Brian Lehrer: It's The Brian Lehrer Show on WNYC. Good morning, everyone. Two days after another assassination attempt against Donald Trump, there are many questions being asked about the effectiveness or deployment of the Secret Service to protect someone in Trump's unique position of candidate, former president, and cultural lightning rod about Trump's unique role in promoting political violence in our country, though obviously not aimed at himself. They are the questions we will take on today about guns.

Authorities say the suspect in the shooting, 58-year-old Ryan Routh, had an AK-47-style weapon with a scope and the serial number blotted out. What do each of those things represent in American life for Trump with a target on his back or for the rest of us? He's been charged, Routh has, with two federal gun crimes, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and possession of a firearm with that obliterated serial number.

The 20-year-old who shot at Trump in July, also with an AK-47-style rifle, if I've got the reporting right, had 14 guns in his home, according to Fox News and other media reports. FBI officials were quoted by The Wall Street Journal saying he had been making dozens of gun-related purchases and stocking up on bomb-making materials for more than a year. Fox News says the one he used that injured the former president was sold to him legally by his father. You can't buy a cannabis gummy until you're 21, but you can own an assault weapon at 20.

The 14-year-old, who confessed to killing four people at his Georgia high school this month used an AR-15-style assault weapon allegedly given to him by his father. The father, as well as the son, has been charged in connection with those deaths. The assault weapons and other gun safety laws debate has been stuck in this country for decades as most of you know. Mostly stuck. There was a law that got passed during the recent Congress and in the Biden administration, but the Gun Owners of America leader was quoted typically after Trump was hit in July, saying gun laws won't make anyone safer.

Ryan Routh, Sunday's alleged would-be assassin, had been convicted back in 2002 of owning a machine gun, a fully automatic weapon that's not legal in this country, or at least it wasn't at the time. The Supreme Court this term, remember this, legalized the attachment known as a bump stock, which makes a semi-automatic weapon act, in effect, like a fully. The United States, as you've no doubt heard before, is an outlier among the world's wealthier nations in the rate of gun ownership, the rate of shootings, the rate of firearm deaths.

Is this our fate forever? Are guns even registering as an issue in this election or in response to these high-profile and deadly incidents in the last few months? With us now, Jennifer Mascia, senior news writer and founding staffer at The Trace. You know The Trace, the news organization that reports on guns and gun violence in America? That's what it does. She previously covered gun violence at The New York Times. Her latest article is called Here's What Harris and Trump Could Do About Guns as Commander in Chief. Jennifer, thanks for coming on for this. Welcome back to WNYC.

Jennifer Mascia: Thanks for having me. Really glad to be here.

Brian Lehrer: I think it would be useful for many of our listeners to go over some of the basics about guns in America and about these incidents before comparing the Trump and Harris positions on the issue. Sunday suspect 58-year-old Ryan Routh is reported to have had an AK-47, or in some reports, they just say an AK-style weapon. What kind of weapon would that be, and why is it controversial?

Jennifer Mascia: Semi-automatic rifles are these guns that were banned in this country for 10 years. They are long guns that emit a one bullet per trigger pull, but the rounds are extremely lethal. It is a lot different than getting shot with a handgun round. They do incredible amounts of damage to the human body. Long guns have always been regulated less stringently in this country than handguns.

Now, when we were talking about long guns, say, in the '90s or before, we'd think shotguns, rifles, hunting. Well, AR-15s are rifles, and in a lot of states, you can possess one even if you can't actually buy one when you're 18, which is handguns, you have to be 21. In some states, there is no age to possess them, which is why you have situations where you can live with your parents and they can have one accessible to you, and it's not necessarily against the law.

Brian Lehrer: The shooter in July, 20-year-old Thomas Crooks, and the 14-year-old Georgia school shooter, reportedly had assault weapons as well. Actually, I'm a little confused about the Thomas Crooks case, the July attempt at assassin. Was that an AK-47 or an AR-15? The question I'm really getting at is, we hear both of those in the news so much, what's the difference between an AK-47 and an AR-15?

Jennifer Mascia: AR-15 is actually patented by Colt. It's like the tissues and Kleenex thing. We refer to all tissues as Kleenex, but Kleenex is a brand name. When it's not specifically made by Colt, we say AR-style rifle. These are essentially all variations on semi-automatic rifles, which are extremely deadly.

Brian Lehrer: I see. Sunday's shooter, Mr. Routh, has been charged with being a felon in possession of a firearm. Was he not legally allowed to own his gun?

