DRIVING AROUND.
HOWEVER, HE DID SEE A
CELEBRATION THAT WAS OCCURRING
IN MADISON.
AND HE SERIOUSLY CONTEMPLATED
USING THE FIREARM HE HAD IN HIS
VEHICLE TO COMMIT ANOTHER
SHOOTING.
IN MADISON.
>> ANOTHER MASS SHOOTING
DEVASTATES AN ILLINOIS
COMMUNITY.
AND HITS CLOSE TO HOME IN
WISCONSIN.
I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG.
TONIGHT ON "HERE AND NOW," AN
EMERGENCY ROOM PHYSICIAN ON THE
DAMAGE AN AR-15 STYLE RIFLE CAN
DO TO THE HUMAN BODY.
A DEFENSE ATTORNEY ON WHY THESE
FIREARMS ARE STILL LEGAL.
AND SPEAKING TO THE LAW
ENFORCEMENT EMERGENCY RESPONSE.
IT'S "HERE AND NOW" FOR JULY
8th.
>>> THIS TIME THE SHOOTER
WREAKED HAVOC IN HIGHLAND PARK
AND DROVE TO MADISON.
NEXT TIME, IT COULD BE ANYWHERE.
ON HIS WAY HERE, HE DROVE PAST
HUNDREDS OF COMMUNITIES,
CELEBRATING THE FOURTH OF JULY.
ALL OF US ARE AT RISK WHEN
WEAPONS OF WAR ARE ON OUR
STREETS.
>> MADISON MAYOR SATYA RHODES
CONWAY.
IT'S DESCRIBED AS THE WEAPON OF
VOICE FOR MASS SHOOTERS, AS IN
HIGHLAND PARK, THE ARHI 15 STYLE
RIFLE.
OUR NEXT GUEST HAS A LOT OF
THOUGHTS ON MASS SHOOTINGS AS A
MILWAUKEE IMAGE ROOM PHYSICIAN.
IN ADDITION TO EVENING AN E.R.
FIGURES, DR. STEPHAN HARGARTEN
IS FOUNDING DIRECTOR OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE INJURY CENTER AT
MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN.
HE HAS THOUGHTS AND RESEARCH
ABOUT THE MAIMING AND KILLING
POTENTIAL OF ASSAULT RIFLES.
HE JOINS US NOW.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> FIRST, WHEN YOU SAW THE
HIGHLAND PARK SHOOTING, WHAT WAS
YOUR MEET REACTION?
>> WELL, WHAT I SAW WAS REALLY
THROUGH THE MEDIA THAT WAS
REPORTING ON IT.
AND I IMMEDIATELY THOUGHT THERE
MUST BE AN AR-STYLE RIFLE BEING
USED TO INFLICT THE DEATHS AND
INJURIES THAT WERE DONE IN SUCH
A SHORED PER -- SHORT PERIOD OF
TIME, AND THAT'S VERY
CHARACTERISTIC OF THE SHOOTINGS
IN OTHER SETTINGS.
>> YOU DESCRIBED THE VELOCITY OF
THE BULLET USED AS HAVING
DEVASTATING WOUNDING POTENTIAL.
HOW SO?
>> WELL, BULLETS ARE -- RELEASED
FROM IN THIS CASE FROM A RIFLE.
THEY HAVE A VELOCITY THAT'S OVER
TWO TO 3,000 FEET PER SECOND.
AND KINETIC ENERGY, WHICH IS
DEFINED BY THE MASS OF THE
BULLET, BUT THE VELOCITY BULLET
SQUARED QUANTITYIFIES THE AMOUNT
OF -- QUANTIFIES THE AMOUNT OF
ENERGY THAT'S DISPLACING TISSUE
BOTH PRIMARILY FROM THE BULLET
BUT FROM THE TEMPORARY CAVITY
THAT'S FORMED BY THIS KINETIC
RELEASE AND THAT TEARS THROUGH
ORGANS SUCH AS -- THROUGH ORGANS
AND RESULTS IN FRACTURES AND
DEVASTATING INJURIES THAT YOU
DON'T SEE WITH OTHER CALIBER
GUNS -- BULLETS FROM LET'S SAY A
HANDGUN.
>> I WANTED TO ASK YOU ABOUT HOW
YOUR RESEARCH ZEROS IN ON THE
FIREPOWER OF THESE AR-15-STYLE
WEEKENDS.
TO ASSAULT RIFLE BULLETS, HOW DO
THEY TO OTHER AMMUNITION IN
TERMS OF THIS FIRE HOUR?
