WELCOME TO "KENTUCKY TONIGHT."

I'M RENEE SHAW.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING u OUR TOPIC TONIGHT: MASS SHOOTINGS AND GUN LAWS.

WITH THE SAFETY NEARLY FOUR DOZEN MASS SHOOTINGS IN A MONTH'S TIME, GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES ARE RENEWING CALLS FOR RENEWAL OF FIREARMS LAWS.

BUT JUST TODAY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT ANNOUNCED IT WILL HEAR A CASE ON THE RIGHT TO CARRY CONCEALED WEAPONS IN PUBLIC, A DECISION THE NATION'S HIGHEST COURT HAS AVOID FOR MORE THAN A DECADE.

TO DISCUSSING GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION, SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS AND IN A COMPROMISE CAN BE REACHED WE'RE JOINED IN OUR LEXINGTON STUDIO BY MARK BRYANT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE GUN VOYAGES ARCHIVE, AND EDWIN NIGHBERT, THE PRESIDENT OF THE LEAGUE OF KENTUCKY SPORTSMEN.

JOINING US BY SKYPE IS WHITNEY AUSTIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AND CO-FOUNDER OF WHITNEY/STRONG AND A MASS SHOOTING SURVIVOR.

AND DAVID BURNETT, AN ATTORNEY, ICU NURSE, FIREARMS ADVOCATE AND PUBLIC RELATIONS DIRECTOR FOR STUDENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY.

CONVERSATION TONIGHT.

SEND US YOUR QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS TWITTER @KYTONIGHTKET.

SEND AN EMAIL TO KYTONIGHT@KET.

OR USE THE WEB FORM AT KET.ORG/ MAKE SURE TO CHECK THE BOX THAT SAYS YOU'RE NOT A ROBOT.

OR YOU CAN GIVE US A CALL AT 1-800-494 PLEASE GIVE US YOUR NAME AND WHERE YOU'RE FROM ON ALL MESSAG WELCOME TO ALL OF OUR GUESTS.

WHETHER YOU'RE WITH US IN THE STUDIO OR JOINING US BY SKYPE, WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TONIGHT ON THIS VERY TIMELY CONVERSATION.

MR. BRYANT, I WANT TO BEGIN WITH YOU BECAUSE I MENTIONED IN THE INTRO THAT THERE HAD REALLY BEEN 45 MASS SHOOTINGS THAT SOME AGENCIES COUNT, BUT OTHER REPORTS SHOW THERE'S MUCH MORE.

SO I'M REALLY CURIOUS FROM YOUR STANDPOINT, THIS GUN VIOLENCE ARCHIVE THAT YOU HAVE FOUND AND THAT YOU RUN, WHY IS THERE SO MUCH SEEMING DISCREPANCY ON HOW YOU DEFINE A MASS SHOOTING AND HOW THEY'RE NUMBERED?

>> WELL, WHEN WE FIRST STARTED OUR IDEA WAS TO NOT PARSE, WAS TO PROVIDE RAW HARD DATA AND ALLOW ANYBODY WHO IS LOOKING AT THE DATA TO THEN GO LOOK AT THE DETAILS AND THEN IF THEY WANT TO PARSE IT TO SAY, OH, I ONLY WANT PUBLIC SHARING ONLY WANT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, THEY CAN DO SO.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT A CLEAR RAW NUMBER, THE NUMBERS ARE HIGH.

IF YOU LOOK AT A NUMBER OF THAT PARSES EVERYTHING OUT AND SAYS WE DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT GANGS WE DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT URBAN VIOLENCE, WE DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.

WE ONLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT PUBLIC SHOOTINGS.

AND THEN THE NUMBER STARTS WINNOWING DOWN.

SO WHAT WE LOOK AT AND WE BELIEVE THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO LOOK AT THE ENTIRE PICTURE AND THEN THEN LET PEOPLE DRAW THEIR CONCLUSIONS FROM THAT.

OUR NUMBER ALSO ENSURES THAT THAT YOU LOOK AT THOSE THAT ARE INJURED, THOSE LIKE WHITNEY.

IN A LOT OF PEOPLE'S COUNTS, SHE DOESN'T COUNT BECAUSE SHE'S STILL ALIVE.

AND THAT'S AS NINE.

>> SO MASS SHOOTINGS SHOULD BE DIFFERENT FROM A MASS MURDER.

CNN DEFINES A MASS SHOOTING AS ONE WITH FOUR OR MORE INJURIES OR DEATHS.

THE WASHINGTON POST EFFORT TO TRACK PUBLIC MASS SHOOTINGS INCLUDES SHOOTINGS WITH FOUR OR MORE PEOPLE KILLED BUT THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE ROBBERIES DOMESTIC SHOOTINGS IN PRIVATE HOMES.

SO THAT GETS TO YOUR POINT ABOUT HOW DIFFERENT MAYBE EVEN MEDIA COMPANIES DEFINE IT.

>> CNN FINALLY CAME OVER TO OUR DEFINITIONS.

MOST HAVE COME TO THEM, NOT ALL, OBVIOUSLY, BUT WE'RE WORKING ON THEM.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS YOU WERE QUOTED IN THE EARP 16th EDITION OF NEW YORK TIMES, AND THE LEAD SENTENCE IN THAT STORY WAS ABOUT MASS SHOOTINGS, AND IT SAID IT MIGHT HAVE SEEMED AS IF MASS SHOOTINGS ALL BUT HALTED DURING THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC WITH A YEAR PASSING BETWEEN LARGE SCALE SHOOTINGS IN PUBLIC PLACES, BUT THE SHOOTINGS NEVER STOPPED.

THEY JUST WEREN'T AS PUBLIC.

AND SO GETTING TO YOUR POINT ABOUT HOW THAT IS DIFFERENTIATED, MR. NIGHBERT, THANK YOU FOR JOINING US FROM THE LEAGUE OF KENTUCKY SPORTSMEN P. I THINK YOUR FIRST TIME PROGRAMS ON OUR SHOW BUT WE'RE GLAD TO HAVE YOU FOUR YOUR MAYEN VOYAGE.

>> YEM, THANK YOU.

>> WHEN YOU HEAR THE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT MASS SHOOTINGS, AND OFTEN THAT EVOLVES INTO PARTICULARLY GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES SAYING THERE SHOULD BE A REFORM OF OUR FIREARMS LAWS TO BE MORE STRICT, MAKE IT HARD FORE GOWNS GET IN THE WRONG HANDS, DO YOU THINK THAT'S A MISGUIDED CONVERSATION?

AND WHAT IS LEFT OUT, IN YOUR VIEW?

>> IS IT MISGUIDED?

NOT NECESSARILY.

I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO LOOK AT THE TOTAL -- TOTAL OF THE PICTURE AND IT'S NOT THE WEAPONS THAT ARE DOING THE DAMAGE, IT IS THE PEOPLE.

AND WE HAVE TO LOOK AT WHO AND WHY THESE PEOPLE ARE DOING WHAT THEY ARE.

AND I'VE CARRIED A PISTOL FOR 20-SOMETHING YEARS AT THIS POINT IN TIME IN MY LIFE.

I'VE NEVER HAD TO PULL IT, THANKFULLY.

I'VE NEVER BEEN IN A SITUATION WHERE I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO BE NECESSARY, BUT I ALSO KNOW IN TODAY'S DAY AND AGE, DRIVING DOWN THE STREET, I CAN NECESSARILY NEED IT.

BUT -- BUT I THINK THAT WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHY THE PEOPLE ARE DOING WHAT THEY'RE DOING, AND IT'S MUCH MORE IMPORTANT TO ME TO UNDERSTAND THAT.

WHITNEY TO HIGH SCHOOL HERE AT HENRY CLAY 1983, AND I GOT MY DRIVER'S LICENSE, 50% OF THE PEOPLE THAT I HUNG OUT WITH, WE HAD A SHOTGUN IN THE BACK WINDOW OF OUR TRUCK.

WE HUNTED.

AND THAT WAS WHAT IT WAS THERE FOR.

WE WERE BOYS.

WE DID THE EXACT SAME THING THAT HAPPENS NOW.

DIFFERENCE IS THAT WE EITHER TOOK A BEATING, GAVE A BEATING.

WE NEVER, EVER, EVER THOUGHT ABOUT BRINGING A WEAPON INTO IT.

AND TO ME THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THEN AND NOW.

WHAT'S HAPPENED SOCIALISTY TO CAUSE US TO BE ABLE TO GO -- SOCIETY CAL ACTUALLY TO BE ABLE TO GO THIS THO' THAT PLACE IMMEDIATELY.

>> SO THERE ARE CULTURAL BREAKDOWNS OR SOCIETAL BREAKDOWNS OR MORAL BREAKDOWNS PERHAPS YOU SEE THAT NEED TO BE A PART OF THIS CONVERSATION.

>> YOU KNOW, I'M NOTE GOING TO POINT FINGERS AT ANY CULTURE, ANY IDENTITY.

I THINK IT'S A SOCIETAL ISSUE AND THAT THAT WE REALLY HAVE TO EXAMINE THIS.

I REMEMBER DISTINCT MY FATHER, AND IT WAS 1985, I WAS RAISED WHEN MOM PUT I DON'T TABLE.

I WAS THERE OR I WAS IN TROUBLE.

AND DAD HAPPENED TO MENTION A STUDY THAT WAS PRODUCED BY HARVARD UNIVERSITY BACK THEN THAT HAVING DINNER WITH YOUR FAMILY AROUND THE TABLE ONE DAY A WEEK, JUST ONE DAY A WEEK WAS MORE IMPORTANT IN DEVELOPMENTAL ISSUES WITH CHILDREN AND PARENTAL ISSUES THAN THE COLLEGE THEY CHOSE TO GO TO.

AND THAT STUCK WITH ME THROUGH ALL THESE YEARS, AND I ALWAYS REVERT BACK TO THAT.

WHERE ARE OUR BREAKDOWNS?

AND I REALLY DO THINK WE HAVE A BREAKDOWN WITH THE FAMILY UNIT.

>> WE'VE HEARD THAT QUITE A BIT, AND I WANT TO BRING IN MS. WHITNEY AUSTIN.

AS WAS ALLUDED TO EARLIER, YOU ARE A MASS SHOOTING SURVIVOR.