Jennifer Mascia: He was not. He had two convictions, one in 2002 and one in 2010. I believe he's had several convictions for felony theft, but the one in 2002 was really interesting. He was arrested in North Carolina and charged with possession of a machine gun. Now, machine guns are regulated under the 1934 National Firearms Act. It is legal to have one, which is a common misconception. They're not banned, but you can only have models that were made, I believe, before 1986, and you have to register them with the federal government.

In a way, the National Firearms Act has been the most successful gun control legislation of all time because we rarely see machine guns used in crimes. You have to get a license and pay a tax in order to own one. They're very heavily regulated by the federal government.

Brian Lehrer: Do we know how he got that machine gun that he was arrested for in 2002, or how easy it is to get around the prohibition on them?

Jennifer Mascia: I don't, and that's one of the big questions I really want to know is how he got the machine gun in 2002 and also how he was able to get a rifle now and where he got it. He might have gotten it in North Carolina, which is where he lived, and driven it down to Florida. In that case, because he does have convictions, he would have to get it in a private sale. Now, if you're selling a gun to somebody who has a conviction and that gun is used in a crime, that could be very bad news for you down the line. If it's not, you've just perpetrated a legal sale, and lives could be lost by the time an authority catches up with this illegal sale.

30 states do not require background checks on these private sales. You could sell a gun to a neighbor. You could find a gun online and say, "Let's do business in the parking lot of the fast-food restaurant." North Carolina and Florida are two of those states. You don't need a background check to buy a gun.

Brian Lehrer: The charges against Ryan Routh also say he blotted out the serial number on the gun. Does that make it what they call a ghost gun?

Jennifer Mascia: It does. Now, ghost guns are not just guns that are made from 3D printing machines. A ghost gun is any gun that does not have a serial number. I believe it was the Gun Control Act of 1968 that required serial numbers on guns. They're identifiers. If a gun is found at a crime scene, that serial number can be called into the manufacturer, and you can attempt to trace the sale.

It's difficult because we don't require background checks in every state, but you can at least get the original buyer and try to find the chain of custody. How did this gun get in the wrong hands? Serial numbers are very important.

Brian Lehrer: That's a federal law, all guns sold in the United States have to have serial numbers?

Jennifer Mascia: Yes. According to an executive action by President Biden, ghost gun kits need to come with serial numbers. Even if you're making a ghost gun, you need to get a serial number for that finished product.

Brian Lehrer: Maybe this is settled law or settled politics if that serial number law was passed in the '60s, but does the gun rights lobby object to the requirement that every gun sold in the US have a serial number? They always, even though it's largely hysterical, say the ultimate goal of the gun reform lobby is to confiscate everybody's guns. Trump even falsely used that in the debate last week. That would be a route to seizing everybody's guns if you can identify with a serial number who they're attached to?

Jennifer Mascia: Well, the gun lobby, first of all, is not a monolith. Some things, the NRA might agree to. You have far-right groups like Firearm Policy Coalition or Gun Owners of America who might balk at every single attempt at restrictions. That's really what we're seeing. Basic things, you would think, "Oh, serial number. Well, if you're a legal gun owner, you don't have to worry about any of this stuff. This is really just for people misusing these products." No, they pretty much balk at any attempt at regulation.

Their whole thing is, "We think these things are a good idea in practice. You should get training, you should be responsible, but we draw the line at the government requiring that." Even things that are a good idea in theory, they will never really agree to requirements about these things.

Brian Lehrer: A listener just wrote a text message correcting me correctly because I had said, "Sunday shooter, Mr. Routh." The listener writes, "You should refer to him as a potential shooter since he didn't actually fire a single shot." That's correct. That same person, I don't know if this is sort of a gun rights implication or position to even say this thing, but that person writes, "The only shooting in this weekend's case was done by the Secret Service. Let's not make this more than it was."

It's either a gun rights comment or it's a 'let's not make Trump look like too much of a victim' comment. [chuckles] I'm not sure which.

Jennifer Mascia: Yes, you could read that both ways. Look, I think any way you look at it, it was an attempted assassination. If somebody's pointing a gun through a fence at me, I'm going to think that they're angling to shoot me. I think most of us would agree that the Secret Service should neutralize that threat in any way possible.

Brian Lehrer: Listeners, is gun policy a motivating issue for you this election year? It certainly doesn't rank in the top few when pollsters poll issues in 2024, but is it a top issue or a motivating issue among the various issues for you this election year? What would you like to see done or not done on gun policy at the federal level, even if it's not the issue you walk around talking about the most? 212-433-WNYC.