>> IN TERMS LET'S SAY A 9
MILLIMETER FROM A HANDGUN, THIS
IS RIFLE IS BULLET 9 TIMES
GREATER IN TERMS OF ITS KINETIC
ENERGY RELEASE AND TEMPORARY
CAVITY FORMATIONS ABOUT THREE TO
FOUR TIMES HIGHER.
SO THERE'S A BIG VARIATION FROM
CALIBER BULLETS FROM HANDGUNS
AND SO WE SEE THE PREDICTABLE
OUTCOMES OF HAVING DEVASTATING
INJURIES BECAUSE THESE
BLULETS -- BULLETS ARE TRAVELING
SO FAST.
>> DEVASTATING INJURIES AND
ALMOST CERTAIN DEATH, CORRECT?
>> WELL, IN THE CASE OF LET'S
SAY SANDY HOOK, ALL 20 OF THOSE
CHILDREN WHO WERE STRUCK BY THE
BULLETS DIED.
THIS WERE -- THERE WERE NO
SURVIVORS IN THAT AGE GROUP.
AND IT'S THE SAME I BELIEVE IN
THIS UVALDE TRAGEDY IN TEXAS.
THESE BULLETS RESULT IN
DEVASTATING PREDICTABLE
INJURIES.
AND I THINK THEY'RE MORE SEVERE.
WE DON'T HAVE THAT DATA.
IT'S HARD TO DO.
BUT IT'S CERTAINLY MORE SEVERE
IN THE YOUNGER AGE GROUPS.
THEY HAVE THERE IS RESERVE TO AT
LEAST IMMEDIATELY SURVIVE THESE
INJURIES AND GET TO HOSPITALS
AND OUR EMERGENCY DEPARTMENTS
AND TRAUMA CENTERS.
>> YOU'VE WRITTEN ABOUT HOW THE
SECOND PASSED -- SECOND
AMENDMENT COULD NOT HAVE
ANTICIPATED THE RIFLE AND BULLET
TECHNOLOGY OF TODAY.
WHAT'S YOUR EXAMPLE OF THAT?
>> WELL, WHEN WE DID THE
CALCULATIONS, THE ENERGY
RELEASES AND -- RELEASED AND HOW
MANY BULLETETS CAN BE -- BULLETS
CAN BE RELEASED, THE SANDY
SHOOTER RELEASED 154 BULLETS IN
LESS THAN FOUR MINUTES.
YOU CALCULATE A MILITIA PERSON
IN THE 1780s WHEN THE SECOND
AMENDMENT WAS FRAMED, THAT
INDIVIDUAL RELEASED SO MANY MORE
BULLETS OVER ONE MINUTE THAN A
MILITIA PERSON COULD DO.
AND THE ENERGY RELEASE OF THE
BULLETS FROM THE AR-STEIFF 15
RESULT VERSUS A MUSKET BALL, WE
ESTIMATED THIS INDIVIDUAL
REPRESENTED ABOUT 170 MILITIA
ATTACKING SANDY HOOK SCHOOL.
>> THERE IS PRESSION DIFFERENT
FOR REGULATING THE -- PRECEDENT
FOR REGULATING THE STYLE AND
MECHANICS OF THE FOORMS SUCH AS
THE 1934 RESTRICTIONS ON GUN
GUNS.
WERE NOT ON AR15 STYLE RIFLES
AND THEIR AM US IN?
>> SURE.
IT'S A GO-AHEAD EXAM ABOUT --
EXAMPLE ABOUT HOW THE FEDERAL
LEVEL DISCUSSIONS CHANGED IN THE
LATE '20s AND EARLY '30s
FROM A SERIES OF GANGLAND-STYLE
MASS SHOOTINGS THAT OCCURRED,
THE SAINT VALENTINES DAY
MASSACRE.
THERE WAS ALSO AN ASSASSINATION
ATTEMPT ON THEN-PRESIDENT
ROOSEVELT, RESULTED IN 1934
REGULATION -- REGULATION OF IN
THIS CASE A THOMPSON MACHINE GUN
WHICH FIRES A 4- -- .45 CALIBER
BULLET.
AND THAT'S RESULTED IN PEOPLE
OWNING THIS GUN BUT SEF A
REGISTRATION REQUIREMENT AND
MILD TAX, AND YET FOR 80 YEARS,
THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A MASS
SHOOTING WITH A THOMPSON MACHINE
GUN.
