June 10, 2026 • 28 mins
The national conversation around gun violence tends to revolve around what laws should be passed next. But a lot of the work of reducing violence doesn’t happen in Congress. It happens in cities, hospitals, community organizations, police departments, schools, and increasingly through coordination between all of them.
My guest today is Rob Wilcox, the president and CEO of the Fund for a Safer Future and the former deputy director of the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention.
In this episode, we talk about what it was like helping build such a critical office from the ground up, how he tried to approach gun violence as more than just a legislative issue, what happens when the federal government starts thinking about violence reduction as an operational challenge instead of simply a political one, and what the future of gun violence prevention should look like.
Rob Wilcox joined the Fund for a Safer Future in 2026 as its first President & CEO. He previously served as co-deputy director of the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention in the Biden-Harris Administration, where he built a track record of turning evidence-informed strategies into real-world results. In that role, he led the implementation of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and helped to shape over 50 executive actions. Prior to his White House service, Wilcox served in a senior role at Everytown for Gun Safety, where he worked on state and federal legislative efforts. His personal connection to the issue—his cousin Laura was killed in a workplace shooting in 2001—has driven his commitment to evidence-informed solutions for more than two decades.
Fund for a Safer Future is a national network of over 30 funders pooling expertise and resources to help end gun violence. FSF is making grants to support policy, research, communications, and community-led efforts that save lives. The collaborative model brings more funders into the movement, lifts evidence-informed solutions, and backs the organizations working every day to keep communities safe.
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_00 (00:00):
I'm Jeff Asher.
This is the Jeffalytics Podcast.
The national conversation aroundgun violence tends to revolve
around what laws should bepassed next.
But a lot of the work ofreducing violence doesn't happen
in Congress.
It happens in cities, hospitals,community organizations, police
departments, schools, states,and increasingly through
coordination between all ofthem.
My guest today is Rob Wilcox,the president and CEO of the
(00:23):
Fund for a Safer Future, and theformer Deputy Director of the
White House Office of GunViolence Prevention.
In this episode, we talk aboutwhat it was like helping to
build such a critical officefrom the ground up.
How he tried to approach gunviolence is more than just a
legislative issue.
What happens when the federalgovernment starts thinking about
violence reduction as anoperational challenge instead of
simply a political one?
And what the future of gunviolence prevention should look
(00:44):
like.
Let's get started.
The guest today is Rob Wilcox.
Rob, thanks so much for joiningme.
It's great to be here with you,Jeff.
Thanks for inviting me.
I'm excited, and you've been aguest that I've wanted to have
on for a long time.
So very excited to have youhere.
And you have a fascinatingbackground.
You have done a lot.
So my first question is (01:00):
can you just sort of recite your
background?
How did you get to be here?
SPEAKER_01 (01:04):
Yeah, I mean, I honestly didn't get here by
choice or with ambition.
We had a family tragedy backwhen I was a senior in college
in 2001 where a cousin was shotand killed.
It really made me want to justdo my part uh to try to
contribute to reducing violencein this country.
I tried to bring my experiencegrowing up in Brooklyn.
(01:25):
My dad was in the special forcesand a gun owner, and have tried
to bring that perspective to akind of lifetime of work on this
issue of gun violence reduction.
And, you know, I started out notin a glamorous job where we got
to know each other, Jeff, at theWhite House, but, you know,
answering the phones at thefront desk for a nonprofit.
And I've just tried to do mypart along the way.
And that's included being alawyer at a big New York law
(01:46):
firm and serving on the boardsof smaller organizations and
then doing policy work for abouta decade and helping Senator
Chris Murphy negotiate theBipartisan Safer Communities Act
and then getting tapped to workin the White House Office of Gun
Violence Prevention by PresidentBiden.
And where are you now?
SPEAKER_00 (02:02):
You're telling me about the work you're currently
doing.
SPEAKER_01 (02:06):
Yeah.
So uh a few months ago, Istarted a new position as the
president and CEO of the Fundfor a Safer Future.
That's a donor collaborativewith 35 philanthropic members uh
that are pooling their resourcesto help contribute to policy
development, programmatic work,and partnerships that will
reduce gun violence in all itsforms, from suicide prevention,
(02:26):
community violence, intimatepartner violence, mass
shootings.
And it's it's really exciting tobe part of a collaborative that
makes about$10 million a year ingrants, but has members that
contribute another 80 to 90million.
And so that's that's reallygame-changing to get those
dollars flowing toevidence-informed programs and
policy development.
SPEAKER_00 (02:47):
So you're given a job at the White House.
I want to hear what is thatlike?
Like what does that feel like toget that?
What does it feel like to workat the White House?
And then what does it feel liketo work at the White House in an
issue that is not well defined?
It's sort of like a here's yourissue, go, go do it.
It's not like you've had decadesof somebody else doing that
issue before you.
SPEAKER_01 (03:06):
Yeah, there no one gave you a handbook or a
guidebook when you show up.
It is a really intense place towork, but it also has the
potential to do so much good.
And you don't, it's one of thosepositions that you don't even
know is out there until ithappens.
Um, you know, I was on vacationwith my family in Delaware, and
the person I'd been working withat the White House for years to
(03:26):
give policy advice to called meup and said, um, you know, the
president wants to start anoffice of gun violence
prevention.
And the first thing I said toher, Jeff, was, Congratulations,
you are gonna do so much goodwith that office.
And and then she said to me,the, you know, the president
wants to know if you'd be, ifyou'd consider serving.
And, you know, that's a momentthat I'd never planned for, I'd
never worked for, that wasn'tkind of the thing I was reaching
(03:49):
for.