Or if you have a question about the firearms used in the apparent Trump assassination attempts or the Georgia school shooting or the current state of the law, as we're doing this explainer with Jennifer Mascia from The Trace, the news organization that covers guns and gun violence in America, 212-433-WNYC, 212-433-9692. Ryan Routh's conviction in 2002, as we said, was for owning a fully automatic weapon or what's been described as a machine gun. What's the difference between that and an AK-47, or an AR-15 known as semi-automatics? That's going to take us to the relevant Supreme Court ruling from this year.

Jennifer Mascia: Yes. Machine guns, you pull the trigger and several bullets come out at once, and semi-automatic rifles, you pull the trigger and one bullet comes out at once. Now, semi-automatic rifles can fire very quickly but not quite the rate of fire as machine guns. Machine guns drew attention in the 1920s when they were used in a number of organized crime hits, and the government took action pretty quickly.

It's very interesting that criminals were dying from these shootings and the government took action. Now we have an interesting situation where children are dying and lots of other Americans are dying from these shootings, and action is a lot, lot slower in 2024.

Brian Lehrer: A listener writes in a text, "Some Democratic lawmaker needs to step up right now and author a bill called the Save Donald Trump's Life Act Gun Regulation and dare Republicans to vote against it."

Jennifer Mascia: I've heard that a lot in recent weeks. I heard that a lot after the first attempted assassination as well.

Brian Lehrer: We'll get to why the gun rights side of the argument doesn't support that obviously. In 2017, the worst mass shooting in US history took place. 60 people. Do I have that number right? 60 people-

Jennifer Mascia: Yes.

Brian Lehrer: -I believe it was, killed at a concert in Las Vegas. After that, under President Trump, the government banned bump stocks, which are attachments that can make semi-automatics act more like automatics. Can you explain what a stock is on a gun and what a bump stock actually is?

Jennifer Mascia: Yes. It's an attachment on the gun that-- Now, there's two types of bump stocks. The one that was at issue in this upcoming Supreme Court decision, which I assume we're about to talk about, is a non-mechanical bump stock. It's an attachment on the gun that-- What it does is it creates a situation where it's bouncing back and forth and the trigger is firing almost at the rate of a machine gun. You have an implement that's making the trigger work faster.

The Supreme Court decided that that regulation on those type of bump stocks was not constitutional because of the amount of effort the user has to put into it. Now, machine gun is you fire the trigger once and several bullets come out. Their argument was that this attachment is not quite the same thing. The user has to expend more physical energy than just a machine gun pull, where several bullets come out. With a bump stock, you have to put a little more oomph into it. That was the basis of that decision. Remember, though, mechanical bump stocks are still legal. This was just non-mechanical. These devices are unregulated.

Brian Lehrer: Did you say this already? Was that used in the Las Vegas massacre, and was it responsible in part, for the high death toll?

Jennifer Mascia: It was. He had a number of semi-automatic rifles in there with bump stock attachments. Also, the height that he was shooting from, a very high floor in a hotel also gave him an opportunity for a high death count. Might I add, also, 422 people were injured by gunshots. As we've seen, some of those people might die of gunshot wound complications sadly. I believe a couple of victims from the Las Vegas shooting and other mass shootings have died in subsequent years. Even surviving those kind of wounds is not a guarantee.

Brian Lehrer: We do that in the media all the time, don't we? We list the death toll, and we don't even mention, or we mention in passing the injured in shootings and bombings, all kinds of things. I'm glad you brought that up. Did Trump personally order or personally support the bump stock ban?

Jennifer Mascia: He directed the ATF to rewrite its rules to make non-mechanical bump stocks illegal. The NRA was behind him at first. There are only about half a million of these out there. The proliferation isn't nearly what it is for handguns or even AR-15s. This affects a very tiny sliver of gun owners. The NRA may have done some math there and said, "It behooves us in the wake of this worst shooting ever to just go along," but in the subsequent years, they have reversed that position. They were very happy. They cheered the Supreme Court decision.

Brian Lehrer: The Supreme Court decision written by Justice Clarence Thomas included the argument that you cited before. We'll go a little more into that, now that guns outfitted with bump stocks don't actually qualify as machine guns because they, quoting from the decision, "cannot fire more than one shot by a single function of the trigger, and even if they could, they would not do so automatically," from Justice Thomas's majority opinion on that.

