 Good afternoon. Thank you folks for joining us. Think Tech Hawaii. Time for responsible change and we're going to talk about guns and hate crimes and the connection between them and maybe some connections that don't get talked about very often. So we have with us resident expert Bill Harrison, leading criminal defense attorney and civil rights, Sandra Sims, retired judge, Tina Patterson, urban planner, mediator, arbitrator, Jack of many trades, and Louise Ng, leading civil lawyer and women's rights lawyer and women's foundation, representative and leader for many years. And then whoever this other guy is, the moderator who will just try and stay out of the way of the people that we should be listening to. So, Bill, given your background and expertise, the connection between guns and hate crimes and what do we need to think about that we haven't to help us understand better how to deal with this stuff because we're not. Yeah, you know, and one of the interesting things that I thought about when you hear about these terrible atrocities is you're going to get people who are going to control proponents and you get the people like the NRA who want the Second Amendment to mean that we all can bear arms. But, you know, the interesting thing about it is the NRA, it depends on which way the wind's blowing. The NRA will take a position one way or the other. Back in the 60s, the 67 and 68, when Huey Newton and Bobby Seale took the California open gun laws and watched around and police patrols to make sure that black folk weren't being killed by police officers, the NRA jumped to the gun and said, hey, we got to control this. Absolutely. Yeah, when we have black people with guns walking around, we don't want that. So, the NRA actually was instrumental in passing the Gun Control Act in 1968. But today, they're basically saying we need to be able to possess and bear arms. And so, they take the position based on what they feel at the time. And they felt threatened back in the 60s because, you know, black people were carrying their own guns and requiring police officers to do the right thing, you know, in urban neighborhoods. And that was too much for the NRA. So, you know, it's an interesting issue that we deal with. It's a love-hate issue with Americans because of Second Amendment. And so, going back to the original question was, you know, what do we do about this? Obviously, we're not going to get rid of guns. Obviously, guns are going to be in bad people's hands. There's no way you're going to get around that, okay? I think as a nation, we have the most, you know, weapons in private ownership in any other nation in the world. So, it's out there. We're not going to get around it. So, I think we have to regulate, if you want to, to make sure that people who have bad intentions don't get those firearms in their hands. But to outlaw them totally, I think is, to me, is a mistake if you think about the ramifications of that. So, what if we shifted the presumption the other way? Instead of presuming everybody has the right to bear arms, as if everybody was part of a well-armed militia, which is what the Constitution connects guns with. But what if instead of that, you said, if you want to have a gun, you have to come in and demonstrate a specific purpose and use for that gun. And if it is limited to a particular area time or activities, such as duck hunting or deer hunting season, you get what's appropriate for that, for that purpose during that period in those locations. And that's all. And if you show up with it somewhere else, you are not in compliance. Well, I think outlaws are actually that way already. When you apply for firearms, you have to take a test. You have to be able to use that weapon. And that's what the course has to approve you to get that weapon. And then you need an AK-47 to bring down a duck or a deer. That goes back to somebody who says that you have a right to bear. I don't think we have, I think in Hawaii, I don't think we have the right to carry assault weapons. There's certainly the right to have, you can get the license and take the test and get the guns as you may need. And that's fine. The notion of regulation when we start talking about guns, it's difficult for me to comprehend why it is so incomprehensible to people when there's so many other things that we regulate without any dire consequences. We regulate, you know, I mean, seat belts. I mean, the simple thing like seat belts, I mean, I'm old enough to remember when they weren't required. And then now they are. And we don't think about that stuff anymore. Go back to looking at, I mean, even things like alcohol, okay, because it came out of the same, I'm originally from Chicago. So we have this perspective about crime and criminals and stuff that kind of is in our nature. But I mean, not the nature of being a criminal, but you know, it's embedded in our history. But when you go back to the establishment of the Brewer and Alcohol and Tobacco and Farms, agency was established following, you know, the times of Capone and the Mafia and the gangsters and all of that. And much of what they were doing had to do with, aside from the guns, but was the you know, alcohol, which began regulating, began being regulated after