I was just trying to play mypart.
And it really takes your breathaway to have that type of
opportunity.
And then it was surreal,honestly, after going through
the interview process, they hada a rose garden ceremony to
announce this office.
And I was there with StephFeldman, our director, my
co-deputy Greg Jackson.
We had our families there.
We had all these incredibleleaders there.
(04:09):
And you're sitting in the rosegarden realizing they're talking
about like the work that you'regonna do.
And the president made it veryclear what our job was to fully
implement the Bipartisan SaferCommunities Act, to maximize the
benefit of that history.
The second was to come up withnew executive actions for every
agency.
Uh, the third was to build newstate and local partnership and
to enhance this work.
And lastly, he said, develop agun violence emergency response
(04:32):
system because we have FEMA showup when there's a hurricane or a
tornado, but we didn't have afull federal government response
when there was a mass shootingor a concentration in community
violence.
Uh, and so he announced that.
And it was surreal like to besitting there and to hear how
far we have come as a movement,as an issue, that we were
getting this kind of prominentplace in the administration.
(04:53):
And what happened was after theevent, the president and vice
president left, and we huggedour families and they left.
And we thought we had to leave,but uh Secret Service said, no,
no, sirs, you can stay.
You have the right color badgenow.
And before we knew it, the wholerose garden was packed up.
Uh, the lemonade was gone, thechairs were gone.
And Greg and I were juststanding there and we we kind of
(05:14):
realized that like that thisoffice was gonna be what we made
it.
And so we were overwhelmed, andit's hard to imagine what you're
gonna do.
And then the next day, you endup going to a really fancy
conference room that was used tonegotiate treaties, and you
start filling out HR paperworkand like you're figuring out
your beneficiary and all thesethings, and you're like, oh my
gosh, this is just a job.
It's like a regular job.
(05:34):
And and then it turns on itshead again, and that that
evening we're called and andwe're told that there's gonna be
a cabinet meeting in a week, andthe vice president and president
will challenge each agency to domore on this issue, and that it
was up to us to kind of reallybe thoughtful about proposals,
ideas, policies that that eachagency could do.
So we just got to work, takingour years of experience, our
(05:56):
trust in each other and in stephto develop a kind of robust
all-of-government approach tohow to reduce gun violence in
all its forms.
Because the president was clearit's not just about homicides
and assaults, it's about suicideand mass shootings and
unintentional shootings anddomestic violence.
So we had a big job, but youknow, it's one of those things
where you kind of realize thatif we're not going to step up
(06:18):
and take those jobs, who elsewill?
SPEAKER_00 (06:20):
And so, having done this for a few years within the
White House, what is your sortof post-mortem look at all of
this?
What works, what doesn't?
If you were put in the same spotall over again, what would you
do differently?
What would you do at exactly thesame?
SPEAKER_01 (06:31):
Yeah, I mean, I think the magic of working in
the White House is not just whatyou could do as an individual.
It's what you can activateacross government.
Now, in our tenure, we took uh55 executive actions,
administration moved billions ofdollars into violence reduction,
fully implemented the BipartisanSafer Communities Act.
None of that could have happenedwith just the four of us in our
(06:54):
office.
It was about the partnershipsyou build within the White House
in different departments,intergovernmental affairs and
federal affairs andcommunications.
And it's about the agencies.
And I think that's one of thekind of lessons I learned was
that's your team, that's yourpower, is the folks that you can
unlock to do good work acrossthe federal government who
(07:14):
hadn't always seen themselves aspart of that solution or hadn't
been reaching to work on itbecause it was always framed as
maybe it's just about passingthis law or doing this
particular policy.
When in fact, I think what whatI learned and what we've seen on
violence reduction is it takes areally broad approach that has
prevention strategies, it hasintervention strategies, it has
accountability strategies, andit has recovery strategies.
(07:38):
And in each of those, there'spolicies and there's programs
and there's partnerships.
And you could only activatefully if you really have a full
team across federal government,as well as partnerships outside
of government at the state andlocal level and community with
folks like you.
I mean, the truth is like wewere looking at your data every
day to give ourselves a realitycheck of like what was happening
(08:01):
actually in cities and how thework was being felt.
And so that was a big lesson.
And the second big lesson wasyou have to have a broad lens
and you have to be focused onthe outcomes you're trying to
achieve with using the bestevidence you have to develop
solutions and helping agenciesbe able to execute them.
SPEAKER_00 (08:19):
And so, sort of taking this down a level from
your experience at the WhiteHouse, working kind of down the
chain, are there things that youwere guys were proposing or that
you have wished you could haveproposed, but for whatever
reason couldn't?
What are the things that citiesshould be doing right now based
on that experience that maybethey're not doing as much of or
they're not uh doing at all?
(08:40):
I mean, look, specifically forgun violence reduction.
SPEAKER_01 (08:43):
Yeah, like we've seen a historic reduction in
violence.
I mean, your work has shown it.
The Council on Criminal Justiceresearch showed that you know,
cities have seen a 44% reductionin violence since 2021.
City's chiefs just put out kindof their data.
So there's a lot happeningthat's right.
And and I think it all goes backto that massive spike in
(09:04):
violence we saw in 2020 and 2021and what the response was.
And the response was let's notpull one lever, but let's pull a
thousand levers.
Let us move money into state andlocal government and community
through the American Rescue Planso that we can invest in
community violence intervention,so we can invest in law
enforcement, so we can buildstate and local offices of
(09:25):
violence prevention to havegovernment infrastructure that
can address this issue.
Let's think about the laws onthe books and how we can be
implementing them in a way thatwill make a tangible difference.