Now, the dissenting justices saw that distinction differently. Can you explain why some people would and some people would not see a difference between a rifle with a bump stock and a fully automatic weapon or machine gun in what it could do?

Jennifer Mascia: It was one of the liberal justices, I believe it might have been Sotomayor, who said, "What does it matter if the effect is the same? If it shoots like a machine gun and it does the damage of a machine gun, what does it matter if the user has to expend a little more energy to bridge the gap between a non-mechanical bump stock and a machine gun? What is the difference if the effect is the same?"

Brian Lehrer: Is the effect the same? Can you shoot the same number of bullets in 30 seconds, let's say, with a semi-automatic outfitted with a bump stock as you can with a machine gun, and that's more than a regular AR assault weapon?

Jennifer Mascia: You absolutely can. 400 to 700 rounds at a time could be expended, according to the testimony in the Supreme Court case.

Brian Lehrer: What do you mean at a time?

Jennifer Mascia: At a time in a clip within a certain period. You can just press the button and a fusillade of bullets spit out. Machine gun fire is like what you've seen in the movies. There's a reason that these weapons and even gun owners who are for relaxed regulations, everybody seems to accept, "Okay, yes, well, machine guns, we understand they're behind." Even though there is a movement to release them from the National Firearms Act, most gun owners, even gun rights supporters, would say, "Okay, yes, we understand why machine guns are illegal."

If these proliferated, and we've seen them proliferate, we've seen them proliferate south of the border, we have these weapons going and fueling crises that compel people to come to our country to seek refuge from our guns. This machine gun problem actually is exported to a different part of the world. There's a reason civilians can't access them easily here.

Brian Lehrer: Emma in Brooklyn, you're on WNYC with Jennifer Mascia from The Trace, the news organization that covers guns and gun violence in America. Hi, Emma.

Emma: Hey, thank you so much for having me. I'm so exhausted from listening to these conversations because we're living in a country where everyone at all times is at risk of being shot and murdered. Instead of putting more laws in place and shifting the responsibility to policymakers and gun manufacturers, we're just criminalizing more and more individuals. These conversations we're having them here, they're not even-- It's gotten so bad that it's just part of our daily lives, and there's nothing to do about it. That's how I feel about this.

Brian Lehrer: Emma, thank you very much. Well, she brings up, instead of putting pressure on politicians, we're criminalizing the father of the kid who shot other kids in Georgia. Yes, 20-year-old Thomas Crooks got his AR legally from his father. He was the attempted assassin of Trump in July. The 14-year-old in Georgia allegedly got his from his father, but the father has been charged. The difference is simply the age of those sons?

Jennifer Mascia: Yes. When I saw the age of the school shooter here in Georgia, I immediately connected it to the Crumbley case, another instance which a minor, in that case, a 15-year-old, accessed a gun from his parents. Actually, he was given by his parents. When I saw the age, I had a feeling that they might do a little more investigating. I didn't expect the charges so quickly. To Emma's point, she does have a point in terms of, a lot of these restrictions that we would put on guns, do affect everyday gun owners.

Right now, gun owners are just doing what the law allows. What should happen is that if we had a jumbo jet crash every day in this country, we would call the airline CEOs before Congress. Well, I don't see anything like that with the gun industry. This really should be laid at the feet of industry. We have to remember this is a consumer product and an industry that's allowed to basically run amok in a way that they're not in any other country.

This should be laid at the feet of the people who are the originators of this problem, which is the gun industry. They could decide tomorrow that they want their products regulated, but they don't.

Brian Lehrer: Let's get a view of this from a retired police officer, a retired NYPD officer, who calls from time to time. Danny in Massapequa, you're on WNYC. Hi, Danny.

Danny: Good morning, Brian. I knew this was going to be an interesting topic, but I'm a retired police lieutenant. I get very proud of the fact that [unintelligible 00:23:31] promotional exam.

Brian Lehrer: Forgive me. Yes, sir.

Danny: Listen, first of all, as you know, I'm basically conservative even though I'm independent-minded. I don't like guns. I don't own any weapons other than the guns that I was handed when I became a policeman. I've seen more than my share of gun violence. My position is that if you make, and these guns shouldn't be legal, if you make the gun illegal, the person-- Like when Dick's Sporting Goods stops selling a certain rifle but they're selling other-- the guy just takes one step to the right and buys the next available weapon that we're never going to be able to outlaw, a standard hunting rifle.