AND WE FEEL THAT PERHAPS THIS IS
AN APPROACH FOR ASSAULT-STYLE
RIVALS, TO CONSIDER THIS
APPROACH -- RIFLES, TO CONSIDER
THIS APPROACH FOR FOR COL --
CONTROLLING THE FIREFIGHTER
AVAILABILITY IN THE COMMUNITY
BY, IF YOU WANT TO HAVE THIS
FIREARM, THEN YOU REGISTER IT
AND THERE'S A TAX SIMILAR TO
WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH
3-POINT -- THOMPSON MACHINE
GUNS.
>> WHAT MIGHT BE CONTEMPLATED AS
PUBLIC HEALTH DOES NOT BAN OR
SEIZING WEAPONS, WHICH THE
POSSESSION OF WHICH IS ENSHRINED
IN THE SECOND AMENDMENT?
>> I'M NOT HERE TO DISCUSS --
NOT A CONSTITUTIONAL EXPERT ON
THE CONTINUING INTERPRETATION OF
THIS.
BUT I FIND IT TO BE NOTABLE THAT
THE TECHNOLOGY HAS EMERGED AS IT
HAS IN THIS CASE THIS PRODUCT,
THAT'S EQUIVALENT TO OTHER
FIREARMS THAT ARE REGULATED LIKE
THE THOMPSON MACHINE GUN AND
IT'S SO DIFFERENT THAN THE
INTELLIGENCES BACK WHEN THE
FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION
THOUGHT ABOUT HAVING A
WELL-REGULATED MILITIA.
SO I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO,
ONE, WE HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS
TO, BASE OUT A SCIENCE-ORIENTED,
SCIENCE-INFORMED PLATFORM THAT
HAS PEOPLE COMING TOGETHER TO
DISCUSS WHAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR
POSSESSION, FOR HUNTING, FOR
SELF-PROTECTION, FOR SPORTING,
AND WHAT PERHAPS IS SOMETHING
ELSE THAT COULD BE OR SHOULD BE
REGULATED IN A DIFFERENT
FASHION.
>> WE LEAVE IT THERE.
DR. STEPHAN HARGARTEN, THANKS
VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>>> DESPITE THE DAMAGE THEY CAN
DO, THE PURCHASE AND USE OF
THESE WEAPONS IS STILL FULLY
LEGAL AND ADAMANTLY SUPPORTED BY
MANY SECOND AMENDMENT DEFENDERS.
WE GO NOW TO ONE SUCH DEFENDER,
TOM GRIEVE A CRIMINAL DEFENSE
ATTORNEY.
HE JOINS US NOW.
THANKS FOR HAVING HERE.
>> THANKS FOR HAVING ME ON.
>> WHAT WAS YOUR REACTION TO THE
CARNAGE OF THE FOURTH OF JULY
PARADE AND THE NEWS THAT THE
SHOOTER CAME TO MADISON AND
CONDUMB PLATED A SIMILAR ACT IN
THIS STATE?
>> AWFUL PEOPLE AND SICK PEOPLE
DO AWFUL AND SICK THINGS.
MY HEART GOES OUT AS ALWAYS TO
THOSE WHO WERE AFFECTED S. EVIL
PEOPLE DOING EVIL THINGS.
>> EVERY TIME THERE IS A MASS
SHOOTING WITH AN AR15-STYLE
RIFLE, THERE IS CALLS TO BAN
THEM N. YOUR MIND, WHY SHOULDN'T
THEY BE BANNED?
>> WELL, AR-15s AND HANDGUNS
BOAT REPRESENT THE PINNACLE OF
SELF-DEFENSE PROTECTION.
THE PINNACLE OF THE SECOND
AMENDMENT, WHICH IS MORE THAN
SIMPLY SELF-PROTECTION, THOUGH
THAT'S CERTAINLY AT ITS CORE.
THE SUPREME COURT HAS COTFIED
OVER THE -- CODIFIED BACK TO
1939 THE FACT THAT ORDINARY
MILITARY WEAPONS AND -- MILITARY
WEAPONS AND ORDINARY WEAPONS ARE
GUARANTEED CONSTITUTIONAL
PROTECTIONS.
WHEN WE LOOK AT THE BODY OF
INJURIES FRIEWNDZ WHICH THESE --
JURIS PRUDENCE WHICH THESE
ARE -- HOW MANY FIREARMS,
REGARDLESS OF THE STUDY, IN ANY
GIVEN YEAR OR WHETHER OR NOT WE
LOOK AT WHAT IS STATISTICALLY A
VERY SMALL SUBSET OF INDIVIDUALS
WHO ARE IMPACTED BY AR-15 AND
AR-15-STYLE WEAPONS.