IN 2018 YOU SURVIVED BEING SHOT 12 TIMES AT YOUR WORKPLACE IN DOWNTOWN CINCINNATI OFFICE BUILDING.

WILL YOU SHARE WITH US AND OUR AUDIENCE YOUR STORY, MANY OF WHOM MAY NOT HAVE HEARD IT OR BE FAMILIAR WITH YOUR JOURNEY AND WHY YOU NOW ARE A GUN VIOLENCE, ANTI-GUN VIOLENCE ADVOCATE.

>> YEAH.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT I DID NOT EXPECT MY LIFE TO CHANGE ON SEPTEMBER 6, 2019.

I WAS JUST -- 2018.

I WAS AN EVERYDAY CITIZENS WHO WAS FOCUSED ON BEING A MOMMY, BEING A WIFE AND CLIMBING THAT CORPORATE LADDER, BUT ON THAT DAY I WALKED INTO SOMETHING VERY HORRIFIC AND, AND REALLY I AM A MIRACLE.

SO I WALKED INTO A MASS SHOOTING.

THE OTHER PEOPLE DIED, FOUR IF YOU INCLUDE THE SHOOTER THAT SO MANY HOWE MIRACULOUSLY BY THE GRACE OF GOD I WAS SHOT 12 TIMES AND NOT ONCE DID A BULLET HIT A MAJOR ORGAN OR AORTA.

AND SO FROM THE -- ARTERY.

SO FROM THE MOMENT I KNEW MY LIFE WOULD CHANGE, I WOULD SURVIVE THIS MOMENT, I DECIDED THAT I HAD TO PAY THAT GIFT FORWARD.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WHITNEY/STRONG IS ALL ABOUT, IS TRYING TO PULL PEOPLE TOGETHER TO RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE A GUN VIOLENCE PROBLEM AND THAT WE MUST DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY SO THAT WE CAN SAVE OTHERS FROM WHAT I EXPERIENCED.

>> YOU KNOW, MS. AUSTIN, ON YOUR WEBSITE WHITNEY/STRONG YOU TALK ABOUT VEERING AWAY FROM THOSE STRIDENT PARTISAN POLICY PROPOSALS THAT DON'T DO ANYTHING TO REALLY FURTHER THE CONVERSATION BUT, IN FACT, MAYBE EXACERBATE THE DIVIDES.

CAN YOU GIVE US AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT YOU BELIEVE COMMON-SENSE GUN CONTROL LEGISLATION WOULD LOOK LIKE THAT BOTH SIDES, THOSE WHO ARE SECOND AMENDMENT ADVOCATES, WOULD AGREE WITH AS LONG AS SURVIVORS AND VICTIM ADVOCATES LIKE YOURSELF.

>> YEAH, WE WORK REALLY HARD TO PULL EVERYBODY INTO THIS CONVERSATION, AND THOSE WERE THE EXACT THOUGHTS THAT I HAD WHEN I SAT IN THE HOSPITAL FOR A WEEK AFTER THE SHOOTING, HOW IS IT THAT WE PULL MORE REPUBLICANS INTO THIS CONVERSATION, HOW DO WE PULL MORE GUN OWNERS INTO THIS CONVERSATION, BECAUSE ON ANY ISSUE IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT TO FIND COMMON GROUND AND TO BRING ALL OF THE IDEAS INTO CONSIDERATION.

AND SO IMMEDIATELY I DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THOSE SOLUTIONS WERE.

WE WORKED REALLY HARD.

WE SPENT MORE THAN SIX MONTHS PORING OVER ALL OF THE SOLUTIONS THAT ARE OUT THERE.

AND FOR THE STATE OF KENTUCKY, WE LANDED ON WHAT IS NOW CALLED CRISIS AVERSION AND RETENTION WHICH WE'VE DONE POLLING IN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY, EIGHT OUT OF TEN KENTUCKIANS SAY THAT THEY ARE AS LIKELY OR MORE LIKELY TO SUPPORT THEIR LEGISLATOR IF THEIR LEGISLATOR SUPPORTS THIS BILL.

AND TO BOIL IT DOWN IN THE SIMPLEST TERMS, IT'S ABOUT AVERTING A CRISIS AND FOCUSING ON RIGHTS RETENTION BECAUSE GUN OWNERS CAN HAVE A CRISIS JUST LIKE ANYBODY ELSE.

GOD KNOWS WE ARE SEEING SO MANY CRISIS MOMENTS IN THE MARYLAND'S OF THIS PANDEMIC.

AND WE -- MIDST OF THIS PANDEMIC, AND WE NEED A LEGAL PATH TO BE ABLE TO TEMPORARILY SEPARATE THEM FROM THAT LETHAL WEAPON, THAT MOST LETHAL WEAPON AND THEN, MORE IMPORTANTLY, GET THEM THE HELP THAT THEY NEED SO THEY CAN GET BACK TO A PLACE IN WHICH GUN OWNERSHIP IS SAFE.

SO THAT'S REALLY AN EXAMPLE OF ONE OF THE SOLUTIONS WE FOCUS ON THAT HAS BIPARTISAN SUPPORT IN THIS VERY COMMON SENSE.

>> AND I DO WANT TO GET MORE INTO THIS A LITTLE LATER, AND SOMETIMES THIS IS EQUIVOCATED TO RED FLAG LAWS OR EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDERS.

CAN YOU GIVE US REALLY QUICKLY THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE TWO?

BECAUSE AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THE CARE INITIATIVE IS DIFFERENT AND MAY BE A LITTLE BIT MORE POLITICALLY PALATABLE THAN THESE RED FLAG LIKES TREATMENT RISK PROTECTION ORDERS.

>> YEAH, WE STARTED WITH A TEMPLATE OF RED FLAG OR EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDERS BECAUSE AT ITS CORE WE'RE TRYING TO SOLVE FOR THOSE CRISIS MOMENTS EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED TO ME ON SEPTEMBER 6th, AND MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE FARM SUE SUED ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY.

NOT EVERYBODY REALIZES THAT TWO OUT OF THREE GUN DEATH IN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY ARE ATTRIBUTED TO SUICIDE.

SO WE STARTED WITH THAT.

WE HAD A HEARING.

WE DID LOTS OF FOCUS GROUPS WITH STITZ AND WITH LEGISLATORS.

AND WE LEARNED REALLY QUICKLY CAN BE CONSTITUENTS AND WITH LEGISLATORS AND WE LEARNED REALLY QUICKLY THAT'S NOT IT.

THAT'S NOT GOING TO FUNCTION IN THIS STATE.

WE REALLY VALUE THE SECOND AMENDMENT.

SO WE TOOK ALL OF THAT FEEDBACK INTO CONSIDERATION AND CAME UP WITH OUR CUSTOM BILL AND THAT IS CRISIS AVERSION AND RIGHTS RETENTION.

AND WHILE THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT SEPARATE IT FROM THAT NATIONAL TEMPLATE, I THROW OUT SOME OF THE BIGGEST ONES, WHICH INCLUDE THINGS LIKE MAKING SURE THAT WE ALLOW FOR RESPONSIBLE PARTIES.

WE ARE A GUN-OWNING HOUSEHOLD, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IF YOU HAVE A VALUABLE FIREARM OR A FAMILY HEIRLOOM, THAT THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO SAFELY STORE THAT FIREARM FOR YOU WHILE YOU GO THROUGH THAT CRISIS MOMENT.

AND THEN THE BIGGEST DISTINCTION THAT I'VE HEARD LOUD AND CLEAR IN THE HEARING AND FROM MANY, MANY MEMBERS OF THE KENTUCKY LEGISLATURE IS THE ROOT CAUSE OF THIS ISSUE IS NOT THE GUN.

SO IF YOU JUST TEMPORARILY SEPARATE THEM FROM THEIR GUN, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

YOU HAVE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE ROOT CAUSE IS AND THEN GET THEM THE HELP THAT THEY NEED.

AND SO THERE IS A VERY STRONG FOCUS WITH OUR BILL THAT WE DO EXACTLY THAT.

WHETHER YOU'RE IN THIS INSTANCE BECAUSE OF MENTAL ILLNESS OR YOU'RE IN THIS INSTANCE BECAUSE OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE OR ANGER MANAGEMENT OR FOR WHATEVER REASON YOU ENDED UP IN THIS CRISIS MOMENT, THAT WE CAN CONNECT YOU TO THE HELP THAT YOU NEED SO THAT YOU CAN GET BACK TO A PLACE IN WHICH GUN OWNERSHIP IS SAFE.

WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE PERMANENTLY SEPARATED FROM THEIR FIREARM.

WE WANT TO GET THEM HELP SO THEY CAN GET BACK TO THEIR FIREARM AND A PLACE IN WHICH IT IS SAFE.

>> WE'LL TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT I THINK AS WE GO ALONG IN TONIGHT'S CONVERSATION.

DAVID BURNETT, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR JOINING US AGAIN.

YOU'VE BEEN ON THE PROGRAM.

IT'S BEEN A COUPLE OF YEARS.

WRECK.

AND JOINING US MY SKYPE PHONY AS I MENTIONED YOU'RE AN ICU NURSE, YOU'RE AN ATTORNEY, AND YOU'RE ALSO A CONCEALED CARRY ADVOCATE.

TELL US YOUR PERSPECTIVE ON WHERE THE CONVERSATIONS SHOULD BE, PARTICULARLY IN LIGHT OF THE SPATE AND SERIES OF MASS SHOOTINGS THAT WE'VE HAD, HOWEVER THEY'VE BEEN DEFINED, AND TODAY'S DEVELOPMENTS WITH THE U.S. SUPREME COURT SAYING THEY'RE GOING TO HEAR POSSIBLY IN THE FALL WHETHER OR NOT CONCEAL CARRY SHOULD CONSTITUTIONAL BE A LIGHT IN PUBLIC.

>> SURE.

AND THANKS FOR THE CHANCE TO BE ON THE PROGRAM AGAIN.

IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE BACK.

AS YOU MENTIONED, I DO KIND OF COME FROM A COUPLE DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE CORRIDOR THERE.