If this guy who was hiding in the woods the other day had the same rifle that John F. Kennedy had 60 years ago, if Trump putts out on the fourth hole and walks to the fifth hole, he's going to be able to kill the president. Absolutely outlaw these high-velocity guns, these high-capacity clips. I have no tolerance for any of this nonsense, but it's not going to end the problem. I am presently in charge of school security, and we deal with all of these what-ifs, and the sad what-if is that there's very little you can do to deter a determined assailant.

You look in Israel, places that are like lockdown, these things happen. It's sad. It's unbelievable. It shouldn't be part of our life. We're producing people that want to use these guns. That's the difference. These guns have been around for a hundred years. I'm not sure what the answer is, it's become so commonplace, but if determined [unintelligible 00:24:52] we're going to lock down the school. Every single door in my school is locked down. Well, the buses have to pull up. We have to get the children off the buses.

The endless scenarios of how to kill a president with a high-- If you want to do it, you're going to do it. It's simple. I'm sad to say that, but it's true, and that's the way it is. You can outlaw anything you want, and I'm not necessarily against some of it. By the way, as far as the machine gun is concerned, professional people, including my nephew who's in Navy SEAL, doesn't want a machine gun because you pull the trigger once and your entire clip is dispensed into one person and you have to reload. Professional criminals want nothing to do with a machine gun because it's a waste of ammunition.

Brian Lehrer: Interesting.

Danny: That's the first thing. Anyway, that's my topic. I enjoy the conversation. Outlaw anything you want, sadly, I don't think it's going to make a difference.

Brian Lehrer: Danny, let me ask you one follow-up. For you or for people in law enforcement generally, according to your own perception and people you know, is there a feeling of fear, or maybe fear is not the right word, but not wanting to be outgunned by the bad guys, or at least in the case of mass shootings, that if the semi-automatic weapons are banned, you couldn't kill 60 people at a concert before somebody stops you or as many people in a school?

Danny: Well, I know in Stockton, California, in 1960-something, a guy shot 30 school children with nothing but the regular rifle. If you get people in the right atmosphere, they can't hide. My son, who is a policeman right now, actually has a high-powered rifle in the back of his car on patrol. Part of the training was he had 30 seconds to unlock that trunk, put on his helmet and his heavy vest, and get into that school by any reason necessary, including shooting out windows to get in. They're training in these things.

The cops have been outgunned on the street since the 1970s. My father was an emergency service cop for 27 years In this city, the guys who wear the baseball hats. When criminals have these weapons and they want to use them, you're going to have casualties. It's a sad state of affairs, but that's the world we live in.

Brian Lehrer: By the way, Danny--

Danny: I thought the question was going to be whether I'm going to attend the rally tomorrow, which is yes.

Brian Lehrer: Oh, that's a Trump rally at Nassau Coliseum, right?

Danny: Yes. I was there when they raised four Stanley Cup banners for the New York Islanders [unintelligible 00:27:11], and now, I'll report back on Thursday. I'm sure it'll be a fun time. There never seems to be any violence at a Trump rally. We can all agree to that unless it's from an outside source.

Brian Lehrer: Well, except the one in Butler, Pennsylvania, right?

Danny: It wasn't a Trump [unintelligible 00:27:27].

Brian Lehrer: Oh, I see. I see. It didn't come from the Trump camp. Well, why do you think, as a Trump supporter, that he's rallying on Long Island at all? He's not going to win New York. He doesn't think he's going to win New York, does he? Do you?

Danny: Oh, Brian, you know what this is. No, he's not going to win New York, but we have four highly contested representatives.

Brian Lehrer: Ah, on the island.

Danny: Right. The only district that's probably solidly red right now is where I live in Massapequa, which is Garbarino, but the other three districts are all hotly contested.

Brian Lehrer: Yes, that's a good point. By the way, Danny, I'll say you are controversial sometimes when you call this show, but I heard you on a sports talk call-in the other day, and you were highly entertaining.

Danny: Thank you very much, my friend.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you for calling us today.

Danny: We can find common ground.

Brian Lehrer: Danny, thank you. All right. Jennifer Mascia from The Trace, reaction to any of that?

Jennifer Mascia: Yes. He makes a very good point. Now, most mass shootings are perpetrated with handguns, and even though AR-15s and semi-automatic rifles do incredible damage in a very short amount of time, handguns are still the weapon of choice. The best hope is that you can tackle someone before they can reload, which is why a lot of gun reformers want to keep the number of bullets in a clip down to a minimum of 10 or less.