IT'S -- IT'S -- IT'S GOING TO BE
EXTRAORDINARILY DIFFICULT AND
WHEN WE LOOK AT HOW GOOD THEY
ARE AS FAR AS PROTECTING OUR
RIGHTS, I THINK THAT'S A VERY
DIFFICULT CASE TO MAKE.
>> A STATISTICALLY SMALL NUMBER
OF PEOPLE IMPACTED BY THESE
WEAPONS, BUT WHEN THOSE MASS
SHOOTINGS HAPPEN, AS YOU
EXPRESSED, IT IS REALLY TRAGIC.
BUT WHAT ARE SEMI-AUTOMATIC
ASSAULT LIVES -- RIFLES USED FOR
BY ORDINARY CIVILIANS WHEN THEY
WERE DESIGNED FOR MILITARY USE?
>> WELL, THEY'RE USED JUST LIKE
ANY OTHER WEAPON.
THEY'RE USED FOR FUN.
THEY'RE USED FOR PERSONAL
DEFENSE.
THEY CAN BE USED FOR HUNTING.
THE AR-15 IS AN EXTRA MODULAR
PLATFORM, WHICH IS THE WEEKEND
THERE'S 20 MILLION IN
CIRCULATION AROUND THE
UNITED STATES AND IT'S BEEN
DUBBED AMERICA'S FAVORITE RIFLE.
>> AND INDEED.
SO YOU DESCRIBE YOURSELF AS A
ZELL -- ZEALOUS SECOND AMENDMENT
ADVOCATE.
HE SAID THE RIFLES AREE
POTENTIALLY MORE THAN DANGEROUS
THAN MUSKETS USED DURING THE
TIME THE SECOND AMENDMENT WAS
WRITTEN.
SO WHY SHOULD THESE BE TREATED
THE SAME AS A HUNTING LIFE?
>> SAME WAY THAT BROADCAST
TELEVISION SUCH AS PBS OR A
PRIVATE-BASED ORGANIZATION IS
TREATED THE SAME AS THOUGH YOU
KNOW, THE RIGHTS THAT WERE
GUARANTEED BACK AT THE TIME OF
THE FOUNDING FATHERS.
THE TECHNOLOGIES HAVE SCALED BUT
THE PROBLEMS AND THE VIRTUES
THAT THEY ADDRESS AND THE VALUES
THAT UNDERPIN THEM REMAIN THE
SAME.
>> PROBLEMS LIKE FOR
SELF-DEFENSE, YOU MEAN?
>> FOR SELF-YES, ABSOLUTELY.
COULD REGULATING ASSAULT --
>> WOULD REGULATING ASSAULT
RIFLES LIKE THEY REGULATE
MACHINE GUNS NOW BE TANTAMOUNT
IN YOUR MIND TO KIND OF SEIZING
PEOPLE'S WEAPONS OR VIOLATING
THE SECOND AMENDMENT?
>> WE DID SOMETHING EFFECTIVELY
MOUNTING TO THAT DURING THE
ASSAULT WEAPONS INSPECTION
BACK -- BAN, WHICH WAS A
10-YEAR BAN.
THERE WAS A STUDY THAT WAS
COMMISSIONED TO FIGURE OUT
BASICALLY HOW EFFECTIVE WAS
THIS.
AND THE NATIONAL INSSTOOD OF
JUSTICE RELEASED -- INSTITUTE OF
JUSTICE RELEASED THERE'S NO-NO
DISCERNIBLE LETHALITY AND
INJURIOUS BECAUSE OF ASSAULT
WEAPONS AND THEY TALKED ABOUT
THE FACT THAT IT'S PREMATURE TO
MAKE DEFINITIVE ASSESSMENTS ON
THE BAN'S IMPACT.
BUT EVEN IF IT WERE RENEWED, ANY
SUCH MOVING OF THE NEEDLE WOULD
BE SO SMALL IF IT EXISTS AT ALL
THAT IT'S BASICALLY -- IT'S TOO
SMALL TO BE MEASURED BY ANY
RELIABLE INSTRUMENT, ACCORDING
TO STATISTICAL STUDIES.
IN OTHER WORDS, BOTTOM LINE THEY
SAID IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANYTHING.
>> WHAT'S YOUR INFORMATION ON
UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS AS
HAS BEEN CALLED FOR?
>> I DON'T SEE THEM SOLVING
ANYTHING.