that. And so we get, you know, so there is this place now where we understand that that's that's what takes place. And it's, and it's okay. And people can operate and function with that. They don't feel the need to like, I want to go because there's no Constitution amendment that says it. And I don't even think the Second Amendment actually just says you have the right to, you know, complete and total. There's no right, there's no, what I'm saying is that the amendment does not prohibit the regulation of firearms, which states are permitted to do. And that's exactly it. I know in that first, the first big case that kind of came out that talked about handguns, I think it was the McDonald case, was it? And of course, that came from Illinois as well. When Chicago attempted to ban handguns, not the assault weapons, but handguns because of the, you know, the gang violence. And it was a city ordinance that banned, and that was deemed to be, I think it was one of the first rulings that addressed the Second Amendment in a very long time. That was in, when was that 2000 something? Anyway, it was the one that actually said that the regulation had gone too far. It was a city doing it, and that the amendment, as the Supreme Court saw it, the second amendment did not permit them to single out, and certainly the city, to single out and ban, you know, handguns in that way. So that kind of spurred a lot more discussions and arguments about the ability of of municipalities, and in states as well, to regulate in how far they could go. So that was part of that discussion as well. So I mean, yeah, that is a timely discussion because the Ninth Circuit just issued an opinion. Yes. That in Hawaii, the county can regulate both open carry and concealed weapons. And so there are a number of states who, and other areas in which there's a different opinion and different appellate opinions. So the Supreme Court is going to have to actually as to what does a Second Amendment really say. And it's going to be interesting what they determine since that court is a fairly conservative court now. William, I want to pull the thread on what you started talking about earlier, and that is when we talk about guns, and you indicated, and it's true, I reside on the East Coast in Maryland. And the use of firearms is regulated on a state by state basis. I am in an area where I'm bordered by Virginia and the District of Columbia. We are required to take training, as you mentioned earlier. If you want to be a firearm owner, and I'm specifically talking about handgun, you have to undergo training, if you do want to possess a firearm, you have to be fingerprinted. Your records are sent to the state police. They conduct an investigation, which takes approximately 30 days. So you actually acquiring that firearm is going to take at a minimum 30 days. But it's also important as a firearm owner to know what are the regulations. So I'm a firearm owner. And we can talk about the journey. It was not an easy one. And I can explain why I did it. But knowing what I had to understand was, I cannot have my firearm in my vehicle with the bullets in the firearm. They need to be, the firearm can be in one place, and the bullets separate. Meaning that the firearm can be in the car, the bullets better be in the trunk. If I'm pulled over for any reason, I'm basically in violation of the law. The District of Columbia, however, has a different law. And I can cross over into the district, and it's very different. Same for Virginia. What I, where I see, and I'm a proponent of the regulation, I'm a proponent of saying, if you have a firearm, why do you need an assault rifle? As you said earlier, if you're going duck hunting, do you need an AK 47? Or could your shotgun do what it needs to do? You also talked about concealed carry and open Maryland as an individual. You're 99% of the time you're not going to get a license with concealed carry, unless you know that you are in imminent danger or that there's some other extreme circumstance. The general public is often not granted concealed. The District of Columbia has concealed. So pulling that apart is important because what we normally hear is, oh, the person got the firearm overnight. Well, what's the rule in that state? What's the regulation? What is the state when we really look further? Is there a period of waiting? Do they do an investigation? Or did the person cross the border? And when I say cross the border, they cross to another state where the regulations are a little bit easier, a little more flexible. And really talking about that. And again, the open carry, I know I have a friend who lives in Texas. Texas is open carry. I can tell you, again, as a firearm owner, open carry frightens me. There's no reason you need to be in the supermarket with your shotgun, assault rifle, or your Glock 46 on you. But I think part of it is the glamourization of firearms. We see it in the movies. We see it in certain ads that, you know, it's sexy to have a firearm. And the truth of the matter is it's a huge responsibility. When I took my training, the one thing that I walked away with was when the instructor said, you now have an instrument that can kill someone. That is a lot of responsibility. What are you