Now, he does have a point, though. When gun reformers talk about, "Ban AR-15s," it's less about the hardware and more the person you're giving it to. It's the vetting, because somebody can perpetrate a mass shooting with a handgun, and they have. It really is about vetting that person. Are they psychologically fit enough to have this responsibility? Unfortunately, in most states, we don't have that ability.

Brian Lehrer: 20-year-old Thomas Crooks was reported to have made 25 firearms-related purchases in a year-plus a little before he fired at Trump. Do you know the range of the purchases he made?

Jennifer Mascia: I actually don't. This is the first time hearing about it because I pivoted to the second assassination attempt. This is a surreal time. Pennsylvania has only-- Right now, they have stronger gun laws than they have, but that's only recent with Josh Shapiro as governor. He signed a universal background check law. Before that, Pennsylvania wasn't permitless carry, but it was a lot less regulated. Pennsylvania has high concentration of guns.

It's also next to Ohio, which is permitless carry and a lot less regulated. It does not surprise me at all that this person was able to buy that many guns in such a short period of time.

Brian Lehrer: By the way, following up on the last caller, have you reported on general attitudes toward gun regulation, gun safety laws on the part of law enforcement?

Jennifer Mascia: I personally haven't, but I can tell you an anecdote, I was speaking to an officer in my Brooklyn neighborhood a couple of years ago, and I said, "Listen, off the record, tell me what you think about guns in civilian hands." He said, "Look, I am--" just like your last caller, "I am a conservative and I believe in gun rights, but New York City does not have the gun culture to support the kind of guns everywhere that Texas does."

I believe, at least where I live in New York, it is very different. There is a recognition that this is not the type of place that has that kind of gun culture that supports the proliferation of guns everywhere. We have a very low rate of shootings compared to other places because people aren't storing guns in glove compartments and in nightstands willy-nilly. When you have more guns, you have more shootings.

Brian Lehrer: We'll continue in a minute with Jennifer Mascia from The Trace, more of your calls. John in Brooklyn, I see you. You want to respond to the question that I asked, that what specific gun reform would you like to see in this country, if any? John's got one. We'll get specifically, which is part of the definition of this segment, into what Kamala Harris says she would try to do as president versus Donald Trump on gun laws in America. Stay with us.

[MUSIC - Marden Hill: Hijack]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. After the apparent assassination attempt on Donald Trump on Sunday, the second this summer, and the Georgia school shooting this month, and of course, there's always gun violence in America, we are looking at gun policy, what Harris and Trump say they would do about gun laws if elected. We're taking your calls for our guest, Jennifer Mascia, who's a founding staffer at The Trace, the news organization that covers gun violence and guns in America.

We're inviting you to say if gun policy is a motivating issue for you this election year, and what would you like to see done or not done on gun policy at the federal level? John in Brooklyn is calling to answer that second question. John, you're on WNYC. Hello.

John: Thank you for having me, Brian. First of all, I would like to tell your guest thank you for the organization that you do. I've never heard of it. While I was on hold, I signed up for your newsletter and made a donation. Thank you for that.

Jennifer Mascia: Thank you. Thank you.

John: You're welcome. What I would like to see done, to answer your question directly, it is a top issue for me, unlike many people. Some of the surveys that I get from the DNC, not all of them, but some of them, where there's a list of issues and they're supposed to check off the box, they don't even list gun control. I have to handwrite it where it says, "Other." That's the first thing. I would like the repeal-- I don't know the acronym. It's four letters. I would like to see the repeal of the gun immunity law because money talks and BS walks. Once you start getting sued, things are going to change. I would like the repeal of that.

The second thing and final thing that I would like to say is that President Biden did do what I'm about to say, but it's being challenged in the courts, which is to close the gun show loophole and all the private sales and all that stuff. That's like a gaping hole. I understand he tried to write the rules being challenged. If that gets upheld, I think that'll make a big dent. That and the repeal of the immunity law.

Brian Lehrer: John, thank you. Thank you very much. Would you explain the immunity law that he's referring to?

Jennifer Mascia: Yes. This is a 2005 George W. Bush-era law called the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, and it immunizes gun manufacturers and sellers for most instances of criminal misuse of their products. Basically, they made themselves lawsuit-proof. Now, lawsuits and the threat of major litigation is what took down the tobacco industry. They learned a lesson and they got their Republican surrogates in Congress to put that law together for them.