AS I WOULD NOTE IN A 2016 SURVEY
OF PRISON INMATES, 90% OF THEM
SAID THEY DIDN'T PURCHASE THEIR
FIREARMS FROM ANY KIND OF RETAIL
STORE OR BACKGROUND.
AS SOMEBODY WHO'S FORM BOTH A
FORMER STATE PROSECUTOR AS WELL
AS THE LEADER OF THE LARGEST
CRIMINAL DEFENSE CENTER FIRM IN
WISCONSIN, I'VE HAD AN
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE ANY NUMBER
OF CONVERSATIONS WITH FOLKS WITH
SOME CHECKERED HISTORIES, LET'S
SAY.
THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT UNIVERSAL
BACKGROUND CHECKS.
>> TOM GRIEVE, THANKS VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>>> NATIONAL POLICING EXPERT
CONSULTANT AND FORMER CHIEF OF
MADISON POLICE NOBLE RAY SAYS
THE ESCALATION OF MASS SHOOTINGS
AND THE USE OF ASTALL- --
ASSAULT-STYLE RIFLES IS
FRIGHTENING.
WE TALKED ABOUT HOW THE HIGHLAND
PARK SHOOTER THREAT CAME CLOSE
TO HOME, ALTHOUGH POLICE ARE NOT
SAYING WHICH CELEBRATION THE
SUSPECT HAD HIS EYES ON.
>> CHIEF RAY, THANKS VERY MUCH
FOR JOINING US.
>> ON THE FOURTH OF JULY WHEN
YOU SAW WHAT HAPPENED IN
HIGHLAND PARK, ILLINOIS, AS A
FORMER POLICE OFFICER, POLICE
CHIEF, AND CITIZEN, WHAT WAS
YOUR REACTION?
>> MY REACTION WAS, JUST UTTER
TEST PAY FORMAN -- DESPAIR FOR
THE PEOPLE WHO WERE THERE.
YOU DON'T EXPECT FROM A LAW
ENFORCEMENT STANDPOINT AND
CITIZEN STANDPOINT OR SOMETHING
LIKE THAT TO HAPPEN AT A PARADE.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT AN URBAN
CENTER, ALTHOUGH IT'S ADJACENT
TO CHICAGO, YOU DON'T EXPECT
THAT.
AND I THINK PARENTS AND PEOPLE
WERE JUST IN SHOCK.
>> AND SO WE ALL KIND OF
POTENTIAL TARGETS THEN AT ANY
TIME FOR A MASS SHOOTER?
>> YEAH, YOU KNOW.
WHEN YOU START TALKING ABOUT
PARADES, GROCERY STORES,
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, YOU JUST
NEVER KNOW WHERE THIS IS GOING
TO HAPPEN.
SO THAT IS WHY I KNOW THAT
CONGRESS PASSED MAJOR
LEGISLATION A FEW WEEKS AGO ON
YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE COMPLEX
ISSUE OF GUNS AND GUN SAFETY AND
MASS SHOOTINGS.
BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE FINISHED
WITH THIS.
NOT -- NOT BY A LONG SHOT.
THERE'S TREMENDOUS FEAR AND THIS
TREMENDOUS FEAR CUTS ACROSS ALL
KIND OF BOUNDARIES, RACIAL
BOUNDARIES, RELIGIOUS
BOUNDARIES, AGE, YOU KNOW,
WHERE -- AS A PARENT, AS A GRAN
PARENT, YOU KNOW -- GRANDPARENT,
BECAUSE I THINK EVERY AMERICAN
WHEN THEY LOOK AT THAT, THEY
THINK OF THEMSELVES AND WHAT
THEY WOULD DO.
THEY CAN RELATE TO THAT BECAUSE
IT'S HAPPENING IN COMMON PLACES.
>> SO IF WE'RE NOT FINISHED,
WHAT'S TO BE DONE?
>> WHAT'S TO BE DONE IS -- I
TEND TO GO TO GRAVITATE TO THE
PEOPLE THAT TALK ABOUT THIS AS A
MULTI-FACETED APPROACH.
I THINK SPLITTING IT INTO A
DICHOTOMY SAYING IT'S GUNS OR
IT'S MENTAL HEALTH, DOES THE --
THAT'S NOT -- DOES NOT HELP THE
DIALOGUE ANY GOOD AT ALL,
BECAUSE IT'S COMPLEX.
HUNDREDS OF RED FLAG -- HOW DOES
A RED FLAG LAW WORK.
EVEN WHEN YOU GET DOWN TO -- AND
THIS -- THIS PARTICULAR
SITUATION IS STILL EVOLVING.