going to do with it? How are you going to possess that responsibility? How are you going to manage that responsibility? So I'm all for doing the diagnostics to make sure that someone is mentally stable and spending the time to find out how many firearms. Marilyn, you can't buy more than one firearm. If you want to get a second firearm, you have to wait another 30 days. I know I said a lot, but I just wanted to put that thread because I think it's important for people to know it just doesn't happen randomly. And it's in many states it's a very lengthy process or it can be a lengthy process. The idea of going in, oh, I like that CZ9. I'll take it today. A responsible gun owner or gun shop is going to say, nope, I don't want to lose my license. I don't want to be fined or shut down. It's going to take 30 days. We will put the gun aside for you, but we have to go through the proper steps. Exactly. There's a lot of states in which I've been to states and I looked in pawn shops and stuff and walked in and said, can I buy that gun? He goes, yeah, just give me an idea. I take the idea. You can have this gun. So there's a lot of states you just walk in and you can buy it. There's no waiting period for that. And those people who argue, they argue they argue, look, you give someone a license to drive a car and they're driving a weapon and they kill people every day, driving cars, okay, running red lights, drinking alcohol, getting in the cars. So yeah, everything. It's not aiming at them. Exactly. Yeah. No, no, no. So yeah, so that's a really legitimate question is, you know, do we regulate, do we properly regulate dangerous instruments? Some people say we don't. Some people get licenses to drive cars that shouldn't be driving cars. Exactly. I think that's what the 1968 Gun Control Act was putting to existence because there was a myriad of regulations across the country and the Gun Control Act tried to put into place an umbrella coverage to say that, number one, if you're a felon, you can't possess a firearm under federal law. So no matter what the state law says, if you're a felon, you're in violation of federal law if you possess a firearm. Okay. And they had other regulations that went into place to try to patch the holes between the various states. But still, yeah, you know, it's amazing. You can walk into some states and just buy a firearm. The other point that Tina brought up that's directly related is besides regulation, education, what proportion of gun owners would you guess actually have had significant firearm education, gun use education? Are you asking me? I think that the vast minority of them too. Yeah, I think so. Might be single digits. Exactly. Well, you know, I have some friends, you know, that have firearms and not necessarily living here in in Hawaii, but you know, live in kind of rural areas and they actually have that. They're they're teaching their kids how to use, you know, to use those kinds of weapons and to do it safely and how you store it and where you keep it and all of those kinds of things. I think people who are, I do believe that those that are responsible gun owners and I think quite honestly, probably the majority are responsible. I mean, just like what Tina is talking about with, you know, with her own, you know, with her own possession, you're understanding the significance of what you're doing and what you're holding. And I think most people do realize that. Unfortunately, what ends up happening is that while we have these discussions is that there is these ones that pop up like these shootings of people who don't have that sense, who don't have that training, and they're already having to deal with other kinds of issues. And so we end up, you know, with situations where, you know, there's a school shooting, there's a, you know, there's a church, there's a people in the church, there's the ladies in their, you know, in their spas, there's the people in grocery stores, there's the people, I mean, those, I mean, I don't want to minimize them, but I think what you're pointing out is that, you know, besides the regulation issue, which is a huge one, we can't even get a consensus on that, but the waiting period sounds like a good move. But there's the whole mental health issue too. And then what is the responsibility of people, do they know enough to point out? Because just in these two last two incidents, it seemed like there were wrench lights along the way here with, you know, in the first, the Tuesday, Kate murder, he was, he was having psychological problems. And then his parents apparently shut him out of the house. And then he was left on his own to go buy a gun and then take it out on innocent people. And then with this recent one too, there were talks about how he had anger management issues, his family saw him playing with a rifle. You know, there must have been signs along the way. And yet, there just seems to be this whole level of lack of family and personal responsibility going on. I'm curious, because you mentioned something, and I've been noticing this and I've been hearing this, especially in the midst of the pandemic, there's been an increase in the number of domestic violence reports. And firearm usage is usually part of that. In addition