You know, for example, one ofthe things that had changed was
we'd seen these ghost gunsbecome a real weapon of choice
for gun traffickers.
And the recovery of ghost guns,which are unserialized firearms
(09:45):
that you could put togetherthrough kind of kits and nearly
finished parts, were floodingour cities because they were so
easy to traffic.
And what we did, what theadministration did, was actually
just regulate that industry asthe law intended.
And that's not my opinion.
That is the US Supreme Court'sopinion and a seven to two
opinion that said it was fullyappropriate the way that we
(10:07):
regulated the ghost gunindustry.
And, you know, the result wasthe largest ghost gun company
didn't want to play by the rulesand get a license.
They went out of business.
When it came to gun trafficking,we used the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act to nearlyquintuple gun trafficking
prosecutions, using data tofocus on the way illegal guns
were moving from source to crimescene.
We invested in crime gunintelligence centers to enhance
(10:29):
the use of NIBAN and gun tracingto build better leads so that we
can improve the clearance ratesfor homicides and nonfatal
shootings.
At the same time, we deeplyinvested in community violence
intervention, the folks who areon the front lines in community
who are trying to interveneprior to violence to prevent
retaliation, to preventconflicts from becoming deadly.
(10:51):
And we see that both kind ofwith street outreach in
hospitals, with cognitivebehavioral therapy.
And that was invested in atscale like we'd never seen.
And we saw partnerships.
And I think that was justanother critical piece where our
health systems, our schoolsystems, our community-based
organizations, our state, local,and federal partners all kind of
saw themselves as on the sameteam.
(11:13):
And that ecosystem ofpartnership enhances the work in
a way that no individual can do.
Because you need your healthsystems in a city working
together to share data and torun hospital violence
intervention programs.
At the same time, you need yourschool leaders thinking about
how do we prevent guns fromgetting in the hands of our
students who bring them toschool?
How do we help our studentsrecover who've been exposed to
(11:33):
violence?
And we need our cities then andnow really using their data to
understand not just where theviolence is, but where are our
solutions and how is that movingso that we can implement
solutions quickly to stopproblems before they escalate.
And so if the advice that I thatI give to mayors now is and
states is like, let's keeprunning that playbook.
(11:54):
And I think it starts with one,having a really strong office of
violence prevention at the locallevel, at the state level.
And over the past few years,we've seen those multiply.
There's 15 or 16 state officesof violence prevention.
There's nearly 120 localoffices.
I think that is really animportant new infrastructure
that has to be supported.
Second, we have to build ourbetter data systems so that we
(12:15):
actually are getting lawenforcement data and health data
to better to better understandwhere homicides are happening,
where nonfatal shootings arehappening, and that we can then
layer on top of that where theinvestments we're making in
homicide clearance rate anddetectives and community
violence intervention and victimservices, so that we are
matching our solutions in a veryfocused and targeted way to
(12:35):
where the problem is occurring.
And lastly, I think if I'mcities, it's it's keeping that
big tech mentality.
Even in with resources goingdown, we have to be investing in
the things that are showing realpromise of working.
And we have to keep bringingpartners to the table.
So philanthropy and healthsystems and school systems all
see themselves as part of theviolence reduction movement.
(12:56):
Um and I think it's reallypossible.
And Jeff, it's not hypotheticalbecause as you've shown, the
reductions are still happening.
And they're not happening byaccident.
They're happening because we'reseeing continued work that is
comprehensive at the local levelthat is sustaining what we've
seen.
SPEAKER_00 (13:11):
Yeah, and they're happening at a rate that at any
point in the last 60 years wouldhave been the fastest ever.
And now we're almost year fourof the fastest decline ever.
Like I like your phrasing ofpulling a lot of levers, because
I I normally call it of like wethrew a lot of crap at the wall
and some of it stuck.
I think that's a lot more artfulof pulling levers rather than
throwing mud at the wall.
(13:32):
Question that's always on mymind is You said crap.
Crap, you know, I don't want toget an expletive filter on this
one, so there's other things wecould say, but yeah, it's the
same concept.
So the question that always sortof stems from this is the data's
very clear, the work is veryclear.
People don't always believe it.
Is there a way to get people tobelieve this, to communicate it
more crystal clearly?
(13:54):
Or is this just something thatit takes a while for the good
news to spread and eventuallypeople will believe it, but just
not as it's happening?
SPEAKER_01 (14:02):
I think a few things, Jeff.
And I know you called it crapand mud, but I would say what we
tried to make was data-drivenand evidence-informed decisions
to support policies and programsthat would be effective.
The truth is that year-to-yearviolence change doesn't change
the way we've experiencedviolence in our lifetimes.
And I think the conversationabout perception, and I love how
(14:24):
you're leading it, you have totake into account that if you've
experienced violence in yourfamily, amongst your friends, on
your block, even in your city,those scars don't go away with
reductions.
That pain doesn't go away.
I know you and I've met moresurvivors that I can count.
SPEAKER_00 (14:39):
And like that mother's grief never sort of
taking it on the other end,because there's always a place
that's seen the outlier.
You know, every murder's goingdown into 80% of cities, that
means 20% are seeing anincrease.
If you're like a mayor Scott andyou've set these goals, it's
hard.
You don't exactly know what'sgonna work.
Sometimes you're not gonnasucceed to hit your goals.
What's the best way tocommunicate that concept of this
(15:02):
is hard, we're trying.
Failure doesn't mean failure, itjust means we have to keep
trying.
Or did I just answer thequestion?
So, what what are the beststrategies to combat either
misinformation or disinformationregarding gun violence when
you've got a situation where youknow the something happens,
violence falls, and thepolitician turns to the thing
(15:24):
that was happening at themoment, or the public wants to
believe that it's just becauseof non-reporting or whatever
reason that the truth is notbelieved.