I HAVE THE NURSING EXPERIENCE WHERE I'VE ACTUALLY TAKEN CARE OF SHOOING VICTIMS IN THE INTENSIVE CARE UNIT, AND I'VE NEVER BEEN SHOT MYSELF, THANK GOODNESS, BUT I CAN STILL SEE THAT THE PAIN AND THE SUFFERING THAT THIS CAUSES IS DEVASTATING, AND IT'S A LONG ROAD BACK, AND FOR WHITNEY I'M SURE IT'S GOING TO BE AN NEVER-ENDING ROAD, AND MY SYMPATHIES ARE THERE.

AND YOU'RE RIGHT.

THIS IS A COMPLEX ISSUE.

IT'S DIFFICULT TO DEFINE, LET ALONE HOYT A SOLUTION, LET ALONE HOYT A SOLUTION THAT WE CAN ALL AGREE ON.

I THINK WE CAN AGREE ONE IS TOO MANY, WHETHER IT'S THREE VICTIMS OR FOUR VICTIMS.

ONE VICTIM IS TOO MANY.

I THINK THAT -- I THINK THAT OUR SOLUTIONS HAVE TO BE TAILORED TO THE PROBLEM WE WANT THEM TO SOLVE.

WE CAN'T TAKE AWAY ALL MUSCLE CARS JUST BECAUSE A FEW SPEED DEMONS ARE OUT THERE BREAKING THE LAW.

WE CAN'T LOCK UP MEN BECAUSE SOME COMMIT THE HEINOUS ACT OF RAPE.

THAT'S STEP ONE.

WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO BALANCE THE RIGHTS AND NOT HAVE TOO BROAD OF A SOLUTION.

AND THEN WE SHOULDN'T HAVE A SOLUTION THAT CREATES MORE HARM THAN IT PURPORTS TO SOLVE.

SELF-DEFENSE IS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF THE FIREARM EUGENIA IN THIS COUNTRY BY A WIDE MARGIN, SO LAST YEAR THERE WAS APPROXIMATELY I THINK IT'S ABOUT 10,000, 11,000 MURDERS IN THE UNITED STATES COMMITTED BY FIREARM.

ACCORDING TO RESEARCH FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, 40,000 FIREARMS, THERE WERE 40,000 INCIDENTS OF SELF-DEFENSE BY FIREARM PER YEAR.

SO THAT MEANS THAT FIREARMS ARE USED TO DEFEND LIFE MORE OFTEN THAN THEY ARE TO TAKE LIFE BY RATIO OF FIVE-TO-ONE, AND ANY LAW THAT WOULD RESTRICT THE OWNERSHIP OF FIREARMS OR THE POSSESSION OF FIREARMS OR THE ACQUISITION OF FIREARMS HAS THE CAPACITY TO DO MORE DAMAGE THAN IT DOES HARM.

SO THESE ARE QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE TO ASK, AND I THINK THAT'S THE FRAMEWORK THAT WE HAVE TO APPROACH THE TABLE WITH.

>> BEFORE WE GET INTO UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS AND SOME OF THE OTHER THINGS THAT THE BIDEN ADMINISTRATION HAS PROPOSED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER OR THEY HOPE CONGRESS WILL TAKE ON, I WANT TO GET YOUR RESPECT PERSPECTIVE, MR. BURNETT, ABOUT RED FLAG LAWS, AND PERHAPS WHAT MS. AUSTIN JUST DESCRIBED ABOUT THIS CARE PERSPECTIVE VERSUS THE CONGRESS APPROACH THAT WE HAVE READER HEARD OF THESE RED FLAG LAWS.

DO YOU SEE A DISTINCTION FROM?

, AND YOU GET ONBOARD WITH WHAT MS. WHITNEY AUSTIN HAS PROPOSED AND THE KENTUCKY LEGISLATURE?

>> YEAH, I'M NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH THE LEGISLATION THAT WHITNEY HAS PROPOSED.

THE SECOND AMENDMENT NOT THE ONLY AMENDMENT THAT I CARE WITH.

THE 5th AND 14th AMENDMENT DUE RIGHTS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO ME SO WE HAVE TO PRESERVE THEM.

YOU CANNOT HAVE A RIGHT REVOKED WITHOUT DUE PROCESS.

SO I'M A BIG FAN OF THAT.

RED FLAG LAWS ARE ALREADY ON THE BOOKS IN 19 STATES, PLUS THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

SO THIS IS NOT AN UNTESTED PROJECT.

AND GENERALLY I PREFER TO SEE THESE THINGS TACKLED A STATE-BY-STATE BASIS.

I THINK 50 LEGAL EXPERIMENTS MUCH BETTER THAN UNCOMPREHENSIVE NETWORK OF FEDERAL LAWS.

BUT WE HAVE SEEN THAT THESE RED FLAG LAWS DON'T ACTUALLY WORK.

WE'VE SEEN A MASS SHOOTING AT THE FEDEX FACILITY JUST THIS MONTH.

THAT GUY HAD HIS RIFLE TAKEN AWAY BECAUSE OF A RED FLAG LAW BUT BECAUSE OF A DEFISSION IT?

SYSTEM IT WASN'T FULLY RECORD AND HE WAS ABLE TO ACQUIRE ANOTHER FIREARM AND ENGAGE IN A MASS SHOOTING.

AND THEN MY QUESTION IS WHAT'S THE CRITERIA FOR A RED FLAG LAW.

IS IT MERELY DEPRESSION ARE WE GOING TO TAKE AWAY THE FIREARMS FROM EVERY PERSON THAT IS HAVING SHOTS THOUGHTS OF SELF-HARM ORE THEY'RE GETTING THERAPY AND THERE'S CONCERNS?

I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT THAT PROCESS WOULDN'T COMPLY WITH THE IDENTIFIED 5th AND 14th AMENDMENTS.

>> MR. BRYANT I WANT TO ASK YOU BECAUSE THIS QUESTION COMES IN FROM ROBERT CUMMINGS IN RUSSELL COUNTY, AND THEN WE'LL GO FROM WILL.

HE ASKS, WHY DON'T WE ENFORCES THE LAWS THAT ARE ALREADY ON THE BOOKS AND MAYBE UPGRADE THE PENALTIES TO FEDERAL CHARGES?

DOES THAT SOUND FEASIBLE TO YOU?

>> PARTIALLY, YES, BUT IN REALTY A LOT OF THE FOLKS THAT ARE SHOOTING, THAT ARE DOING -- THAT ARE DOING SHOOTING, EACH YEAR THERE'S ABOUT 100, 125,000 PEOPLE WHO SHOOT OTHER PEOPLE.

AND THERE'S 15 MILLION GUN OWNERS.

NOW, NEXT YEAR THERE'LL STILL BE ANOTHER 100, 125,000 PEOPLE SHOOTING OTHER PEOPLE.

WE DON'T KNOW WHICH OF THOSE 50 MILLION IT WILL BE.

SO WE CAN LOOK AT -- YES, WE CAN LOOK AT ENFORCING THE LAWS THAT WE HAVE, BUT THE LAWS THAT WE HAVE DON'T NECESSARILY WORK.

I CAN GO TO ARMS LIST ONLINE RIGHT NOW, AND WITHIN THREE OR FOUR HOURS, IF THERE'S SOMEBODY HERE IN LEXINGTON, I CAN BE AT THE WALMART PARKING LOT AND BUY A RIFLE OR A PELLET PISTOL WITH NO PROBLEM IF BOTH OF US ARE KENTUCKIANS.

THERE'S NO LEGAL ISSUE WITH THAT.

EVEN THOUGH NOBODY HAS BEEN BACKGROUND CHECKED.

NOBODY HAS BEEN LOOKED AT TO SEE IF THAT IS A GOOD THING.

DO I NEED TO BUY A GUN?

DO I HAVE A FELONY THAT SHOULD KEEP ME FROM HAVING IT?

DOES THE GUY THAT'S SELLING THE GUN HAVE AN ISSUE THAT HE'S SELLING A STOLEN GUN?

THERE ARE A LOT OF THING THAT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT.

WE NEED NEW LAWS TO ADDRESS THOSE.

THEY DON'T NEGATIVELY AFFECT OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS WHATSOEVER.

DAVID, I BELIEVE, HE MENTIONED CARS.

WE DON'T TAKE CARS AWAY FROM ALL THE HOTRODS AWAY, BUT WE SURE LICENSE AND WE INSURE AND WE LOOK AT ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE NECESSARY TO MITIGATE THE LIABILITY FOR CAR, SO WHEN A HOTRODDER KILLS SOMEBODY OR LET'S BACK IT UP AND SAY WHEN THE HOTROD SER RUNNING 125 MILES PER HOUR HE IS IMPACTED FINANCIALLY.

HE HAS LOTS OF IMPACTS THAT HAS TO BE ADDRESSED ADDRESSED AND THEY'RE COVERED AHEAD OF TIME.

HE HAD TO HAVE TRAINING.

HE HAD TO HAVE A LICENSE.

IF WE LOOK AT CARS, I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

BUT I NEED TO TALK ABOUT ONE THING DAVID SAID ABOUT 40,000 DEFENSIVE GUN USES FROM A -- FROM A DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE STUDY.

THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE COLLECTED A WHOLE BUNCH OF DIFFERENT STUDIES BY DIFFERENT ACADEMICS, AND ONE OF THEM HAD THIS 40,000 DEFENSIVE GUN USES.

IT STARTED OUT AS 2.5 MILLION DEFENSIVE GUN USES A YEAR.

AND IF RESEARCHER WHO LIVES IN FLORIDA APPARENTLY THE DOG ATE HIS HOMEWORK BECAUSE HE COULD NEVER QUITE COME UP WITH HOW THAT NUMBER WAS ARRIVED.

WE TRACK DEFENSIVE GUN USES.

THERE IS A COUPLE OF THOUSAND A YEAR.

THOSE ARE JUSTIFIABLE, REALISTIC DEFENSIVE GUN USES.

THERE HAS NEVER BEEN ANYTHING THAT REMOTELY TOUCHES 40,000.

AND A LOT OF THESE DEFENSIVE GUN USES, BECAUSE WE USE THE CLEAR DEFINITIONS OF A PERSON WAS THREATENED AND HE SHOT SOMEONE OR HE TRIED TO STOP SOMEONE, SOMETIMES IT'S TWO DRUG DEALERS, SO SOME OF THAT 2,000 DEFENSIVE GUN USERS ACTUALLY DRUG DEALER VERSUS DRUG DEARLY OR BAD GUY VERSUS BAD GUY.

