fiemts might not last very long. i don t think the supreme court is going to go in that direction. instead what i think is a longer term problem is the chipping away at roe. as i m sure you know there is no affirmative right to reproductive justice. it s just implied. and so it s hard to protect. and it s happening in state after state. there are upward of 30 states that have imposed restrictions they don t look like alabama or mississippi or missouri. right. and again, i think that if you want to put on marching shoes you probably should put on marching shoes and go to your state capitol most states enacted these trap laws designed to limit the opportunities the women has to do reproductive health not just abortions by the way, reproductive health in general gets hurt when the laws are enacted. that s right. anna marie cox good to see you again thank you for joining us. and tonight s last word.
the streets about knows as well. i mean, it s it s in some ways you know it s ka that is rightic to see the fight about the extreme bills but there is a part of me that feels like those fiemts might not last very long. i don t think the supreme court is going to go in that direction. instead what i think is a longer term problem is the chipping away at roe. as i m sure you know there is no affirmative right to reproductive justice. it s just implied. and so it s hard to protect. and it s happening in state after state. there are upward of 30 states that have imposed restrictions they don t look like alabama or mississippi or missouri. right. and again, i think that if you want to put on marching shoes you probably should put on marching shoes and go to your state capitol most states enacted these trap laws designed to limit the opportunities the women has to do reproductive
provision that would require background checks on all commercial sales. one of the big gaps in our background checks is sales at gun shows an over the internet are not necessarily subject to a background checks. and we think they should be. these are essentially commercial in nature and they are on a scale that really matters. so our bill would require those background checks. we also have a number of provisions which we ll you have support for that? for bipartisan support for what you are saying? we have 54 votes in 2013. and most of those 54 are still in the senate. and you didn t have a lost presidential back-up. mr. president the president did support it. but that was your problem. but there was a worry that he wanted to go further and that was a concern. and there are two other iemts items. one is ways in which a law-abiding citizen could have greater freedom to exercise the second amendment, allowing an active duty military person to be able to buy a fir
you see a guy like that. we d deal with that as a bomb. it looks like a bomb. it has web feet. it quacks, we will treat it like a bomb as cal said iemts. london police are not armed and they may have very little information. they may not know very much. when you say we would deal that as a bomb. tell me what that likely sbalgs. well, we would evacuate the people just like i ve dealt with these cases for years, we don t know exactly what it is. it looks like a bomb to us. we evacuate the people. we bring in the bomb disposal. this guy s alive, that complicates your case tremendously because he could be hitting the switch or something. but if he s deceased we would bring a robot in, look at that, try to explore it, maybe pull a claw, robot pull that back out. the bomb technicians would see