How do we fight that as astrategy?
SPEAKER_01 (15:37):
Yeah, look, I think there's three things to do.
I think one is we have toimprove our understanding of
what really contributed to thesereductions year after year after
year after year.
And that's not an easy project.
I think the challenge for ourresearchers is that it's not
about what one individualprogram did in one individual
neighborhood to reduce violence.
(15:58):
It is what are the contributingfactors to a national trend
looking across jurisdictions.
And that's hard work.
And I think it begins with justbuilding a good foundation of
our understanding.
And that's bringing together aninterdisciplinary group that has
different academic backgroundsand different perspectives, and
is able to actually look at whatall went into the work of
(16:22):
violence reduction in 2021 and2022, three, four, five, and
actually start to assess well,what is likely to have
contributed to violencereduction, what's unlikely,
what's promising.
And it should then really thentry to delve into deeper
individual research projects tounderstand what happened when we
really attacked the ironpipeline, the gun trafficking
(16:42):
pipeline with gun traffickingprosecutions and straw
purchasing prosecutions andholding gun dealers that were
most closely tied with illegalguns responsible.
What did it mean when weregulated the ghost gun
industry?
What did it mean when weinvested resources in crime gun
intelligence centers andsupported law enforcement to
improve clearance rates forhomicides and nonfatal
(17:03):
shootings?
What was the effect of anational trend of investing in
community violence interventionor victim services?
Uh and I so I think there's animmediate need of like, let us
actually try to build the rightfoundation for what went into
this and then some real researchthat should be diving deeper.
That's not easy.
I don't pretend that it is, butI think it's necessary because
to see reductions at this scalefor this length of time should
(17:27):
force us all to want to answerthe question of what contributes
to the thing that we're allseeking, which is a safer
future.
And it's not just for communityviolence.
We've seen reductions in massshootings year over year.
And so we have to dive deeperinto what is helping us get to
the place that we are all tryingto get to.
Number two, I think it's we haveto keep up the work of
sustaining, taking what we thinkhas been effective and really
(17:49):
doubling down on investment.
And that could be into officesof violence prevention, it can
be into building the right crimegun intelligence center and
homicide and non-fatal shootingreview teams.
And it certainly is in investingin community violence
intervention and victimservices.
And lastly, it is how are wecommunicating?
And that's about messenger, it'sabout medium, and it's about
(18:10):
message.
And I think we too often thinkthat we can tell a national
story with nationalspokespeople, when in fact, I
think the most credible folksare those who are close to the
community.
And we have to be lifting up thevoices of those who are doing
this work in community andlocally so that they're telling
the story of how they'vecontributed.
But I think part of the issue ofwhy we don't break through on
(18:31):
these reductions is thateveryone goes to the thing that
they done first.
They say, This is what I did,this is responsible.
And I think we should get morecomfortable, all who want to see
this safer future.
And I think that is a broadswath of saying, this is what's
happening.
These are the things that wethink went into this, because
this is actually what occurredin history.
And here's the role that Iplayed.
(18:52):
Here's the policy I worked toimplement.
Here's what my unit did to solvenonfatal shootings, here's what
my health system did to set uphospital intervention programs.
And I think that's a differentway to think about how we
communicate on these reductions,is we should start with the big
collective effort and then moveto the thing that we did, as
opposed to just trying to makeit about the thing that we did
(19:13):
and that that was what is deeplyresponsible.
And so I think that's adifferent way to communicate.
It's lifting up those localvoices, telling those local
stories, finding the rightmediums to tell them in, and
being willing to share creditwith the different folks who've
helped contribute to thesereductions.
SPEAKER_00 (19:29):
So what does the future of gun violence
prevention, of this work looklike?
I'm gonna fuse in with that aquestion I've been asking all of
my guests is that is there arole for AI specifically in
this?
Have you thought through that asa as a potential contributor?
SPEAKER_01 (19:44):
I mean, look, the the future is for the first time
in history the the issue of gunviolence prevention isn't
hypothetical.
It's not in a white paper.
It's not kind of what advocateswould would ask for.
It's reality.
I mean, what we saw in theadministration that I worked for
was us pulling a thousand leversthat were informed by the
evidence and data to actuallygovern for gun violence
(20:06):
prevention.
For literally the first time inour history, we governed for gun
violence prevention.
And we did it through improvingdata systems, like at the CDC,
which produced the first evernational resource on firearm
homicide and suicide that getsyou down to the zip code level
with only a three to four monthlag.
I mean, that is so much fasterand more localized than what
we'd ever seen throughincorporating the data that you
(20:27):
were, Jeff, responsible forunearthing and incorporating
that into our decision making,for helping Nibers to make sure
that we actually are bringing ininformation on non-fatal
shootings and incorporatingthose recommendations.
We did it through policyimplementation when it came to
regulating ghost guns or guntrafficking or machine gun
conversion devices, maximizingour background check system,
(20:48):
improving our crime gunintelligence.
We did it through investing inthe right kind of programs in
community violence interventionand victim services, as well as
larger investments into localgovernment.
And we did it throughpartnerships.
And I think when you ask aboutthe future, we don't have to
live in the hypothetical.
We can live in the reality ofthat comprehensive approach.
And maybe a governor or a mayoror even a president doesn't want
(21:12):
to do all those things, butgosh, that gives you a lot to
choose from if you want toattack this crisis.
And I think the worst thing wecan do is going back to the
mentality of like, let's just gopick the one thing.
Let's just go do this one thing.
This is the thing.