BUT WE EXPECT A LOT FROM PARENTS
AND RELATIVES TO BE THE ONES
THAT WOULD CONTACT LAW
ENFORCEMENT AND SAY, HEY, LOOK,
MY CHILD WAS DOING THIS.
THIS LOOKS OUT OF PLACE.
BUT THEY ALSO HAVE A LOVING
RELATIONSHIP WITH THAT CHILD.
AND SO IT'S A VERY COMPLEX.
NO ONE WANTS TO SEE THEIR KIDS
IN HANDCUFFS, BUT THE QUESTION
IS NO ONE DOES NOT WANT TO SEE
THEIR KIDS HARM SOMEONE OR END
UP IN PRISON FOR LIFE OR EVEN
WORSE.
>> MEANWHILE, WE LEARNED AFTER
THE FACT THAT THE SUSPECT IN
THIS HIGHLAND PARK MASS SHOOTING
MADE HIS WAY TO WISCONSIN AND
MADISON POTENTIALLY WITH SOME
IDEA OF DOING SOMETHING SIMILAR
HERE.
WHEN YOU HEARD THAT, WHAT DID
YOU THINK?
>> WELL, AGAIN, IT GETS CLOSER,
CLOSER TO HOME.
SO IT BECOMES PERSONAL.
AND SO WHAT I THOUGHT WAS A
NUMBER OF THINGS IN MY -- FROM A
PERSONAL STANDPOINT, I STARTED
TO THINK ABOUT WHERE WE WERE,
WHERE MY SONS WERE, WHERE MY
GRANDKIDS WERE THAT DAY AND WHAT
WE WERE DOING.
DO THEY COULD INTO HARM'S PLACE.
FROM A LAW ENFORCEMENT
STANDPOINT, IT WAS -- YOU KNOW,
HOW ARE THEY RESPONDING.
WHAT ARE SOME OF THE TECHNIQUES
THAT THEY'RE USING TO RESPOND?
BECAUSE IT'S NOT COMMON FOR A
MASS SHOOTER TO LEAVE THE SCENE.
OR TYPICALLY THERE'S ARRESTED OR
THERE'S A QUOTE/UNQUOTE SUICIDE
BY COP OR THEY'RE ARRESTED
PRETTY CLOSE TO THE SCENE.
SO FOR SOMEONE WHO LEAVE A MASS
SHOOTING WITH THAT MUCH
DEVASTATION MAY GET NOT ONLY
ACROSS STATE LINES TO ANOTHER
CITY.
THAT'S RARE.
AND THANK GOD IT'S RARE.
BUT IT WAS -- IT WAS REALLY A
TENSE MOMENT I THINK, FOR A
COUPLE OF PEOPLE IN THE AREA.
>> WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT
WHETHER OR NOT THE POPULATION --
FOR A NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THE
AREA.
>> WHAT DO YOU THINK WERE THE
POPULACE HERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN
WARNED ABOUT THAT?
>> I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING
THAT I BELIEVE LAW ENFORCEMENT,
THE LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
SHOULD GET TOGETHER AND DISCUSS
THAT, HOW DOES THAT HAPPEN.
WHO -- WHO NOTIFIES THE PUBLIC,
WHAT INFORMATION SOME COME OUT?
BECAUSE THERE IS A BALANCE.
YOU KNOW, I THINK EVERYONE
UNDERSTANDS WHAT YOU DO WHEN
YOU'RE NOTIFIED OF AN AMBER
ALERT, BUT WHO INFORMATION COMES
OUT WHEN YOU HAVE A MASS
SHOOTING AND YOU'RE NOTIFYING
THE PUBLIC, YOU DON'T WANT THE
PUBLIC TO GET TOO UPSET AND
WHERE THEY'RE PARALYZED AND
ACTING.
BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, YOU
WANT PEOPLE TO TAKE THE PROPER
PRECAUTIONS.
WHAT WERE THE PROPER PRECAUTIONS
UNDER THE SCENARIO.
>> WHAT IS YOUR OPINION AS
FORMER LAW ENFORCEMENT OF THESE
MILITARY-STYLE ASSAULT RIFLES IN
THE HANDS OF CIVILIANS?
>> THEY HAVE NO PLACE, NOT IN A
DOMESTIC SETTING.
THAT'S NOT EVEN IN -- AN
ARGUMENT OR DEBATE.
YOU -- HIGH CAPACITY, THE
ABILITY FOR HUMAN DESTRUCTION ON
THE BODY, I UNDERSTAND THE
SECOND AMENDMENT.