>> MS. WHITNEY AUSTIN, I THINK YOU WOULD LIKE TO JUMP IN AT THIS POINT.

GO AHEAD.

>> WHAT I'M HEARING HERE IS SOMETHING I HEAR VERY OFTEN ON THIS ISSUE, WHICH I DEDICATED MY LIFE TO, AND THAT IS A FATALISTIC ATTITUDE THAT WHATEVER SOLUTION IS PROPOSED, THERE'S A REASON WHY IT WON'T WORK.

IT'S TOO BURDENSOME ON GUN OWNERS OR IT'S TOO SPECIFIC TO THIS POPULATION.

I WANT TO ENCOURAGES TONIGHT TO NOT THAT HAVE FATALISTIC ATTITUDE BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A SMALL PROBLEM HERE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THIS.

BUT THE SAME PEOPLE THAT DIE EVERY YEAR OF CAR ACCIDENTS IS THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT DIE OF GUN VIOLENCE EVERY YEAR.

THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT DIE EVERY YEAR TO BREAST CANCER IS THE SAME NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT DIE EVERY YEAR TO GUN VIOLENCE.

SO THIS IS NO LONGER A SMALL PROBLEM.

THIS IS A BIG PROBLEM.

IT WILL IMPACT YOU IN SOME WAY, SHAPE OR FORM.

AND I JUST REFUSE TO THROW MY HANDS UP AND SAY, THERE'S NOTHING.

AND IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT IT HAS TO BE SOLVED WITH ALL LEGISLATIVE SOLUTIONS BECAUSE WE DO A LOT OF COMMUNITY WORK THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH LEGISLATION, BUT THERE ARE SOME VERY REASONABLE SOLUTIONS THAT WE SHOULD BE CONSIDERING TO HELP US REDUCE THE LEVELS GUN VIOLENCE, AND THERE'S ONE OTHER THING THAT I WANT TO COME BACK TO THAT DAVID SHARED RELATIVE TO RED FLAG LAW AND THE IMPORTANCE OF DUE PROCESS.

WE CERTAINLY AGREE WE NEED TO HAVE A HIGH LEVEL BURDEN OF PROOF IN ORDER TO ENSURE THAT, YEP, WE'VE CHECKED THE BOX.

THIS PERSON TRULY HAS REACHED THAT PLACE WHERE WE NEED TO TEMPORARILY SEPARATE THEM FROM THEIR FIREARMS.

BUT WHAT EVERYBODY NEEDS TO KNOW IS THERE ARE 20 STATES IF YOU INCLUDE THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, WE'VE GOT 20 STATES AT THIS POINT THAT HAVE EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDERS OR RED FLAG LAWS, AND THEY HAVE CONSISTENTLY BEEN UPHELD BY THE COURT.

SO THIS IS NOT A QUESTION OF, M'M, I'M NOT SURE IF DUE PROCESS IS THERE OR NOT.

IT'S BEEN UPHELD WITH THE CORKS THIS IS ACROSS MANY DIFFERENT STATES: FLORIDA TO INDIANA TOO MASSACHUSETTS TO CALIFORNIA.

THERE'S REALLY GOOD EVIDENCE FOR NOT ONLY ARE THESE BEING UPHELD BUT SECONDLY THAT THEY'RE WORKING AND THEY'RE REDUCING GUN VIOLENCE IN THOSE STATES.

>> WELL, YOU ARE WATCHING "KENTUCKY TONIGHT," AND TONIGHT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MASS SHOOTINGS AND GUN LAWS, AND WE THANK YOU FOR JOINING US TONIGHT FOR THIS CONVERSATION.

I WANT TO GO TO YOU, MR. NIGHBERT.

THIS QUESTION OR COMMENT FROM ADAM HALEY SAYS, "WHAT RIGHTS WOULD GUN CONTROL ADVOCATES BE WILLING TO EXCHANGE FOR THEIR PROPOSAL?"

SO WE MENTIONED THE WORD "COMPROMISE" AT THE BEGINNING, AND SO COMPROMISE INVOLVES TWO SIDES, AND SO I'M CURIOUS AND WE'LL GET FROM THE OTHER SIDE WHAT THEY'RE WILLING TO CAPITULATE ON.

BUT WHAT IS IT THAT YOU THINK IS REASONABLE TO THINK, OKAY, THIS IDEA, ITS TIME HAS COME?

>> I'M A CONSTITUTIONALIST TO THE CORE.

AND I THINK THAT -- THAT ANY ATTEMPT TO SUBVERT OR CIRCUMVENT THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS WRONG.

I THINK THE FIFTH AND 14thS ARE THERE FOR A REASON.

I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH HER LEGISLATION AT ALL.

I HAVE READ SOME THAT WAS PROPOSED A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, AND THE LEAGUE CAME OUT STAUNCHLY AGAINST THEM BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN TIMES I'VE BEEN WITH MY IP WIFE FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS, AND IN OUR YOUNG RELATIONSHIP THERE WERE TIMES WHERE SHE WAS MAD ENOUGH AT ME THAT SHE WOULD HAVE CALLED, AND TO HAVE HER TESTIMONY CONVINCE A JUDGE THAT I WAS GOING TO BE A DANGER TO HER OR ANYBODY ELSE, WHETHER IT WAS TRUE OR NOT, IS ABSOLUTELY A VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS.

AND I DON'T KNOW, LIKE I SAID, I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH IT.

I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THEIR.

I'M FAMILIAR WITH KENTUCKY.

THIS IS MY HOME.

AND I'M VERY MUCH AGAINST ANYTHING THAT ALLOWS MS. SHAW TO CALL IN AND SAY, EDWIN NIGHBERT IS A DANGER, FOR WHATEVER REASON, AND HAVE THAT DUE PROCESS TAKEN CARE OF BECAUSE THEN IT'S MY WORD VERSUS YOURS.

AND A JUDGE CAN BE CONVINCED FROM THE VICTIMOLOGY, YOU KNOW, THE VICTIM SIDE OF IT.

SO THE LEAGUE IS ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED TO ANYTHING THAT FRIES TO GO AGAINST DUE PROCESS.

>> AND WE SHOULD MENTION, MS. AUSTIN, AS A RECALL, YOUR BILL THAT WAS IN THE '21 KENTUCKY GENERAL ASSEMBLY HAD A REPUBLICANCO SPONSOR I BELIEVE PAUL HORNBACK ALONG WITH MORGAN INFORMATION GARVEY OF LOUISVILLE, A DEMOCRAT, WHO SIGNED ONTO IT.

TELL US WHAT YOU SAID THAT CONVINCED PERHAPS SENATOR HORNBACK TO COME ABOARD THAT PARTICULAR PIECE OF LEGISLATION.

>> I MEAN WHAT I SAY.

I THINK THAT IT REALLY TAKES BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, BOTH GUN OWNERS AND NON-GUN OWNERS, TO COME TOGETHER TO FIND THE RIGHT SOLUTIONS TO SOLVE THIS PROBLEM.

SO FROM THE VERY BEGINNING, I KNEW THAT I WANTED TO FIND REPRESENTATION FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE.

AND I'LL NEVER FORGET MY FIRST MEETING WITH SENATOR HORNBACK.

IT WAS AT A HORSE APARTMENT IN SHELBYVILLE.

AND JUST HAVING THE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHAT IT FELT LIKE TO BE THAT VICTIM, TO BE THERE IN THAT MOMENT ON SEPTEMBER 6th AND HOW COMPELLED I FELT TO MAKE SURE NO ONE ELSE EVER EXPERIENCED THAT AND ALSO PRESENTING A LOT OF FACTS AND DATA AROUND THIS SOLUTION THAT COULD REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

AND AGAIN, I'LL ALWAYS THROW IN SUICIDE BECAUSE THAT IS OUR BIGGEST PROBLEM IN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY.

TWO OUT OF THREE GUN DEATH ARE ATTRIBUTED TO SUICIDE, AND PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THAT THAT DISPROPORTIONATELY IMPACTS OLDER WHITE MALES IN THE STATE OF KENTUCKY.

SO WE TALKED ABOUT THE EVIDENCE.

WE TALKED ABOUT THE FACTS.

WE TALKED ABOUT WHAT HAD HAPPENED TO ME.

AND WE BONDED OVER OUR EXPERIENCE OF BEING GUN OWNERS, BEING FROM THE STATE OF KENTUCKY, AND WANTING TO DO THE RIGHT BALANCE ON THIS ISSUE.

AND SO WE JUST HAD A LOT OF COMMON GROUND.

ON THE FLIP SIDE, STATE SENATOR MORGAN McGARVEY IS THE OTHER SPONSOR IN THIS BILL, AND HE SHOWED UP AT MY HOUSE THREE DAYS AFTER A RETURNED HOME FROM THE HOSPITAL AND SAID, "WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO, I AM HERE TO HELP SUPPORT YOU."

SO I HAVE HAD A WONDERFUL EXPERIENCE WITH THOSE TWO SENATORS AND MANY OTHER SENATORS THAT HAVE SHARED, LOOK, WE WANT TO HELP ON YOU THIS ISSUE.

IT'S COMPLICATED.

WE HAVE TO FIGURE IT OUT.

BUT WE WANT TO HELP YOU.

SO BACK TO THAT FATALISTIC ATTITUDE, I WILL NOT ACCEPT IT.

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY SOMETHING WE CAN DO AT THE LEGISLATIVE LEVEL THAT WON'T BE BURDENSOME ON THE GUN OWNERS BUT WILL HELP REDUCE THE LEVELS GUN VIOLENCE IN THIS STATE.

THAT'S MY MISSION.

THAT'S WHAT I HAVE TO DO.

>> AND MR. BURNETT, I WANT TO ASK YOU THE SAME QUESTION AS A POSED TO MR. NIGHBERT AND TO MS. AUSTIN AND MR. BRYANT, AS A MATTER OF FACT.

IS THERE ROOM FOR COMPROMISE HERE?

WHAT IS -- OF ALL THE IDEAS THAT WE'VE HEARD ABOUT, AND I KNOW SOME PERHAPS YOU DO NOT KIR FAVOR WITH, UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS ARE BANNING ASSAULT STYLE WEAPONS AND HIGH CAPACITY MAGAZINES, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO THESE THINGS LIKE RED FLAG LAWS TO PREVENT THOSE WHO, FOR WHATEVER REASONS OF DISTRESS, NOT BE IN THE BEST INTERESTS OF THEMSELVES OR FOR THE PUBLIC AT LARGE TO HAVE NEAR THEM A HANDGUN, RIFLE, ANY TYPE OF FIREARM.