to beating, sometimes the the victim is shot or fatally wounded with a firearm. And oftentimes you mentioned upon shop William that that's generally the way that you could easily possess a firearm versus going through a proper channel. But I was wondering, Louise, if you would share a perspective regarding this correlation between firearms being used in a as a weapon of power, especially when we're talking about domestic or oppressing a group that you believe is either inferior or needs to be tamped down. Yeah, well, we certainly have seen, you know, I think there's there's data that shows that there's an uptake in domestic violence because of our shutdown. And more more often than not, it seems like it's gun violence that causes the murder or the serious injury. So I mean, that's a whole other level. I'm not sure how you spot it, how do you prevent those situations? Regulation is one thing. But again, I think it goes back to just needing to have resources and community resources to attend people's health and give them safe places to go or safe outlets or, you know, ways to get anger management. And that's a really important point, Louise, because hey, the minute that somebody brings a domestic violence or temporary restraining or a complaint, first thing that goes all the guns, you can have all the knives you want, all the poison you want, all the dynamite you want, no guns. But guns got to go. Yeah, the presumption shifts. So it keeps bringing me back and everything I'm hearing keeps bringing me back to why shouldn't there be a presumption that gun use ownership need to a be established with conditions. And one of those conditions be education and responsible use. Well, there should be absolutely. But then if you think about it, the very fabric of our country and those who were Second Amendment proponents is we have liberty and freedom in the United States. And we and you got to understand how we became a country, right? We ran away from Britain, we ran away from the King going into your house, the troops coming in and doing what they wanted to do. And the whole idea was if we have guns, no one's going to do that. The government's not going to walk into your house and do what they did in Britain. So that's part of our fabric of our country. So how you disabuse people of that belief that they have the liberty to possess weapons. And then when you start, when you basically put regulations in place to provide buffers so they can't get weapons, they're basically saying, look, the timelines are not there to protect people. The timelines are there to keep guns out of my hand. And I don't want those timelines there. I don't want those regulations there because I have that Second Amendment right. That's, it's part of our constitution. So, you know, it's, that's a difficult issue to deal with. If we go, if we go back, Bill, to the Second Amendment, if the only people that could have guns or did have guns, who were a well, well regulated militia, we would not be talking about this. Yeah, you know, but the problem is, is that the other side says, you know what a well regulated militia was back in, in, in, you know, the time, the formation of the country, those are folks who got together in a town and say, why is it not coming into my house? Okay, that's what they consider them. They didn't consider it, you know, our, our state, you know, armed forces that we have in each individual state and etc. It was folks who basically said, you're not coming into our houses. And so once a week and be a citizen patrol, that, that's the militia at the other side argues that we have, but we also know that if we went back to that point in time and determine the intent, according to that, oh, only one of the five of us that would be able to vote our own property. That too. That too. Yeah. But I think it was mentioned on Vice President Terrace had mentioned this whole discussion about, you know, taking away guns and doing regulations is sort of like this false equivalency. This is this one has nothing to do with the other. And, and what you're, you're talking about, but I think it's, it's still part of that. I mean, I, it's difficult for me to conceptualize that responsible people are adamantly against having some reasonable regulations on the perhaps the type of weapons you can possess and who can, who can obtain them as opposed to someone saying the purpose of any sort of regulation is to literally take away my right to have guns. That's not even the discussion. That's not even what we're talking about, but it keeps getting bounced back to being we're talking about, you're going to take away the guns. And that's not the discussion. That's not what we're talking about. I mean, it's not what we're talking about. It's just finding some way to, to do a reasonable regulation. And I think in Hawaii, we do have some fairly reasonable, you know, regulations on who can possess and, and how you can obtain because I think our concealed, our weapons laws are similar to what you're talking about, Tina, about where, where you can have the gun, the gun has to be in a container, it has to be in your trunk. It has to be, you know, on your way to, you know, the range or someplace that you can carry. It's not, yeah, I can