I SUPPORT THE SECOND AMENDMENT.
I UNDERSTAND THAT SO MANY WAYS.
AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE
HOLD NEAR AND DEAR TO -- IT IS A
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT.
BUT I -- I READ THE CONSTITUTION
ALL THE TIME.
AND I'VE YET TO SEE A
CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO AN AC14.
>> -- AK-47.
>> AS A POLICE OFFICER, DO THEY
SCARE YOU?
>> YES, ESPECIALLY WHERE THE
TRENDS ARE GOING RIGHT NOW.
THE LAST THREE TO FOUR YEARS,
MORE GUN PURCHASES, MORE PEOPLE
WEARING -- POSSESSING THEM IN
PUBLIC PLACES AND PUBLIC SPACES.
AND HERE'S THE DOWNSIDE OF WHERE
THIS IS GONNA GO.
IF YOU ARE, BASED UPON SOME OF
THE RECENT SUPREME RULINGS --
SUPREME COURT RULINGS, WHERE
YOU'RE MORE ABLE TO OPEN CARRY
OR CONCEALED CARRY, THAT MEANS
THE INTERACTION BETWEEN A POLICE
OFFICER AND THE CITIZEN, THAT
COULD CHANGE THE DYNAMIC OF WHAT
TAKES PLACE.
WE HAVE RELIED ON OUR ABILITY TO
COMMUNICATE WITH CITIZENS.
THE ABILITY TO BUILD A
PREPOUR -- RAPPORT, BUILD TRUST,
AND IF THE FIRST THING YOU'RE
THINKING ABOUT IS IS THIS PERSON
ARMED ALL THE TIME, THEN WHAT DO
YOU DO?
>> ON ANOTHER MATTER, THE ARREST
OF THE SUSPECT IN THE HIGHLAND
PARK SHOOTING WAS DESCRIBED AS
WITHOUT INCIDENT.
PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT KIND OF
THE STARK DIFFERENCE BETWEEN
THAT ARREST OF A SUSPECT IN A
MASS MURDER, ESSENTIALLY, AND
THE ARREST OF A YOUNG BLACK MAN
IN AKRON, OHIO, WHO WAS GUNNED
DOWN DURING A TRAFFIC STOP.
>> UH-HUH.
>> WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT?
>> I DO THINK HISTORICALLY, ASK
CURRENTLY, WITH TODAY -- AND
CURRENTLY WITH TODAY'S SOCIAL
CONTEXT, AND WHAT
AFRICAN-AMERICANS IN PARTICULAR
BELIEVE, THERE'S A QUESTION IN
TERMS OF YOU KNOW, HOW DO I
RESPOND TO POLICE WHEN I'M ASKED
TO STOP AT A TRAFFIC STOP OR
WHEN I'M TOLD TO COMPLY.
IT SHOULD BE EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER
THE LAW.
AND EVERYONE SHOULD BE TREATED
THE SAME.
I THINK THAT IS THE ISSUE.
BUT HISTORICALLY, AND WITH
TODAY'S SOCIAL CONTEXT, I
PERSONALLY AND I HAVE RELATIVES,
I HAVE FRIENDS -- THERE IS A BIT
OF CONFUSION, A BIT OF FEAR THAT
IF I COMPLY, WHAT WILL HAPPEN.
IF I DON'T COMPLY, WHAT WILL
HAPPEN.
AND AGAIN, THAT IS A DIALOGUE
THAT NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE,
SERIOUSLY NEEDS TO TAKE PLACE
BETWEEN THE POLICE AND MANY
COMMUNITIES THAT THEY SERVE.
>> ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>>> TURNING TO ELECTION NEWS,
ABSENTEE BALLOT DROP BOXES USED
ACROSS THE STATE DURING THE
COVID-19 PANDEMIC ARE NOW
ILLEGAL AFTER A WISCONSIN
SUPREME COURT DECISION THAT WAS
RELEASED TODAY.
SENIOR POLITICAL REPORTER
ZAC SCHULTZ JOINS US WITH MORE
FROM THE CAPITOL.
HEY, ZACH.
>> HELLO, FRED.
THESE WERE WIDELY USED.
DROP BOXES WEREN'T IN PART OF
THE OLD STATE HISTORY AND THEY
WEREN'T PART OF STATE LAW, WHICH
IS WHAT CREATED THE LEGAL
UNCERTAINTY OF WHAT HAPPENED TO
THEM.
CLERKS ARE AROUND THE STATE SAID
THEY'RE NOT BARRED AND WE'RE
GOING TO USE THEM.