ONCE AGAIN, GIVE US THE LOGIC.

IF DUE PROCESS IS IN PLACE AND ALL OF THAT IS LAID OUT, WHAT THEN WOULD YOUR OBJECTION BE?

>> SURE.

WELL, ONCE AGAIN, THE LOGIC AND REASON OF MY LAW DEGREE CAN BE MET WITH THE SYMPATHY MY NURSING DEGREE.

I HAVE GOOD SYMPATHY FOR THOSE WHO STRUGGLE WITH SUICIDE.

I HAVE NEVER FELT THAT COMPULSION MYSELF.

MY FAMILY HAS BEEN TOUCHED BY THAT.

I'VE DEALT THE PATIENTS, IN FACT PATIENTS WHO ATTEMPTED SUICIDE BY FIREARM AND FAILED WHICH IS A CAUTIONARY TALE TO END UP WITH A VEGETATIVE STATE AS A RESULT OF AN INEFFICIENCY TO USE FIREARM IN SUICIDE.

AS FAR AS A COMPROMISE, SENATORS GIVING UP RIGHTS, I VERY, VERY AWARE OF ANY TERMINOLOGY THAT SAYS JUST GIVE UP A FEW RIGHTS IN EXCHANGE FOR YOUR FREEDOM.

I THINK THAT'S THE GENERAL AXIOM UNDER WHICH I OPERATE.

I AM CERTAINLY OPEN TO IF THERE IS A SYSTEM THAT CAN BE PUT IN PLACE.

FOR EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAVE AN EMERGENCY PROTECTIVE ORDER AGAINST YOU ALREADY, YOU'RE NOT ABLE TO GET A FIREARM.

THAT'S -- YOU'RE GOING TO BE REJECTED IN TERMS OF THE BACKGROUND CHECK.

SO I THINK THERE'S AN EXISTING LAW THAT DOES HELP TO METE OUT THOSE THINGS.

OBVIOUSLY IF THERE'S SOMEONE WHO INTENDS TO HAVE AN ACT OF IN VOICING AGAINST A PARTNER WE NEED TO FIND WAY TO TAKE THAT ABOUT ABILITY OF HARM AWAY FROM THEM.

I DO WANT TO SAY SOMETHING THAT WAS SAID EARLIER THE ABOUT PRIVATE SALES.

IT'S A FELONY TO SELL TO SOMEONE THAT YOU KNOW IS NOT PERMITTED TO HAVE A FIREARM.

SO THE IDEA OF THE FIREARMS DEAL IN THE PARKING LOT, THERE ARE STILL LAWS TO COVER THAT.

WHETHER OR NOT SOMEBODY IS GOING TO LET THAT LAW STOP THEM IS SOMETHING I'M NOT SURE, BUT -- AND AGAIN, IF SOMEBODY'S GOING TO GIVE A FIREARM TO SOMEBODY ELSE AND THEY'RE DISREGARDING THE LAW, NO LAW IS GOING TO STOP THEM.

IT'S ONLY A TOOL TO PREVENT THE HARM AFTER IT HAPPENS.

AND THEN I THINK AS FAR AS THE SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM, AND WE'VE ALREADY AGREED ONE DEATH IS ONE TOO MANY, BUT WE ALSO NEED TO KEEP THE REASON AND LOGIC FIXED FIRMLY IN THEIR PLACE WHEN WE LOOK AT THIS PROBLEM.

THE UNITED STATES SAT HISTORIC LOWS WITH VIOLENT CRIME AND FIREARMS CRIME.

WE HAVE HALF THE VIOLENT CRIME SINCE THE 1990S WHILE STATEMENT FIREARM BACKGROUND CHECKS HAVE GONE UP 100%.

GUN SALES HAVE BEEN SMASHING RECORDS, BLOWING RECORDS AWAY, QUITE FRANKLY, FOR THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS.

I MEAN, THERE'S SOME EVIDENCE THAT THE HAS NOT HELPED THAT BUT AGAIN THIS TIME LAST YEAR POLICE LET US KNOW WHAT CRIMES THEY WEREN'T GOING TO COME OUT TO ENFORCE THE LAWS AGAINST.

AND SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THE MURDER RATE, ABOUT 14,000 MURDERS COMMITTED BY FIREARM LAST YEAR.

ONLY 3/4 OF THOSE WERE BY FIREARMS, AND OVER HALF OF THOSE WERE COMMITTED IN CITIES LIKE CHICAGO AND NEW YORK AND DC, PLACES LIKE BALTIMORE, PLACES THAT ALREADY HAVE VERY STRICT FIREARMS LAWS.

AND THEN HI IF I MAY, ONE LAST POINT TO THE QUESTION OF HOW MANY FIREARMS ARE USED FOR TEACHES CAREER YEAR.

I HAVE PERSONALLY.

I COAUTHORED A -- WE BROKE DOWN OVER 4,000 INSTANCES OF SELF-DEFENSE.

IF HE WANTS TO QUIBBLE WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE AND THE SURVEY THAT THEY USE, I HAVE TO RESPECTFULLY DISSENT.

>> MS. AUSTIN, IF YOU CARE TO WEIGH IN HERE, PLEASE.

>> YEAH, I JUST WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THE TOPIC OF GUN VIOLENCE IN THIS COUNTRY AND US BEING AT AN ALL-TIME LOW.

I KNOW WHAT HE'S REFERRING TO, AND ABSOLUTELY WE ARE IN A BETTER PLACE PRIOR TO 2020.

BUT 2020 IS A DIFFERENT YEAR BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC, BECAUSE OF THE INCREASED LEVELS OF GUN OWNERSHIP AND GUN PURCHASES, AND THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

IN FACT, THIS IS THE MOST VIOLENT YEAR WE'VE SEEN IN MORE THAN TWO DECADES.

AND REALLY LUCKY THAT WE HAVE MARK HERE WITH US, RIGHT?

BECAUSE HIS ORGANIZATION FOUNDED OUT OF KEV IS ON A DAILY BASIS GOING THROUGH EVERY DIT OF INFORMATION TO GET TO US THAT ACCURATE NUMBER.

SO 19,000 PEOPLE DIED OF GUN HOMICIDES IN 2020, AND THAT NUMBER WAS 25% HIGHER THAN 2019.

SO WE REALLY ARE COMING FROM IT FROM MULTIPLE ANGLES, WHETHER IT'S HIGHER LEVELS OF MENTAL ILLNESS, INCREASED LEVELS OF GUN OWNERSHIP, AND THEN CERTAINLY INCREASED LEVELS OF GUN VIOLENCE THAT WE HAVE NOT SEEN IN DECADES.

SO WE ARE AT A VERY URGENT MOMENT, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR EVERYBODY TO UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> MR. BRYANT.

>> I AGREE THAT WE OBVIOUSLY -- WE HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL THE DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS.

BACK TO WHAT DAVID SAID -- AND DAVID AND I ARE EVIDENTLY GOING TO THROW THINGS AT EACH OTHER FOR A MOMENT, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE STUDY.

THAT HAS BEEN DEBUNKED.

THAT WAS JUST FLAT-OUT DEBUNKED.

AND YOUR 4,000 THAT YOU FOUND, HOW MANY YEARS WAS THAT OVER?

I'VE SEEN THAT STUDY BY CATO.

I'M TALKING 2,000 A YEAR.

YOU'RE TALKING 4,000 SEVERAL YEARS.

THE NRA, AS AN EXAMPLE, WHEN THEY ARGUE THEIR DEFENSIVE GUN USE, THEY USE OUR NUMBERS.

BUT THEN THEY COMBINE THEM.

AND ANOTHER SUBJECT THAT YOU SAID THAT IT'S AGAINST THE LAW FOR A PURCHASE AT A PARKING LOT, NO, IT IS NOT.

ABSOLUTELY NO, IT IS NOT.

NOW, IF I KNOW YOU'RE A FELON, I CAN'T SELL TO YOU.

THAT IS THE LAW.

BUT IF I WINK WINK, YOU NUDGE, DON'T ASK THE QUESTION, AND YOU KNOW HOW GUN SALES GO AT SWAP MEETS AND HOW GUN SALES GO AT THE RANGE, WHEN SOMEBODY SEES SOMETHING PRETTY AND THEY WANT IT AND THEY HAVE CASH, THEY DON'T ASK IF SOMEBODY'S A FELON.

IT'S JUST A TRANSACTION THAT OCCURS FULLY WITHIN THE LAW BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE BACKGROUND CHECKS REQUIRED FOR THAT.

TO SOMETHING MR. SHAW SAID -- >> MR. NIGHBERT?

>> SHAW.

I'M SORRY.

YOU SAID MRS. SHAW.

AND THAT THREW ME OFF FOR A SECOND.

I'M SORRY.

YOU SAID YOU DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE YOUR WIFE HAVE TO CALL THE POLICE AND THEN PUT YOU IN A POSITION THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE YOUR GUNS TAKEN AWAY.

OVER 1,000 WOMEN GET KILLED EVERY YEAR BECAUSE THAT IS NOT ALLOWED TO HAPPEN.

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE KILLS SO MANY PEOPLE, AND IT HAS TO BE ADDRESSED.

YOU DO NOT WANT TO HAVE A RULE.

NOW, YOU SAID YOU ARE A STRICT CONSTITUTIONALIST.

YOU CAN'T VOTE.

YOU'RE NOT A CITIZEN.

AFRICAN AMERICANS WERE NOT ALLOWED TO BE CITIZENS WHEN THE CONSTITUTION WAS WRITTEN.

IF YOU DO NOT HAVE PROPERTY, YOU CAN'T VOTE.

>> AND THERE'S DUE PROCESS IN PLACE TO CHANGE THAT, WHICH OBVIOUSLY SHE CAN VOTE.

>> EXACTLY.

SO THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS NOT SACROSANCT TO WHERE IT CANNOT BE CHANGED AS WELL.

>> I AGREE WITH YOU 100%, BUT -- >> SO YOU'RE WILLING -- ARE YOU WILLING TO MAKE A COMPROMISE ON THE 18th CENTURY SECOND AMENDMENT?