just walk around and hitch it to my jeans belt. That's not quite how it's done here either. So we have those kind of really strict regulations about that. And, and, and people comply with that. Yeah. Actually, we have the strictest gun laws in the nation, Hawaii has. Okay, so I think sorry, we're running out of time. I wanted to say this because following up on what Sandra said, the, so the conflated argument, what that results in is, and we've seen this in the past two years, a run on firearms. So whether it's assault weapons or handguns, suddenly they're not available or the price has increased 25, 30%. At one point in 2020 ammunition was not available in many gun shops. And it was because people were stockpiling. That's where the conflated argument goes. Chuck, I also wanted to touch quickly upon the correlation with hate crimes and, and the use of firearms. And it's because of the easy access and because of the, the, the regulations varying if there are any and open carry versus concealed. And I think about Dylan Roof and the fact that he literally sat in a church, waited until people had closed their eyes for prayer and then didn't shoot off one or two bullets. He had the equivalent of 70 bullets. He had rounds, a magazine, he had several magazines. So he literally had to discharge that magazine, load it back in the gun and continue with what he was doing. For those who don't know what I'm talking about, think about the matrix. When Nia was in one of those scenes, he literally is dropping and inserting magazines. It's intentional. And that's where the, the, the correlation between the anger and using this, this weapon as a means to destroy really, for many of us who consider ourselves rational, prudent people, we can't make the connection. But my personal opinion is that's where it's coming from. It's, it's instantaneous. You know, whoever your enemy is or whatever you believe is, is your enemy, you're taking them down and you're taking them down quickly. These weak people, a sense of power. Yeah, right. It's a power tool. It is. It is. Well, here's the question then. Is it really the underlying attitudes and behaviors, including the discrimination, the race, the ethnic, the LGBTQ, all of it, that generate the abuses for which gun access is a means. It's an avenue. And others who don't want their so-called Second Amendment rights, rights intruded upon, wind up protecting the abusers because of their own, exactly what Sandra said, the polarized attitudes, behaviors and communications that we degenerated into. And that's the tide that needs to be reversed. So I guess you put out the deeper problem, Choc, which is, okay, gun regulation is one thing, but we have a whole problem here with hate and division. Yes. And, you know, the failure to, to tolerate each other and recognize differences. And, and then that gives people the feeling that they need some little, you know, this tool to act out their insecurities. Exactly. So last words, everybody. Bill? I was just going to say that someone once said that the gun is a tool of a cowardice because if you really want to kill someone, try to kill them with a knife. Okay, you have to be visceral. You have to go and you have to struggle with someone. Pulling a trigger is easy. And so it is, it is a cowardice weapon. And put in the wrong hands. It does what we see happen in our day to day existence nowadays. And there, and I agree. And then as, as we, there's some things that we need to be paying more attention to when it comes to these issues of who goes and has the bills that they need to do that kind of power trip over people. And that's a lot of it is still mental health. And we still need to address those issues. There's still the stigma, you know, attached to that. There's still, you know, family members who are, you know, maybe looking at a situation and afraid to act, not knowing how to act, not knowing what they can or cannot do. And then the person acts out, there's a gun and they act out. I mean, that's what we had in this situation last weekend was, again, family that kind of knew something was amiss. There's something was wrong. And then, you know, he takes it out on, on these women in various locations. So again, very intentional, very intentional, driving from one place to the next to the next to the next. And, you know, I, I'm, these things have shaken me. I'll just be real honest. I'm just shaken by all of this. I don't really know how to respond. I'm trying to like everybody else trying to figure out how, why, where do we get, how do we get to this, to this place? How do we, how do we wind back so we can talk to each other without it being I got to pull out my gun and blow you away because I disagree with you. We got to pull it back. We got to pull it back. Well, that's all the time that we have today. Let's give that some thought. Because a lot of underlying issues, people issues, attitude issues, behavior issues, behavioral abuse issues, societal connections of mental of regulation and many other things and education. Thank you all. Come back and see us in two more weeks. We will be back April 8th. And thank you for joining us. Think back Hawaii time for responsible change. Thank you, Chuck. Thank you, guys. Thank you.