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.