in the U.S. That's according# to the Gun Violence Archive.

William Brangham is back now with a look at a new## book that critically examines how# America addresse WILLIAM BRANGHAM: In April 2018,# a mentally ill white man took an## AR-15 into a Nashville Waffle House and# shot dead four young people of colo For one researcher at nearby Vanderbilt# University, a man who had studied gun## violence for years, that shooting# prompted a deeper reckoning.

Had## the various gun control approaches he# and others had long championed failed?

That researcher is Dr. Jonathan Metzl.

He's# the director of the Department of Medicine,## Health and Society at Vanderbilt.

And his# new book is called "What We've Become:## Living and Dying in a Country of Arms."

Dr. Metzl, thank you so much for joining us.

The key message here in your book is that# people who have long fought for co ntrol measures, including yourself, things# like red flag laws and background checks,## that they have been arguing for# this public health approach,## and you argue that that approach is# wrong.

Can you explain a littl DR. JONATHAN METZL, Vanderbilt University:# Well, I wouldn't say that it's wrong.

I will say that I have spent a very traumatic and racially charged# mass shooting that happened here in my## hometown of Nashville.

And what# I found was that, on one hand,## I wished -- I'm an advocate for gun laws.# I think we need stronger national gun laws.

But as I uncovered the before and after# of the case and really tracked the story## of how not just a mentally ill white man,# but a naked white man -- he walked into## the Waffle House naked -- how did# a guy like that even get a gun?

How## did he get to the Waffle House in South# Nashville?

And what happened afterwar And as I uncovered that story, I started to# realize that a lot of the positions that I## had been advocating for, background checks,# red flag laws, they're vitally important,## but not only would they have not stopped# this shooting, but they, for me, spoke to## the bigger issues that I address in the book# about race and violence and guns in America.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: You mention in your# book that the way we have treated## or thought to treat gun violence with# campaigns similar to w cigarettes and secondhand smoke or with# car safety is not effective.

Why is that?

DR. JONATHAN METZL: I tracked the# history of that going back to the '90s.

And I think, at some point, it made sense.# We had in the past.

Here is someone whose product# is killing people, and we came in as public## health advocates and experts and said what we# need to do is impose government regulation,## we need to have commonsense laws, we# need to hold the manufacturers liable.

And that approach worked in cigarettes,## it worked in cars for a couple of reaso were liable for their products.

And the second# was that a lot of people across the country had# relatives who had died of lung cancer or# knew people who had died in car wrecks.

But, unfortunately, as I argue, it was a# wrong turn in the gun debate, because guns## just meant something really different.

Gun# manufacturers were protected from liability,## the kind of liability lawsuits, but also# guns really were not amenable to the kind## of government databases and regulations that# we were advocating because they were tied## to the much longer history of the meanings# of just who got to carry a gun in America,## what that meant that tied into some of our# deepest racial fault lines in this country.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: I know that, as part of your# research, you talked with a lot of gun owners,## people in the South, conservative, Second# Amendment absolutists, as one might put them.

How do they reckon with this toll# of gun violence from homicides to## suicides to mass shootings?

How# do they see this as a problem?

DR. JONATHAN METZL: For white conservative# gun owners, the issue is this.

There wi a mass shooting in this country.

Again,# they don't want that k But then liberals like me rush in and say what# we need are more government databases or more## red flag laws that empower police to put people in# front of judges.

They hear more regulation, more## government.

And so really what they hear is, for# a lot of the gun owners I spoke to, exactly the## reason they own guns in the first place, which is# that they feel like they mistrust the government.

So I asked a lot of people in the book,# well, how do you think we can resolve## this?

How can we make the -- how can we# feel safe?

And, for them, it wasn't more# regulation.

It was basically improving community# structures and improving community safety.

And so in the book, I end up being kind of# a structuralist and really take seriously,## what would it mean to make communities safer?# What would it mean to invest in communities## and really look at the upstream drivers# not just of gun violence, but the upstream## drivers of why people feel like they need# to carry guns in public in the first place?

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: Help me understand, though,# something that I have often struggled with.

You often do see reports of large polling# institutions will say majori including gun owners, support what we# call -- quote, unquote -- "commonsense## gun reforms," the kinds of things you# have been talking about in the past.

If even gun owners support those things,## why do those things have such a# difficult ti DR. JONATHAN METZL: I think there's a# misnomer in that kind of data.

That data## is true.

Many people do support background# checks, red flag laws, str But that doesn't mean that they vote on those# issues.

I think that's really the misperception.## So if you hear somebody say, I support a red# flag law, it's not like they're going to go out,## if they're a liberal or a Democrat -- they're# going to vote based on many different things.## They might support somebody who supports# climate or the economy or other factors.

And the difference really# is, historically, at least,## Republicans vote on gun issues.

That# has really been the case cert here in Tennessee and across red state# America.

And so part of the story is,## people support those laws, but that's different# from if they're going to go out and vote.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: We are, as you well know,# entering a yearlong presidential race.

There could not be a more clear# delineation in how we ought to## approach guns between the -- we suspect# the nominee, former President Trump,## and Joe Biden.

How do you imagine that# playing out in this year's election?

DR. JONATHAN METZL: I do think that shifting# popular opinion, plus some of the troubles that## are happening on the very strongly pro-gun# side, create an opening for Democrats.

Toward the end of the book, I discuss an# eight-part plan that I think can improve## the ways that Democrats talk to red# state gun owners that really speaks## their language a lot more about gun safety# entrepreneurialism, fixing larger structures,## addressing the upstream drivers of why# people feel like they need to carry guns.

Because, right now, what we have is Trump, who's# basically telling red state gun owners, I'm going## to let you keep your guns and keep your power,# and Biden, who's saying, I support regulation.

And at least for many gun owners, they're going to# hear that, let me keep my guns and keep my power,## because it's just something that's very deep.

And# I think we need to really disrupt that binary.

WILLIAM BRANGHAM: All right, Jonathan# Metzl of Vanderbilt University.

The book is called "What We've Become:## Living and Dying in a Country of# Arms."

T Thank you so much for being here.

DR. JONATHAN METZL: Thanks so much.