And I say that not as aresearcher or an academic who
might say, well, this is the onething, but no one has, in fact,
told me that yet, if it was thisone thing.
I don't think they ever will.
(21:32):
And I think that is the mistakewe see in debates is we always
try to reduce it to this is theone thing.
Instead of telling people, like,which is what I actually think
they want, is we're doing allthe things.
We're doing the prevention,we're doing the intervention,
we're doing the accountability,and we're doing the recovery.
And I think that is our futureis we lean into all of it.
And that's about the right gunsafety laws and implementing
(21:53):
them responsibly.
It's about the big communitylevel prevention work in terms
of cleaning and greening space.
And making sure we haveeducational opportunities for
youth and economicopportunities.
It's about the targetedintervention for those who are
most at highest risk forcommitting acts of violence.
And it comes through theaccountability of solving
homicides and shootings and therecovery of victim services.
(22:16):
That playbook is no longer ahypothetical.
It is so real.
And I saw it firsthand.
And we could be running it andinnovating on it everywhere.
And if we do that, we have achance to sustain this fragile
progress.
And that's my belief of what wesaw last year.
And to your question on AI, Ihave been thinking a lot about
it.
It is a really excellentquestion.
And I think there's a few waysthat AI can be helpful.
(22:39):
One is there's a lot ofdatabases when it comes to
violence, its effects, and howit's showing up that we need
help assessing better in realtime and vetting.
And we have to be thinking aboutlaw enforcement data and health
data and how do we synthesizethis large amount of input into
something that is kind of usablefor policymaking and decision
(23:02):
making.
I don't think you can everseparate an expert like you or
others who are looking at thedata, ensuring that it is
correct and accurate.
But I do think AI can help usleverage large data sets to get
some better insights.
Number two, I think there'sissues that come with gun
trafficking or emerging firearmthreats where AI could be of
(23:24):
advantage.
And I'll name two.
One of the last things we didwas try to focus on the
proliferation of these machinegun conversion devices.
These are small parts thatattach to a semi-automatic
handgun.
They make it into a machine gun.
Some research has shown thatthat is keeping our homicide
numbers high.
And I think that's important,Jeff.
It's like even though we'reseeing these declines, like a
city like Chicago think thoughtthat, you know, maybe a quarter
(23:45):
of their homicides were due justto these devices.
So how are they getting here?
One is that they were beingillegally imported from China.
Chinese gangs were puttingwebsites up that sold them
directly to consumers.
You know, our administrationfocused on shutting down those
illegal websites because theywere just they were available
through a Google search.
You could go Google machine gunconversion device or what
they're called lock switches,and you could find a website
(24:07):
like it's Amazon and you couldbe ordered into your house.
The administration took steps toinvestigate and shut those down.
We shut down 350, but it was anindividual looking for websites,
taking screenshots, capturingthat evidence.
I actually think there are toolswe can build with AI that would
more effectively scrape thewebsite for websites selling
those illegal products so thatwe're not playing a game of
(24:28):
whack-a-mole, but we in fact aremore effectively using
technology and reducing thecosts to identifying and
shutting down sites like that.
The same thing goes for how doyou prevent the illegal 3D
printing of these switches, theother way that they're showing
up.
And I think AI can play a bigrole in developing the
technology technology solutionsthat can prevent the 3D printing
of those illegal machine gunconversion devices.
(24:50):
That's not hypothetical.
That's a project we started thatthe Fund for Safe for Future
continues to support, is thedevelopment of the technology.
And it's so close, Jeff.
Like I literally have seen theprototypes, like it is right
there that we can build inthrough uh sequence analysis and
functionality analysis, alongwith AI, the ability to
basically put an antivirussoftware into a 3D printer or
(25:12):
into slicer software to preventthe 3D printing of an illegal
Glock switch.
And that's like those are prettyremarkable, tangible solutions
that would be very difficult todo without the power of AI.
SPEAKER_00 (25:23):
That's a great answer.
And I think the most productiveanswer I've heard of like very
specific is the ways to use it.
So uh I really appreciate youhearing you telling us that.
My last question is you've livedsuch an and I'm not like this
isn't a postscript to your lifeor career, but you've done so
much so far.
SPEAKER_01 (25:39):
What career advice would you have for somebody that
is interested in making adifference or in just doing
something interesting in the intheir I I think there's a few
things that I've learned alongthe way that I'm happy to share.
And I'm definitely no expert,but it's always be willing and
ready to play your part.
I think do the thing in front ofyou and do it as well as you
can.
Uh, and then you'll get anotheropportunity and another one
(26:00):
after that.
But it's about being willing toplay the part that you have in
that moment.
The second is be good to yourteam and thrive in a team and
realize that success doesn'tjust come from the person on
top, but it's the person all theway down below and everyone in
the middle.
And that real success comes fromeveryone on the team doing their
best at the part they'replaying.
(26:21):
And the third thing is there'sreally no secret.
It's just hard work.
It's being willing to kind ofpush yourself to become an
expert in your particular craft,be it policy or data analysis or
research or communications,whatever it is, the thing that
you have the talents for, try tobecome the master of and then
continue to put the work in.
When I was working at the lawfirm, I remember the most senior
(26:42):
partner who's literally one ofthe best litigators in in the
country, telling me that, youknow, everyone who's preparing
for trial is going to do 80% ofthe work because that's what's
most likely to come up.
And the challenge is can youpush yourself to do that last
20%?
The things that are mostunlikely to happen, but almost
certainly one of those things inthat bottom 20% will come up.
And if you're prepared for thatopportunity, then you can be
(27:05):
successful.
And that literally is thedifference between success and
failure, are sometimes as thinas that like one moment, that
one opportunity.
