has not yet met with one single police group in contrast with president trump within hours of his inauguration met with law enforcement groups and they had a shared agenda disclosing shared priorities but i think what we see it so emblematic of his remarks yesterday that he is just such a continued disappointment. everything that he touched on does not have a real or would not have a real effect on the crimes plaguing the city and minority in urban neighborhoods throughout the country, assault weapons bans and red flag laws and background checks have absolutely inconsequential impact on the actual crimes that are taking place in the cause is about das lack of prosecution so that the family courts for he says we have violence coming to you think that matters to gangs that are recruiting teenagers because they know they will get to family court? he won t even prosecute holding a weapon during a robbery unless it is fired. all of these things are so
presidency granted slim margins in each, but granted as you know well, democrats more supportive of broader measures like we ve been discussing here. if democrats couldn t get measures like, for instance, assault weapons bans or high magazine weapons ban, if they couldn t get it done now, should folks at home think it s ever going to get done? no, look, i think we have to demonstrate we re committed to those issues and keep fighting for them. the progress on this has been obviously too slow and i ve been fighting, i think as many of my colleagues have for a very long time, and we re going to continue to fight for it, but i don t think they would give up because they have a right to live in their communities free from gun violence and congress has much more work to do. and although our majorities are slim, we ll try to grow them and get this done and make sure that every single community is safe from gun violence. we appreciate your effort on this, this particular bill and we also a
(Mathematics:) Beginning of a phrase binding a name to a certain value. The scope of the binding is understood (from clues from natural language, usuall.
director of giffords law center and joins me from san francisco. thanks for being here with us. you ve been working for years to fight for gun safety. i want to start by getting your reaction to this setback and what effect it might have. this is an incredibly disappointing decision. it is completely an outlier from other decisions federal courts have issued ruling on the validity of assault weapons bans. it s an inappropriate and alarming decision and obviously one we re very disappointed in but one we don t expect will carry on as it goes up through the appeal process. among the many mass shootings i had the misfortune to comer from california, i was in san bernardino where the killers used ar-15 style rifles bought legally despite the ban. one constitutional expert i spoke to who agreed with the general principles expressed in this ruling felt this idea of so-called assault rifles, a sort of artificial distinction,
other decisions federal courts have issued ruling on the validity of assault weapons bans. it s an inappropriate and alarming decision and obviously one we re very disappointed in but one we don t expect will carry on as it goes up through the appeal process. among the many mass shootings i had the misfortune to comer from california, i was in san bernardino, ar-15 style rifles bought legally despite the ban, one constitutional expert i spoke to who agreed with the general principles expressed in this ruling felt this idea of so-called assault rifles, an art distinction that doesn t have much practical merit and the bans haven t shown any significant effect in preventing mass shootings. is there any proof that they even work? there is absolutely proof that these restrictions do work. so i find that factual inaccuracy to be really disappointing to hear.