>> ABSOLUTELY NOT.

THITES THE NOSE FLUID AMENDMENT THAT THERE IS.

>> WHY IS IT SO FLUID?

>> BECAUSE IT WAS WRITTEN AT A TIME THAT OUR COUNTRY WAS FOUNDED.

THE SECOND AMENDMENT WAS WRITTEN SO THAT YOU AND I AS CITIZENS HAD THE ABILITY AND THE CAPABILITY THROUGH THE WEAPONS TO OVERTHROW A TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT THAT EXISTS TODAY RIGHT NOW, THE SAME REASON.

I THINK THAT WE'VE RESTRICTED IT WAY TOO MUCH AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

LET'S TALK ABOUT ASSAULT PRIME MINISTER NUMBER ONE, ASSAULT IS NOT AN ADJECTIVE.

IT IS A NOUN OR A VERB.

PERIOD.

AND WE'VE CONFLATED THAT BECAUSE A .223 RIFLE THAT LOOKS MEAN LIKE SOMETHING SOLDIERS CARRY IS NOW CALLED AN ASSAULT RIFLE.

IT'S NOT.

IT'S A .223IER RIFLE.

NATO ADAPTED THE .556 BECAUSE IT WAS A LESS THAN LETHAL ROUND.

PERIOD.

>> I'M SURE WHITNEY WOULD ARGUE AGAINST THAT.

>> I'VE BEEN SHOT MYSELF, TOO, I WASN'T GOING TO BRING IT UP BECAUSE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES, SO I UNDERSTAND THE PAIN OF BEING SHOT.

I ALSO UNDERSTAND WHY I WAS SHOT, AND IT WAS A MANUFACTURERS DEFECT THAT I WENT TO THE MAT FOR AND NEVER SUED THEM BECAUSE YOU KNOW WHAT IT COST ME IN THE LONG RUN WAS ABOUT $1,000 AND A WEEK IN THE HOSPITAL.

BUT AT ANY RATE, NATO ADAPTED THAT BECAUSE IN WAR YOU WANT TO WIN THAT WAR.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO WAR, I WANT TO WIN IT.

I DON'T WANT TO SIT THERE FOR 15 YEARS.

YOU DO THAT IN SEVERAL DIFFERENT WAYS.

A SUPPLY CHAIN DUTY CUTOFF.

THAT'S TAKING RESOURCES AWAY FROM THEM WHENEVER YOU CAN.

IF I KILL A SOLDIER, A SOLDIER IS DEAD.

IF I WOUND THAT SOLDIER, IT TAKES TWO TO GET HIM OFF THE BATTLEFIELD AND THREE TO FIVE TO GET HIM PATCHED UP TO GET THE BEHIND THE LINES WHERE HE TAKES MORE RESOURCES AWAY.

THAT'S WHY NATO ADAPTED THAT, LESS THAN LETHAL PROFOUND MORE SOLDIERS GOING TO LEAVE THE BEATLEFIELD RATHER THAN DIE.

NOW, THAT BEING SAID, A .22, WHICH A .223 IS, JUST A LITTLE BIGGER, IS AS LETHAL AS ANY GUN ANYWHERE ON THE PLANET.

I'M AN EXPERT MARKSMAN.

I CAN SHOOT 600 YARDS.

I SOWN AN ARSENAL OF RIFLES.

I NEVER ONCE POINTED ONE AT AN INDIVIDUAL.

NEVER HAD A NECESSITY TO DO SO.

BUT I ALSO WANT MY RA BUILT ABILITY THAT IF MARSHAL LAW IS DECLARED, IF MY RIGHTS ARE INVADED, AND AGAIN I'M GOING TO GO WITH DAVID -- >> MM-HM, DAVID.

>> -- AND SAY THAT IF THERE'S A COMPROMISE TO BE MADE THAT DOES NOT AFFECT IT -- US AND TRADE OUR RIGHTS FOR A LITTLE BIT OF FREEDOM, THEN I'M FOR IT.

BUT WE DO NOT, AND YOU CANNOT LEGISLATE MORALITY, WHICH IS A BIG PROBLEM, AND WE HAVE LAWS ON THE BOOKS RIGHT NOW.

PRESIDENT OBAMA, TO HIS CREDIT, IDENTIFIED THE PROBLEM OF OUR BACKGROUND CHECK.

WE WANT UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND.

WE HAVE THEM RIGHT NOW.

IF I GO BUY A WEAPON TODAY AT 53, I KNOW THAT I'M NOT GOING TO GET IT FOR SEVEN DAYS BECAUSE THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION SAW FIT WHEN I WAS 17 TO GIVE MY SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER TO A GUY IN ARIZONA TO RACKED UP HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS OF TAX DEBT AND WAS CONVICTED OF A FELONY.

SO WHEN I WENT TO BUY MY FIRST GUN I'M RED-TRAGEDY.

WHAT?

I HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING.

AND THIS GUY GOT ME FLAGGED.

TO THIS DAY MY SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER IS FLAGGED.

I CAN'T GO BUY A WEAPON AND WALK OUT OF IT TODAY.

REGARDLESS OF MY CREDENTIALS.

WE HAVE A BACKGROUND CHECK SYSTEM IN PLACE.

AND PRESIDENT OBAMA, WHEN THE FBI TOLD HIM, YOU KNOW, WE CANNOT -- WE CAN'T DO 30% OF WHAT WE GET, YOU KNOW, IN O.

A MONTHLY BASIS, HE GAVE THEM A BUMP IN FUNDING SO THEY COULD HIRE MORE PEOPLE, AND IT JUMPED TO 50%.

WE'RE STILL AT THAT NUMBER TODAY.

ONLY 50% OF BACKGROUND CHECKS ARE ACTUALLY PROCESSED BY HUMAN BEINGS.

OTHERWISE THEY'RE RUN THROUGH AN ALGORITHM SYSTEM, AND THAT'S HOW WE GET THE FEDEX GENTLEMAN.

>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS JUST GOING TO BRING UP TO MR. BURNETT.

SO IN MR. NIGHBERT'S CASE, THE FLAGGING OF THAT DURING THE BACKGROUND PROCESS WORKS FOR THE INTENDED PURPOSE, BUT WITH THE FEDEX ISSUE, AND YOU BROUGHT THIS UP YOURSELF, IT DIDN'T.

I'M JUST CURIOUS ABOUT HOW DO YOU CLOSE THOSE LOOPHOLES.

NOTHING IS GOING TO BE 100% FAIL SAFE.

BUT HOW DO YOU GET CLOSER TO IT SO THAT THE WRONG GUY WITH THE WRONG MOTIVE DOESN'T CARRY OUT AN ILL INTENT?

>> SURE.

I'M GOING GIVE YOU A I VERY POLITICALLY INCORRECT ANSWER.

I DON'T KNOW.

I THINK THAT THESE ARE VERY COMPLEX SUBJECTS.

AND IF I FOR SOME REASON DEVELOPED A MENTAL DEFECT AND DECIDED THAT I WANTED TO COMMIT SOME KIND OF ACT OF MASS ATROCITY, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT TO ANTICIPATE THAT, LET ALONE PREVENT IT.

I DO WANT, IF I MAY, GO BACK.

OBVIOUSLY SO MARK AND I MIGHT HAVE A BATTLE OF THE EXPERTS.

ACADEMICS ARE GOING TO DISAGREE WITH THESE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

AS FAR AS THE RESEARCH, IT WAS A SAMPLE ONLY.

IT WASN'T COMPREHENSIVE.

BUT I THINK IF ONLY ONE PERSON WERE IN NEED OF A FIREARM TO PROTECT THEMSELF AND THAT WAS PREVENTED BY THE LAW, THEN WE'RE POTENTIALLY CULPABLE.

BUT LET'S LOOK AT SOME OF THE CULL REAL NUMBERS.

LET'S GO BACK TO THE MASS SHOOTING DISCUSSION THAT WE WERE HAVING.

ACCORDING TO THE FBI, TEN OUT OF 50 MASS SHOOTINGS WERE ACTUALLY PREVENTED BY ARMED CITIZENS -- I'M SORRY -- BY CITIZENS BETWEEN 2016, 2017.

FOUR OF THOSE PEOPLE WERE ARMED.

THOSE WERE MASS SHOOTINGS THAT WERE, IN FACT, THEY WEREN'T EVEN PREVENTED BECAUSE IF YOU PREVENT A MASS SHOOTINGS, IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY MEET THE CRITERIA TO BECOME A MASS SHOOTING.

SO THERE'S A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF NEM, APPROXIMATELY 48 ACCORDING TO SOME ESTIMATES, SINCE 2000 THAT HAVEN'T ACTUALLY BEEN PREVENTED BY MASS -- >> NOT TO INTERRUPT YOU, DAVID, BUT MR. BRYANT SAID THOSE INVOLVED LAW ENFORCEMENT.

>> YES, MOST OF THOSE WERE OFF-DUTY LAW ENFORCEMENT, PRIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT.

THE WOMAN WHO STOPPED IS THE MASS SHOOTING AT THE CHURCH, SHE WASN'T OFF-DUTY DEPUTY SHERIFF.

OF THAT GROUP I THINK THERE WAS ONE THAT WAS A CITIZEN.

BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO USE THE LOGIC IF ONLY ONE PERSON IS SAVED, THEN WE SHOULD KEEP THAT RIGHT AND HAVE IT ABSOLUTE, WE COULD FLIP THAT AROUND AND SAY IF ONLY ONE PERSON IS SAVED BECAUSE WE START DOING A LITTLE BIT BETTER JOB OF REGULATING, IF WE START DOING A LITTLE BIT BETTER JOB OF ADDRESSING A 21st CENTURY SECOND AMENDMENT RATHER THAN A 18th CENTURY SECOND AMENDMENT, THEN THAT SHOULD BE JUSTIFIED, ACCORDING TO YOUR ONE PERSON SUGGESTION.

>> MR. BARNETT, THIS QUESTION FROM A VIEWER IN ELECTRICS SAYS "THE MAIN PROBLEM IS ONLINE SALES.

STOP ONLINE SALES OR ANY SALE TIE PERSON THAT IS NOT PHYSICALLY PRESENT."

WHERE DO YOU FALL ON THAT ISSUE?

>> WELL, THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT KINDS OF ONLINE SALES.

