>> 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.