And so, you know, I think that'sthe advice I would give.
And and the other, the otherthing is kind of what I said at
the top, Jeff.
It's like people can see you orme now and think about like the
biggest accomplishments we'vehad, but it's all of those quiet
moments of hard work that gointo it.
It's answering the phones at thefront desk, it's taking those
(27:27):
entry-level jobs, uh, and it'sdoing all of those things that
aren't seen.
And it's the hard work behindthe scenes that goes into uh a
successful career.
So I guess that's kind of what II probably offer to someone, as
well as as well as to haveoptimism in the thing you're
doing.
That's probably the last andmost important.
Have optimism in the thing youare doing that you if you don't
believe you're gonna besuccessful in the thing you're
(27:49):
doing, you're never gonnaconvince someone else of it.
SPEAKER_00 (27:51):
That's great.
Well, Rob, I really appreciateyour coming on.
This has been a fantasticconversation, and I can't say
thank you enough.
So thank you.
And uh hopefully we'll crosspaths soon again.
SPEAKER_01 (28:01):
Uh I'm sure we will, Jeff.
And and hopefully next timewe'll have uh, you know, not an
awkward hug.
SPEAKER_00 (28:07):
We we we didn't tell that story, so we'll uh we'll
leave the listeners'imaginations to that one.
SPEAKER_01 (28:12):
Great, Jeff.
Thank you so much for having me.
I've really enjoyed talking toyou and and digging into some of
these issues.
SPEAKER_00 (28:17):
Rob, that was awesome.
Thank you so much.
Thanks for listening to theJeffalytics Podcast.
Be sure to subscribe and tolearn more, head on over to
ahdatalytics.com for moreinformation and previous
episodes.
If you like what you heard,please leave a glowing review,
which will help others todiscover the show.
Until next time, I'm Jeff Asher.
I'm Jeff Asher.
This is the Jeffalytics Podcast.
The national conversation aroundgun violence tends to revolve
around what laws should bepassed next.
But a lot of the work ofreducing violence doesn't happen
in Congress.
It happens in cities, hospitals,community organizations, police
departments, schools, states,and increasingly through
coordination between all ofthem.
My guest today is Rob Wilcox,the president and CEO of the
(00:23):
Fund for a Safer Future, and theformer Deputy Director of the
White House Office of GunViolence Prevention.
In this episode, we talk aboutwhat it was like helping to
build such a critical officefrom the ground up.
How he tried to approach gunviolence is more than just a
legislative issue.
What happens when the federalgovernment starts thinking about
violence reduction as anoperational challenge instead of
simply a political one?
And what the future of gunviolence prevention should look
(00:44):
like.
Let's get started.
The guest today is Rob Wilcox.
Rob, thanks so much for joiningme.
It's great to be here with you,Jeff.
Thanks for inviting me.
I'm excited, and you've been aguest that I've wanted to have
on for a long time.
So very excited to have youhere.
And you have a fascinatingbackground.
You have done a lot.
So my first question is (01:00):
can you just sort of recite your
background?
How did you get to be here?
SPEAKER_01 (01:04):
Yeah, I mean, I honestly didn't get here by
choice or with ambition.
We had a family tragedy backwhen I was a senior in college
in 2001 where a cousin was shotand killed.
It really made me want to justdo my part uh to try to
contribute to reducing violencein this country.
I tried to bring my experiencegrowing up in Brooklyn.
(01:25):
My dad was in the special forcesand a gun owner, and have tried
to bring that perspective to akind of lifetime of work on this
issue of gun violence reduction.
And, you know, I started out notin a glamorous job where we got
to know each other, Jeff, at theWhite House, but, you know,
answering the phones at thefront desk for a nonprofit.
And I've just tried to do mypart along the way.
And that's included being alawyer at a big New York law
(01:46):
firm and serving on the boardsof smaller organizations and
then doing policy work for abouta decade and helping Senator
Chris Murphy negotiate theBipartisan Safer Communities Act
and then getting tapped to workin the White House Office of Gun
Violence Prevention by PresidentBiden.
And where are you now?
SPEAKER_00 (02:02):
You're telling me about the work you're currently
doing.
SPEAKER_01 (02:06):
Yeah.
So uh a few months ago, Istarted a new position as the
president and CEO of the Fundfor a Safer Future.
That's a donor collaborativewith 35 philanthropic members uh
that are pooling their resourcesto help contribute to policy
development, programmatic work,and partnerships that will
reduce gun violence in all itsforms, from suicide prevention,
(02:26):
community violence, intimatepartner violence, mass
shootings.
And it's it's really exciting tobe part of a collaborative that
makes about$10 million a year ingrants, but has members that
contribute another 80 to 90million.
And so that's that's reallygame-changing to get those
dollars flowing toevidence-informed programs and
policy development.
SPEAKER_00 (02:47):
So you're given a job at the White House.
I want to hear what is thatlike?
Like what does that feel like toget that?
What does it feel like to workat the White House?
And then what does it feel liketo work at the White House in an
issue that is not well defined?
It's sort of like a here's yourissue, go, go do it.
It's not like you've had decadesof somebody else doing that
issue before you.
SPEAKER_01 (03:06):
Yeah, there no one gave you a handbook or a
guidebook when you show up.
It is a really intense place towork, but it also has the
potential to do so much good.
And you don't, it's one of thosepositions that you don't even
know is out there until ithappens.
Um, you know, I was on vacationwith my family in Delaware, and
the person I'd been working withat the White House for years to
(03:26):
give policy advice to called meup and said, um, you know, the
president wants to start anoffice of gun violence
prevention.
