they will begin the pain staking process of trying to piece together exactly what happened here. and i can tell you the here, your blood boils as youzf hear this story and after s!gjñecing together what has happened, it just, it never i think the real challenge for all of us including law enforcement is not putting the pieces together after this, but doing it with the purpose that wexd do everything possible to prevent the next one? we were talking before you came on, commissioner, about the fact that everything here seemed to have been by the book,lp how quick the response was, how they responded by going toward the shots, not as we saw in placese like uvalde, waiting, not going toward clearly where the shooter wa went in, how the evacuation began almost immediately. all of that went by the book,
man power, and track record, whatever they can do to move the needle so that when we find ours in an incomprehensible situation that we found ourselves in last tuesday, that maybe, just perhaps, those first responsers facing evil will be able to do it in a manner wholly, separate and apart from the amateur hour that we saw in uvalde last tuesday. so this there an area where e of these officers might be charged with a crime? you know, i will reserve judgment until all the facts are in. i have learned this much in my four decades in the criminal justice system is being a peace officer is the ultimate home field advantage in the criminal justice system. particularly in a red state like texas and a red county like uvalde, it s even more pronounced. i think two things, though, stand out. number one, steve mccaw, the colonel of the department of public safety our state police
assault-style rifles was in effect, mass shooting deaths fell on the decade of the ban and the decade following expiration. this is according to journal of trauma and acute care surgery. i see what you are saying, richard, there is not the political landscape right now for that to happen. let me just quickly go to you for final thoughts here, jonathan. when i hear governor abbott and others say, well, these laws wouldn t have prevented these shootings, right? that the gunman in uvalde was able to legally obtain, he passed a background check. he was able to legally obtain the gun. i guess my question is, so does that mean we shouldn t have any laws in the books that can cut down on violence? this is sort of this argument about all or nothing. well, since it won t eliminate all of it, then we maybe shouldn t do it. but you are former law enforcement? laws can help. even if it doesn t eliminate the problem. right? those homicide laws on the book. we see homicide.
gun can be a toxic combination as we just saw in uvalde. yet, i was listening to texas governor greg abbott s press conference. he said friday mental healthcare is key, not expanding background checks. let s listen to this. anyone who suggests maybe we should focus on background checks as opposed to mental health i suggest to you is mistaken. if there is anybody here thinks perfect healthcare in this country in this world. they re wrong. is there anybody that thinks we can t do more to address mental healthcare? they re wrong. certainly, we can improve mental healthcare and do more in the background check. why not do both? what do you think? well, i think that s exactly right. i join with jonathan and the independent firearms association, that it s not just one butcher sticker slogan or another. we have to intelligent approach