Now, states have passed their own laws that have given opportunities to sue that don't invoke that federal law. Laws around marketing, like the negligent marketing of products. We saw a big settlement between Remington and the Sandy Hook families because that case was about to go to trial, and that was based on a Connecticut law about the marketing of these guns. There are ways around it, but it is a huge block. Without the consequence of losing billions of dollars in profits, which lawsuits provide, the gun company really is, I hate to say this pun, it's bulletproof.

Brian Lehrer: So many calls, so many texts coming in. Mike in Carle Place, I think, is responding to his fellow Long Islander Danny in Massapequa, who called in. Listener writes on the gun debate, "I am tired of hearing from people that no matter what laws are put in, you can't stop a determined person who wants to commit violence, but that is just nonsense," writes this listener. "That is essentially an argument for getting rid of all laws, as it won't stop a person so determined to commit a crime. Of course, it won't stop at all, but it will stop many, if not some, and that must be worth it." Maybe it's a little bloodless to ask the question this way, but is there data on that?

Jennifer Mascia: I'm sure there is, but let's just look at these cases where parents are being charged for giving their minor kids guns and then they go commit mass shootings. Somewhere, it's catching on in this country, parents are going to think twice before handing their child a handgun. These kind of cases really do reverberate, and for the most part, gun owners are law-abiding people, and they don't want to do anything illegal. Cases like those can really have a deterrent effect, which is why everybody's looking to see if that is going to be a trend.

Brian Lehrer: Alex in West Orange, you're on WNYC. Hi, Alex.

Alex: Hi. Thanks so much for taking my call.

Brian Lehrer: Sure.

Alex: I feel very passionately about this issue. I would say abortion and gun control are the top issues that I care most about going into this election cycle. I guess my question for your guest is just around why Kamala's campaign has not really used this as a major talking point during her stump speeches, during Tim Walz's stump speeches, both of whom I've been following pretty closely. I volunteer for their campaign and do a lot of phone banking for them.

In talking with other parents-- My daughter's going to start elementary school in a few years. Especially for women, especially for moms, I feel like those are the two issues that's going to, not only motivate them to go to the polls in a blue state like New Jersey but really in swing states like Arizona. I talk to a lot of moms on phone banking in swing states as well. My question is, why isn't Kamala using this as a talking point? I know she bragged about having a gun in the debate, but to the other caller's point, the campaign is not really pushing this at all.

Brian Lehrer: Thank you, Alex. Do you want to do a political analysis of that? Do you accept the premise? I think it's right, right?

Jennifer Mascia: Yes.

Brian Lehrer: Sort of like climate, which we've done a segment on, like Israel and Gaza. Harris is downplaying those issues. She wants to be elected based on other things. She may agree with this caller on guns and may agree with people on some of the other issues that she's not emphasizing, but she's not emphasizing them.

Jennifer Mascia: Yes. I can only assume that their internal polling is telling them which issues are in the top three; the economy, abortion, and possibly threats to our democracy. I remember in 2016 when we had both candidates, we didn't have an incumbent coming into the race. It was much more of an issue. We had many more debates. We had debates with primary challengers. It was a way for the candidates to differentiate themselves. You even had Hillary Clinton attacking Bernie Sanders about Vermont's lax gun laws, which have since changed.

This time around, I can only guess that they feel like they have much bigger fish to fry. They're focusing on seven or eight states that are swing states and pretty much staying to those places, and the issues that are important in those places, maybe guns is a divisive factor. I do know that there's really little mystery to where these candidates stand at this point.

Brian Lehrer: On your comparison of the two in your article on that, you start by noting that both Vice President Harris and her running mate Tim Walz are gun owners. Have they each said what kinds of gun or guns and why they own them?

Jennifer Mascia: Tim Walz, we've seen him with hunting rifles. Vice President Harris in 2019, she said in an interview, "Of course, I'm a gun owner. I was a prosecutor, and I have guns for the same reason many Americans have guns, personal protection." You know what? I think she might be right. I think most Americans have a gun in a locked box somewhere. It's not a part of their everyday life, but they just have one in the closet. I think that that could apply to many Americans.

An aide later said, "Yes, it's a handgun." We don't know exactly what type, and I can't imagine she's had much use for it since she's had Secret Service protection for the last number of years. They're the type of gun owners that I think represent most Americans, a hunting rifle and a locked-up handgun.

Brian Lehrer: Trump and Vance also own guns, right?