And the first thing I said toher, Jeff, was, Congratulations,
you are gonna do so much goodwith that office.
And and then she said to me,the, you know, the president
wants to know if you'd be, ifyou'd consider serving.
And, you know, that's a momentthat I'd never planned for, I'd
never worked for, that wasn'tkind of the thing I was reaching
(03:49):
for.
I was just trying to play mypart.
And it really takes your breathaway to have that type of
opportunity.
And then it was surreal,honestly, after going through
the interview process, they hada a rose garden ceremony to
announce this office.
And I was there with StephFeldman, our director, my
co-deputy Greg Jackson.
We had our families there.
We had all these incredibleleaders there.
(04:09):
And you're sitting in the rosegarden realizing they're talking
about like the work that you'regonna do.
And the president made it veryclear what our job was to fully
implement the Bipartisan SaferCommunities Act, to maximize the
benefit of that history.
The second was to come up withnew executive actions for every
agency.
Uh, the third was to build newstate and local partnership and
to enhance this work.
And lastly, he said, develop agun violence emergency response
(04:32):
system because we have FEMA showup when there's a hurricane or a
tornado, but we didn't have afull federal government response
when there was a mass shootingor a concentration in community
violence.
Uh, and so he announced that.
And it was surreal like to besitting there and to hear how
far we have come as a movement,as an issue, that we were
getting this kind of prominentplace in the administration.
(04:53):
And what happened was after theevent, the president and vice
president left, and we huggedour families and they left.
And we thought we had to leave,but uh Secret Service said, no,
no, sirs, you can stay.
You have the right color badgenow.
And before we knew it, the wholerose garden was packed up.
Uh, the lemonade was gone, thechairs were gone.
And Greg and I were juststanding there and we we kind of
(05:14):
realized that like that thisoffice was gonna be what we made
it.
And so we were overwhelmed, andit's hard to imagine what you're
gonna do.
And then the next day, you endup going to a really fancy
conference room that was used tonegotiate treaties, and you
start filling out HR paperworkand like you're figuring out
your beneficiary and all thesethings, and you're like, oh my
gosh, this is just a job.
It's like a regular job.
(05:34):
And and then it turns on itshead again, and that that
evening we're called and andwe're told that there's gonna be
a cabinet meeting in a week, andthe vice president and president
will challenge each agency to domore on this issue, and that it
was up to us to kind of reallybe thoughtful about proposals,
ideas, policies that that eachagency could do.
So we just got to work, takingour years of experience, our
(05:56):
trust in each other and in stephto develop a kind of robust
all-of-government approach tohow to reduce gun violence in
all its forms.
Because the president was clearit's not just about homicides
and assaults, it's about suicideand mass shootings and
unintentional shootings anddomestic violence.
So we had a big job, but youknow, it's one of those things
where you kind of realize thatif we're not going to step up
(06:18):
and take those jobs, who elsewill?
SPEAKER_00 (06:20):
And so, having done this for a few years within the
White House, what is your sortof post-mortem look at all of
this?
What works, what doesn't?
If you were put in the same spotall over again, what would you
do differently?
What would you do at exactly thesame?
SPEAKER_01 (06:31):
Yeah, I mean, I think the magic of working in
the White House is not just whatyou could do as an individual.
It's what you can activateacross government.
Now, in our tenure, we took uh55 executive actions,
administration moved billions ofdollars into violence reduction,
fully implemented the BipartisanSafer Communities Act.
None of that could have happenedwith just the four of us in our
(06:54):
office.
It was about the partnershipsyou build within the White House
in different departments,intergovernmental affairs and
federal affairs andcommunications.
And it's about the agencies.
And I think that's one of thekind of lessons I learned was
that's your team, that's yourpower, is the folks that you can
unlock to do good work acrossthe federal government who
(07:14):
hadn't always seen themselves aspart of that solution or hadn't
been reaching to work on itbecause it was always framed as
maybe it's just about passingthis law or doing this
particular policy.
When in fact, I think what whatI learned and what we've seen on
violence reduction is it takes areally broad approach that has
prevention strategies, it hasintervention strategies, it has
accountability strategies, andit has recovery strategies.
(07:38):
And in each of those, there'spolicies and there's programs
and there's partnerships.
And you could only activatefully if you really have a full
team across federal government,as well as partnerships outside
of government at the state andlocal level and community with
folks like you.
I mean, the truth is like wewere looking at your data every
day to give ourselves a realitycheck of like what was happening
(08:01):
actually in cities and how thework was being felt.
And so that was a big lesson.
And the second big lesson wasyou have to have a broad lens
and you have to be focused onthe outcomes you're trying to
achieve with using the bestevidence you have to develop
solutions and helping agenciesbe able to execute them.
SPEAKER_00 (08:19):
And so, sort of taking this down a level from
your experience at the WhiteHouse, working kind of down the
chain, are there things that youwere guys were proposing or that
you have wished you could haveproposed, but for whatever
reason couldn't?
What are the things that citiesshould be doing right now based
on that experience that maybethey're not doing as much of or
they're not uh doing at all?
(08:40):
I mean, look, specifically forgun violence reduction.
SPEAKER_01 (08:43):
Yeah, like we've seen a historic reduction in
violence.
I mean, your work has shown it.
The Council on Criminal Justiceresearch showed that you know,
cities have seen a 44% reductionin violence since 2021.
City's chiefs just put out kindof their data.
So there's a lot happeningthat's right.
And and I think it all goes backto that massive spike in
(09:04):
violence we saw in 2020 and 2021and what the response was.
And the response was let's notpull one lever, but let's pull a
thousand levers.