AND THERE WERE NOW LAWSUITS AT
THAT TIME.
AND SINCE THEM THERE HAVE BEEN
LAWSUITS AND THE SUPREME COURT
FINISHED THEIR 4-THERE A A
DIS -- 4-3 DECISION, THEY SAY
THAT BECAUSE OF SOME OF THE
LANGUAGE IN STATE STATUTES
DEALING WITH ABSENTEE BALLOTS,
DROP BOXES ARE ILLEGAL IN
WISCONSIN.
>> SO WHAT DO VOTERS DO NOW?
>> WELL, I HAVE MY ABSENTEE
BALLOT RIGHT HERE.
WE'RE ABOUT A MONTH AWAY FROM
THE AUGUST PRIMARY ELECTION.
AND I COULD EITHER PUT THIS IN A
PAIL BOX IN MY MAILBOX OR ONE OF
THE OFFICIAL FEDERAL MAILBOXES
THAT LOOKS LIKE A DROP BOX BUT
IS NOT.
THE BIG DISTINCT, ACCORDING TO
WISCONSIN LAW.
OR I COULD BRING IT TO THE
MUNICIPAL CLERK WHERE I WOULD
VOTE AND HAPPENED IT IN THERE,
OR I CAN BRING TO IT THE POLL ON
VOTING DAY.
I CAN'T GIVE IT TO SOMEONE ELSE
TO BRING IT IN.
THAT'S NOW ILLEGAL.
AND I ALSO CANNOT PUT IT IN THE
DROP BOX.
SO I HAVE TO THINK A LITTLE MORE
WHERE I WANT TO PUT IT.
AND FOR VOTERS WHO WAIT UNTIL
MUCH CLOSER TO THE ELECTION,
EITHER MAKE YOUR VOTE AND GET
THEIR BALLOT AND RECEIVE IT.
IF THEY DON'T TRUST THE FEDERAL
MAIL IS GOING TO GET IT BACK
WHICH IS A BIG QUESTION WITH THE
SLOW MAIL RETURNS DURING THE
PANDEMIC, OR IF THEY'RE NOT ABLE
TO TRAVEL IN, HOW DO THEY MAKE
THEIR VOTE COUNT PHYSICAL
THEY'RE VOTING ABSENTEE?
>> WHAT WAS THE REASON FOR
BANNING THESE OR PROHIBITING
THESE BOXES?
>> THERE ISINGING IN IN STATE --
THERE IS NOTHING SOME STATE
LAW -- IN STATE LAW ABOUT DROP
BOXES.
VOTE BE ANTE PUB -- VOTING BY
ABSENTEE.
WHAT THE STATE ANNOUNCED IS
BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE SAID IT HAS
TO BE DELIVERED TO THE MUNICIPAL
CLERK, THAT THEY MEANT
PERSONALLY HANDED TO THEM.
IT CAN'T BE PUT IN AN UNMANNED
DROP BOX WHICH WAS WHAT DROP
BOXES WOULD HAVE BEEN.
>> SO THE DISSENTING LIBERAL
JUSTICES HAD SOMETHING TO SAY
ABOUT THIS.
>> YEAH.
THEY BELIEVED THIS IS JUST
FURTHER ENCUMBERING VOTING
RIGHTS IN WISCONSIN.
THEY SAID IT WAS UNNECESSARY,
THAT IT PLAYS INTO CONSPIRACY
THEORIES BEING PUSHED BY
CONSERVATIVES.
TRUMP SUED SAYING IT WAS DROP
BOXES IN DANA, MILWAUKEE COUNTY,
THAT WERE FILLED WITH FORT
LAUDERDALE.
THERE'S NO BASIS FOR THAT
WHATSOEVER.
SO SOME OF THE LIBERALS SAY THIS
DOESN'T HELP WITH PEOPLE'S
BELIEF IN THE SECURITY OF OUR
ELECTIONS.
>> WE LEAVE IT THERE.
WE KNOW YOU HAVE SOME GOOD
ONLINE REPORTING ON THIS.
THANKS VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU.
>>> FOR MORE ON THIS STORY AND
OTHER ELECTION-RELATED NEWS IN
WISCONSIN, VISIT OUR WEBSITE AT
WPTV.COM.
-- PBSWISCONSIN.ORG AND CLICK
ON THE "NEWS" TAB.
LOOK FOR A SERIES OF U.S.
CANDIDATE INTERVIEWS.
I'M FREDERICA FREYBERG.
HAVE A GOOD WEEKEND.