THERE'S THE KIND WHERE YOU ORDER THE FIREARM AND IT'S SHIPPED TO AN FFL, A FEDERAL FIREARMS DEALER, AND THEN THEY HAVE TO PERFORM THE 4473 CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECK WHICH, BY THE WAY, IS A FAIRLY RIGOROUS PROCESS.

YOU CAN'T HAVE HAD ANY KIND OF DRUG USAGE, RELIANCE, DEPENDENCY OR CONVICTION.

YOU CAN'T HAVE HAD A DISAN RABBLE DISCHARGE FROM THE MILITARY.

YOU CAN'T HAVE HAD ANY FELONY CONVICTIONS.

AND YOU CAN'T HAVE AN EMERGENCY PROTECTIVE ORDER AGAINST YOU.

SO THAT'S A PRETTY RIGOROUS PROCESS ITSELF.

THERE'S SOME EVIDENCE THAT MOST CRIMINALS DON'T SUBMIT THEMSELVES ON THAT PROCESS BECAUSE THEY KNOW THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO PASS THOSE BACKGROUND CHECKS.

AND THERE'S QUITE A FEW FALSE POSITIVES AND THERE ARE VERY FEW CRIMINALS THAT ABIDE BY THAT.

AND I HAVE TO REPEAT THIS.

THESE ARE COMPLEX ISSUES.

AND I WOULD HAVE TO HEAR A SPECIFIC POLICY RECOMMENDATION IN ORDER TO ENTERTAIN IT WITHOUT LISTEN TO SOME OF THESE BLANKET POINTS.

IT SOUNDS LIKE WHITNEY HAS PRESENTED SOME.

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, IT SOUNDS LIKE MARK IN THIS CONVERSATION HAVE NOT.

BUT THERE ARE A VARIETY OF SYSTEMS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, FBI, THE CIA AND LOCAL AND FEDERAL POLICE DEPARTMENTS.

WHEN ALL OF THOSE THINGS BREAK DOWN, AS THEY HAVE OFTEN, AM I GOING TO BE LEFT EMPTY-HANDED BECAUSE SOMEBODY DECIDE THAT TARGETING A LAW-BINDING POP LAST WITH THE LAWS WAS THE BEST SOLUTION RATHER THAN TARGETING CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR?

>> WHITE NEE AUSTIN, LET ME HAVE YOU PICK UP ON THAT POINT THAT MR. BURNETT JUST MADE.

>> YEAH, I THINK FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MAKES YOU FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE IN THIS WORLD IN WHICH WE HAVE INCREASED GUN VIOLENCE IS TO CARRY A FIREARM, AND AS A VERY SKILLED INDIVIDUAL WHO HAS DONE LOTS OF TRAINING, THAT'S THE THING THAT WORKS FOR YOU.

I THINK IT IS JUST AS IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE AMERICANS THAT DON'T WANT TO CARRY.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT MAKES THEM FEEL COMFORTABLE.

SO IF YOU TAKE IT BACK TO THE POINT OF WE'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT INFRINGING UPON LAW-ABIDING GUN OWNERS, AND I TOTALLY AGREE, THEY HAVE YET TO HAVE A REALLY GOOD ANSWER FOR HOW BACKGROUND CHECKS, AS AN EXAMPLE, WOULD DO THAT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE DATA, 80% OF GUNS ARE PURCHASED VIA BACKGROUND CHECKS.

IF IT WAS REALLY THAT BURDENSOME, THAT WOULD NOT BE THE NUMBER.

PEOPLE WOULD NOT BE GOING TO GUN SHOWS OR GUN SHOPS IN DROVES.

THEY WOULD BE GOING TO GUN SHOWS TO DO THE WORK-AROUND.

THEY WOULD BE MAKING PURCHASES ONLINE TO DO THE WORK-AROUND.

SO THAT'S MY DIRECT QUESTION FOR YOU, DAVID, IS WHY DOES IT FEEL AS IF BACK GROUND CHECKS WOULD BE A BURDEN ON GUN OWNERS.

HELP ME UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> SURE.

WELL, I'VE BEEN SUBMITTED TO MULTIPLE DIFFERENT BACKGROUND CHECKS.

I GUESS MY QUESTION IS HOW ARE WE GOING TO GET THE CRIMINALS TO SUBMIT TO THEM.

>> I THINK THAT FAILS, THAT IGNORES -- IF THAT IGNORES THE IDEA THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GUN SHOWS, THAT THEY'RE NOT MAKING PURCHASES ONLINE, AND THERE'S NOT DATA TO SUPPORT THAT THEY ARE NOT DOING THAT, AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT BOUNCERS TWO CYST, A MASS SHOOTING.

THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY.

IN FACT, 80% OF CRIME WAS COMMITTED WITH A GUN THAT WAS PURCHASED OUTSIDE OF A BACKGROUND CHECK.

SO I AGREE WE NEED MORE RESEARCH TO DISSECT THAT 80%.

I THINK IT'S VERY NAIVE TO SAY WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO TO GUN SHOWS.

THEY'RE NOT DOING THIS ONLINE.

SHOW ME THE PROOF.

IT'S WAY TOO EASY.

THAT'S WHAT I WOULD DO.

I YOU WOULD WALK RIGHT IN.

EDWIN SHARING HIS EXAMPLE OF GOING THROUGH THAT ISSUE BECAUSE OF STOLEN SECURITY, SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER, AND WHEN YOU SHOULD HAVE GONE TO A GUN SHOW, YOU SHOULD HAVE PURCHASED ONLINE YOU.

WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM.

>> I HAVE DONE BOTH OF THOSE.

>> SURE.

SO WE HAVE RECORDS ON HOW MANY CRIMINALS OBTAINED THEIR FIREARMS THROUGH GUN SHOWS OR FLEA MARKETS.

IT'S LESS THAN 2%.

I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY MASS SHOOTER, CERTAINLY THE ONES NOTORIETY, THAT HAVE GONE TO A GUN SHOW OR SOME OTHER PRIVATE SALE.

BUT AGAIN, I THINK THERE IS A QUESTION, AND I DON'T MEAN TO BE CONTRARY BECAUSE I I THINK, I I THINK YOUR INTENTIONS ARE SINCERE, BUT IF SOMEBODY WHOSE CRIMINAL INTENT GOES TO THE METAPHORICAL PARKING LOT THAT MARK WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER, THEY HAVE A CRIMINAL CONVICTION OR IN FACT THEY STEAL A FIREARM AS THE SANDY HOOK SHOOTER DID, HOW DO YOU PREVENT THAT?

HOW DO YOU -- HOW DOES THAT PREVENT THAT SHOOTER FROM OBTAINING THE FIREARM?

I UNDERSTAND IT GIVES US THE TOOLS AFTERWARDS TO PROSECUTE THEM.

BUT HOW DOES THAT ACTUALLY PREVENT THE VIOLENCE.

BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ALL DISCUSSING HERE.

AND IT MAY BE THAT WE CAN THAT HAVE CONVERSATION, BUT I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW SAYING, OKAY, WE'RE GOING FACEBOOK GROUND CHECK EVERY SINGLE FIREARM IS GOING TO PREVENT SOMEBODY FROM ENGAGING IN THIS BACK ALLEY OR BLACK MARKET FIREARMS TRANSACTION OR FROM SIMPLY STEALING THEIR FIREARMS.

>> AND MR. BURNETT MAKES A VERY GOOD POINT, FOR THESE BACK ALLEY OR BLACK MARKET TRANSACTIONS, HOW ARE YOU GOING TO PREVENT THAT WITH ENHANCED BACKGROUND CHECKS?

>> FIRST OF ALL, IF THEY'RE OFF THE RECORD, BEVE E. WE HAVE NOD WHY HOW MANY THERE ARE, SO WE CAN'T SAY ONLY 2% ARE BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW THE DENOMINATOR.

SIMPLE MIDDLE SCHOOL MATH THERE.

IF YOU DON'T KNOW THE DENOMINATOR, IF YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW MANY ARE ACTUALLY SOLD THAT WAY, YOU CAN NOT SAY THERE ARE 2% THAT ARE OFF-RECORD.

BUT MORE TO THE POINT, EVERY GUN STARTS OUT AS A LEGAL GUN, OWNS LEGALLY EITHER BY A GUN SHOP OR BY A LEGAL GUN OWNER, MYSELF.

APPARENTLY EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD IS A GUN OWNER, WHICH IS OKAY YOU, BECAUSE WE HAVE A GOOD PERSPECTIVE WITH THAT.

BUT ALL GUN SALES START OUT WITH AN HONORS GUN OWNER.

SO -- HONEST GUN OWNER.

SO HOW DO CRIMINALS GET GUNS?

THAT'S WHERE THE QUESTION IS.

DO GOOD GUN OWNERS SELL GUNS TO CRIMINALS OR, WINK WINK, NUDGE NUDGE, HER THEY JUST DON'T ASK, AND WE KNOW THAT'S THAT'S CORRECT IN A LOT OF CASES.

THEY ALSO, SOME FFLs WILL SELL THEM OUT OF THE BACK OF THE SHOP, NOT AND GO.

WE ALSO KNOW THERE ARE STRAW PURCHASES.

SO BACKGROUND CHECKS, WHILE SOME PEOPLE SAY, OH, WE'RE DOING PLENTY OF BACKGROUND CHECKS, THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF THINGS THAT WE CAN DO ON BACKGROUND CHECKS, WE CAN ELIMINATE STRAW BUYERS, WE CAN ELIMINATE HA WHAT THEY CALL THE CHARLESTON LOOPHOLE WHERE HE WENT FOR A BACKGROUND CHECK BUT BECAUSE IT WASN'T DONE IN THREE OR FOUR DAYS HE GOT GUN ANYWAY.

WE KNOW THAT WE'VE GOT TO LOOK AT HOW YOU ADDRESS THE LARGER POPULATION, NOT JUST THE ONES THAT ARE GOOD, HONEST GUN OWNERS.

>> AND THAT'S A QUESTION FOR YOU, MR. NIGHBERT.

HOW DO YOU ADDRESS NOT JUST THE LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS LIKE YOURSELF WHO PRACTICE RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNERSHIP, BUT ON TO MR. BRYANT'S POINT WE'RE TALK ABOUT CRIMINALS, THE KIND OFFER.

RATE WHO SHOT 12 TIMES WHITNEY AUSTIN?