Jennifer Mascia: Yes. Trump, though, as a convicted felon, he's not permitted to own guns. His licensing was revoked in New York. He was a concealed carrier. He had a license, which is very hard to get in New York, many years before he ran for president. His son as well. I can only imagine JD Vance is a gun owner. He comes from a very rural place with a strong gun culture.

Brian Lehrer: Is Trump only barred from owning a gun in New York because that's the state he was convicted in, or does it apply across state lines?

Jennifer Mascia: I believe where his main residence is in Florida, they have to honor New York's laws, I believe. Again, someone with Secret Service protection, this isn't really an issue in his everyday life.

Brian Lehrer: You and your colleagues at The Trace report that Harris has taken a prominent role in the Biden administration's gun policy work. For example, that since its launch in September of last year, Harris has overseen the first White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention intended to coordinate federal efforts. Talk about not getting publicity. Who knew that the White House established an Office of Gun Violence Prevention just last year?

You're right that under Harris's leadership, the office has worked to enhance background checks for prospective gun buyers who are under 21. What does enhanced background checks mean?

Jennifer Mascia: That means an extra layer of vetting for people who are 18 to 21, and that is a recognition that that age group is responsible for quite a bit of gun violence in our country. There are a lot of things that Trump could undo that the Biden-Harris administration has done with executive orders, and there's quite a bit of policy he could tinker with. You really have a situation where the difference between the candidates is night and day.

That White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention under Trump, if he's elected, will be dismantled probably immediately. Gun violence will not be a priority in that White House. You're right that most people don't know about the Office of Gun Violence Prevention. I cover this, and Vice President Harris's name isn't routinely linked to it, and it is a big accomplishment. Survivors had been asking for it for years.

Brian Lehrer: Here's another thing that people don't know or maybe have forgotten because it was in the news briefly a couple of years ago. You remind us that Harris has worked as vice president to accelerate the implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the most significant gun safety legislation in nearly 30 years, signed by President Biden in 2022. People forget that Congress actually passed a gun law during this administration. What does it do?

Jennifer Mascia: They did. They expanded the requirements for who needs to obtain a license to sell guns. Now, that's what your other caller was mentioning, closing the private sales loophole. They've basically said, if you want to sell guns, you have to call yourself a gun seller. What we have is the ATF cracking down on people who are selling guns. It really is their primary occupation, and you need to be licensed for that. That's something that I could see a Trump White House defunding that effort and saying, "You know what? When it comes to gun dealer inspections, hang back on that." Weakening enforcement.

The ATF is an already underfunded agency, could easily be a priority of a Trump administration. The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act also closed what we call the boyfriend loophole. There's a gun ban for people who've been convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence. It didn't include dating partners, if you were married, or family member, but dating partners are responsible for at least half of the domestic violence in this country. For at least five years, somebody is banned from guns if they have a conviction like that on their record

It also set aside billions for states if they wanted to adopt red flag laws. Of course, a lot of red states are not going to take them up on that. Also, community gun violence prevention, it funneled millions into that effort, and that targeted focused deterrence. Focusing on hotspots and areas and giving people options and services so that they don't pick up a gun is very successful when it's been rolled out in pilot programs. Those millions could easily go bye-bye under a Trump administration.

Brian Lehrer: Well, it's been two years now since that passed. Do you have data that it's made a difference in terms of a reduction in gun violence in the United States?

Jennifer Mascia: Those enhanced background checks have prevented several hundred people from getting guns, those enhanced background checks on gun buyers under 21. Also, we know that a lot more people have been asked to get licenses who are selling guns. They have managed to close the private sales loophole just a little bit. Look, any little bit counts, right? Why let the perfect be the enemy of the good? Slowly but surely, we do have this incremental progress, but it hits a limit when it's not rolled out evenly in red states as well as blue states. This is very important.

Brian Lehrer: Well, we're out of time. Listeners, we cover the issues here primarily, not primarily the horse race. Like a lot of other places, we cover the horse race too because it does matter, but we primarily cover the issues. Now, we've talked about gun laws and the Harris versus Trump positions on them with Jennifer Mascia, senior news writer and founding staffer at The Trace, the news organization that reports on guns and gun violence in America.

She previously covered gun violence at The New York Times. Her latest article is called Here's What Harris and Trump Could Do About Guns as Commander in Chief. Jennifer, thank you so much.

Jennifer Mascia: Thanks for having me.

Brian Lehrer: Callers and texters, thank you.