>> AND I HAVE BEEN IN THAT -- IT'S NOT A METAPHORICAL PARKING LOT.

IT'S A REAL PARKING LOT.

I'VE BEEN IN IT.

AND I'VE BOUGHT GUNS AND I'VE BOUGHT SEVERAL OF THEM.

AS A RESPONSIBLE GUN OWNER, BEFORE I TAKE POSSESSION OF THAT NUMBER, THE SERIAL NUMBER IS CALLED INTO IF LOCALLY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, PERIOD.

NO IFS, ANSWERED AND BUTS ABOUT IT AND I'VE SENT A COUPLE OF PEOPLE TO JAIL.

WHEN YOU HAVE MASS CENSORSHIP OF THOSE TYPE OF PURCHASES ON SOCIAL MEDIA, IT MAKES IT A WHOLE LOT EASIER FOR THE CRIMINAL ELEMENT TO GET THROUGH.

IN MY EXPERIENCE ON FACEBOOK MARKETPLACE BEFORE THEY TOOK A STRINGENT -- EVERYBODY POLICED EVERYBODY.

AND IF THERE WAS A BAD APPLE, IT WAS SPOKEN AND SPOKEN ALLOWED AND ACROSS MANY DIFFERENT PAGES.

AND I TRULY BELIEVE THAT MY SPORTSMEN THAT I REPRESENT ARE THAT ETHICAL AND THERE ARE 750,000 OF US IN KENTUCKY.

AND I KNOW NOT ALL OF THEM ARE GOING TO BY ETHICAL BUT THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY ARE.

>> AND DO ALL OF THE MEMBERS BECAUSE YOU ARE AN NRA AFFILIATE.

>> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> DOES EVERYONE FEEL THE SAME WAY YOU DO ABOUT BACKGROUND CHECKS AND RED FLAG LAWS?

BECAUSE WE KNOW THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME TILT IN OVERALL PUBLIC OPINION TOWARDS THESE TYPES OF REFORM EFFORTS THAT SEEM A LITTLE BIT MORE POLITICALLY PALATABLE AND DOABLE.

>> I THINK THAT MOST OF MY CONSTITUENCY WOULD COME FORWARD AND SAY THAT UNTIL WE GET TRUE DATA FROM THE LAWS THAT ARE ON THE BOOKS, TRUE ENFORCEMENT OF THOSE LAWS ACROSS THE BOARD, THAT WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A RAW BASELINE TO GO ON.

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, WE REALLY DON'T.

I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THE FBI HUMANLY PROCESSES LESS THAN 50% OF THE DAILY BACKGROUND CHECKS THAT COME THROUGH THEM.

IT IS A FACT.

AND WE HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT.

PRESIDENT BIDEN, IF HE PUT $1 BILLION INTO THAT DIVISION OF THE FBI, LET'S GET THOSE PROCESSED.

LET'S GET IT CAUGHT UP SO WE DON'T HAVE THE GENTLEMAN IN INDIANA.

I REFUSE THE USE TO ELSE T. NAMES OF THESE PEOPLE.

THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT TO DO, IS BE GLORIFIED.

>> GENTLEMAN'S MIGHT ALSO BE A CHARACTERISTIC.

>> IT'S CHARACTERISTIC BUT MOM ALWAYS SAID IF I COULDN'T SAY SOMETHING NICE -- SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S I THINK WHERE OUR CONSTITUENCY IS AT, IS THAT ENFORCE WHAT WE HAVE.

>> AND PUT THE RESOURCES BEHIND IT IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING TO ENFORCE WHAT YOU HAVE.

>> YES.

>> RIGHT.

>> THAT'S THE SIMPLE THING.

IF WE GET -- >> BEFORE YOU PASS FURTHER LAWS THAT WOULD REQUIRE MORE RESOURCES.

>> I THINK IF WE ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTEN AND FORCE AND MAKE THE CURRENT BACKGROUND SYSTEM WORK THAT WE HAVE, THEN IT'S WORKED FOR YEARS.

IT'S JUST UNTIL THESE MASS PANIC-BUYING OF AMMO AND GUNS HAS HAPPENED THAT THEY FELL BEHIND.

AND IT'S A DIGITAL AGE.

WE CAN DO THIS.

>> AND THERE'S A LARGER QUESTION THERE ABOUT WHY HAS THERE BEEN A MASS MOVEMENT TO PURCHASE FIREARMS AT AN EXACERBATED RATE PERHAPS.

MR. BRYANT, I WANT TO GO TO YOU BASE KNOW THAT YOU HAD INDICATED THAT YOU WANTED TO JUMP IN HERE.

BEFORE YOU EXPRESS YOUR THOUGHT, THIS COMMENT FROM CRESTWOOD, KENTUCKY.

DENNIS SAYS, WHY IS IT SO THREATEN FOR PRO GUN RIGHTS PEOPLE TO THE RIGHTS OF A MENTAL ILLNESS OR A BACKGROUND OF CRIMINAL HISTORY?

CAN YOU ANSWER THAT IN THE CONTEXT OF WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO SAY?

>> SURE.

IF YOU'VE BEEN ADJUDICATED AS MENTALLY INCOMPETENT OR INVOLUNTARILY COMMITTED, YOU CAN'T OWN A GUN.

IT'S THAT SIMPLE.

IF YOU HAVE A FELONY ON YOUR HISTORY, CERTAINLY A VIOLENT FELONY, YOU CAN'T OWN A GUN.

IT'S THAT SIMPLE SUSPECT SO I SUBMIT THAT MAYBE A LOOK AT MAYBE THE GUN-BUYING PROCESS FOR THAT VIEWER MIGHT BE BENEFICIAL TO HIM.

WE ARE DISCUSSION WHAT LAWS ARE NEEDED, AND HATE TO BE KIND OF THE DATA NERDS EVER NERD ON THIS BUT I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF NEW LAWS THAT ARE KIND OF DUPLICATIVE AND WE JUST NEED TO ENFORCE THE OLD LAWS, AS ONE OF YOUR OTHER GUESTS WAS SAYING.

THE FEDEX SHOOTER THIS MONTH WAS ALREADY SUBJECT TO A RED FLAG ORDER AND COULDN'T OWN A FIREARM.

THE SOUTHERLAND SPRINGS SHOOTER WAS CONVICTED FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AND COULDN'T OWN A FIREARM.

THE CHARLESTON CHURCH SHOOTER COULDN'T OWN A FIREARM.

THE NAVY, THE SANDY HOOK SHOOTER, EVEN MS. AUSTIN'S OWN SHOOTER, THE PERSON WHO IS ON THE E. SHOT AT THE THIRD FIFTH BANK BUILDINGS, HIS FAMILY HAD PETITIONED FOR HIM TO BE INVOLUNTARILY COMMITTED, AND THERE'S A STILL A COUPLE YEARS LATER AS TO WHY THAT DIDN'T STOP HIM FROM BUYING A FIREARM.

WE DON'T NEED NEW LAWS IN THIS CASE.

WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS SHORE UP THE AREAS WHERE THE SYSTEM IS FAILING US BECAUSE THE SYSTEM IS SUPPOSED TO UPHOLD THESE LAWS AND ENFORCE THESE LAWS.

BUT AGAIN, I WOULD RATHER NOT AT THE END OF THE DAY WHEN THAT SYSTEM BREAKS DOWN, AS INEVITABLY SYSTEMS DO, I DON'T WANT TO BE LEFT EMPTY HANDED AND HAVING TO PLAY DEAD OR HOPING THAT THE SHOOTER IS A BAD SHOT.

>> I WANT TO GIVE MS. AUSTIN AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT HERE.

WE HAVE ABOUT A MINUTE 30 WHICH YOU CAN'T TELL FROM YOUR CLOCK BUT WE KNOW FROM NEAR IN THE STUDIO.

IN 45 SECONDS GIVE ME YOUR FINAL TAKEAWAY, MS. AUSTIN.

>> YOU'RE RIGHT, WE DO NEED TO ENFORCE THE LAWS THAT EXIST, AND WHILE WE DON'T KNOW FOR SURE, THAT COULD HAVE BEEN EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED TO ME.

WE DON'T HAVE PROOF THAT HE WAS INVOLUNTARILY COMMITTED.

JUST THAT HE WAS COURT ORDERED INTO OUTPATIENT TREATMENT.

SO I'M ALL BEHIND ENFORCING THE EXISTING LAWS AND POURING DOLLARS INTO THE NEXT SYSTEM.

BUT WHAT WE HAVE TO REALIZE IS THE NEXT SYSTEM ONLY WORKS IF YOU GO INTO A GUN SHOP OR ACTUALLY ONLY WORKS IF YOU GO INTO A GUN SHOP.

SO WE HAVE THESE GAPS THAT EXIST, AND IF WE CAN ALL AGREE THAT THESE PROHIBITED CATEGORIES ARE ARE LEGITIMATE, IT SHOULD BE THAT WHEREVER YOU GO, THAT BACKGROUND CHECK IS RUN.

SO I THINK WE HAVE A LOT OF AGREEMENT ON THIS SUBJECT MATTER.

AND I'LL CONTINUE TO ASK, AND I DON'T THINK I GOT AN ANSWER, IS PLEASE PROVE TO ME HOW IT IS BURDENSOME ON YOU TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH A BACKGROUND CHECK WHEN 80% OF PURCHASES ALREADY REQUIRE THEM.

IT'S NOT BURDENSOME.

YOU ALREADY KNOW THE PROCESS.

LET'S JUST DO IT.

LET'S DO IT.

>> ALL RIGHT.

MS. AUSTIN, GOOD QUESTION PERHAPS TO LEAVE ON.

WE PICK IT UP AGAIN, MR. NIGHBERT, SOME OTHER TIME.

A LOT TO STILL CUSS ON THIS ISSUE AND I'M SURE WE'LL REVISIT IT AGAIN.

NEXT WEEK ON "KENTUCKY TONIGHT" WE'LL TALK ABOUT PRESIDENT BIDEN'S FIRST 100 DAYS IN OFFICE.

WE HOPE YOU'LL JOIN US FOR AT AT 8 SOUTHEASTERN, SEVEN CENTRAL ON COMMENTS ON KENTUCKY THIS EVEN EVENING RIGHT HERE ON KET.

TAKE GOOD CARE