Let us move money into state andlocal government and community
through the American Rescue Planso that we can invest in
community violence intervention,so we can invest in law
enforcement, so we can buildstate and local offices of
(09:25):
violence prevention to havegovernment infrastructure that
can address this issue.
Let's think about the laws onthe books and how we can be
implementing them in a way thatwill make a tangible difference.
You know, for example, one ofthe things that had changed was
we'd seen these ghost gunsbecome a real weapon of choice
for gun traffickers.
And the recovery of ghost guns,which are unserialized firearms
(09:45):
that you could put togetherthrough kind of kits and nearly
finished parts, were floodingour cities because they were so
easy to traffic.
And what we did, what theadministration did, was actually
just regulate that industry asthe law intended.
And that's not my opinion.
That is the US Supreme Court'sopinion and a seven to two
opinion that said it was fullyappropriate the way that we
(10:07):
regulated the ghost gunindustry.
And, you know, the result wasthe largest ghost gun company
didn't want to play by the rulesand get a license.
They went out of business.
When it came to gun trafficking,we used the Bipartisan Safer
Communities Act to nearlyquintuple gun trafficking
prosecutions, using data tofocus on the way illegal guns
were moving from source to crimescene.
We invested in crime gunintelligence centers to enhance
(10:29):
the use of NIBAN and gun tracingto build better leads so that we
can improve the clearance ratesfor homicides and nonfatal
shootings.
At the same time, we deeplyinvested in community violence
intervention, the folks who areon the front lines in community
who are trying to interveneprior to violence to prevent
retaliation, to preventconflicts from becoming deadly.
(10:51):
And we see that both kind ofwith street outreach in
hospitals, with cognitivebehavioral therapy.
And that was invested in atscale like we'd never seen.
And we saw partnerships.
And I think that was justanother critical piece where our
health systems, our schoolsystems, our community-based
organizations, our state, local,and federal partners all kind of
saw themselves as on the sameteam.
(11:13):
And that ecosystem ofpartnership enhances the work in
a way that no individual can do.
Because you need your healthsystems in a city working
together to share data and torun hospital violence
intervention programs.
At the same time, you need yourschool leaders thinking about
how do we prevent guns fromgetting in the hands of our
students who bring them toschool?
How do we help our studentsrecover who've been exposed to
(11:33):
violence?
And we need our cities then andnow really using their data to
understand not just where theviolence is, but where are our
solutions and how is that movingso that we can implement
solutions quickly to stopproblems before they escalate.
And so if the advice that I thatI give to mayors now is and
states is like, let's keeprunning that playbook.
(11:54):
And I think it starts with one,having a really strong office of
violence prevention at the locallevel, at the state level.
And over the past few years,we've seen those multiply.
There's 15 or 16 state officesof violence prevention.
There's nearly 120 localoffices.
I think that is really animportant new infrastructure
that has to be supported.
Second, we have to build ourbetter data systems so that we
(12:15):
actually are getting lawenforcement data and health data
to better to better understandwhere homicides are happening,
where nonfatal shootings arehappening, and that we can then
layer on top of that where theinvestments we're making in
homicide clearance rate anddetectives and community
violence intervention and victimservices, so that we are
matching our solutions in a veryfocused and targeted way to
(12:35):
where the problem is occurring.
And lastly, I think if I'mcities, it's it's keeping that
big tech mentality.
Even in with resources goingdown, we have to be investing in
the things that are showing realpromise of working.
And we have to keep bringingpartners to the table.
So philanthropy and healthsystems and school systems all
see themselves as part of theviolence reduction movement.
(12:56):
Um and I think it's reallypossible.
And Jeff, it's not hypotheticalbecause as you've shown, the
reductions are still happening.
And they're not happening byaccident.
They're happening because we'reseeing continued work that is
comprehensive at the local levelthat is sustaining what we've
seen.
SPEAKER_00 (13:11):
Yeah, and they're happening at a rate that at any
point in the last 60 years wouldhave been the fastest ever.
And now we're almost year fourof the fastest decline ever.
Like I like your phrasing ofpulling a lot of levers, because
I I normally call it of like wethrew a lot of crap at the wall
and some of it stuck.
I think that's a lot more artfulof pulling levers rather than
throwing mud at the wall.
(13:32):
Question that's always on mymind is You said crap.
Crap, you know, I don't want toget an expletive filter on this
one, so there's other things wecould say, but yeah, it's the
same concept.
So the question that always sortof stems from this is the data's
very clear, the work is veryclear.
People don't always believe it.
Is there a way to get people tobelieve this, to communicate it
more crystal clearly?
(13:54):
Or is this just something thatit takes a while for the good
news to spread and eventuallypeople will believe it, but just
not as it's happening?
SPEAKER_01 (14:02):
I think a few things, Jeff.
And I know you called it crapand mud, but I would say what we
tried to make was data-drivenand evidence-informed decisions
to support policies and programsthat would be effective.
The truth is that year-to-yearviolence change doesn't change
the way we've experiencedviolence in our lifetimes.
And I think the conversationabout perception, and I love how
(14:24):
you're leading it, you have totake into account that if you've
experienced violence in yourfamily, amongst your friends, on
your block, even in your city,those scars don't go away with
reductions.
That pain doesn't go away.
I know you and I've met moresurvivors that I can count.
SPEAKER_00 (14:39):
And like that mother's grief never sort of
taking it on the other end,because there's always a place
that's seen the outlier.
You know, every murder's goingdown into 80% of cities, that
means 20% are seeing anincrease.
If you're like a mayor Scott andyou've set these goals, it's
hard.
You don't exactly know what'sgonna work.
Sometimes you're not gonnasucceed to hit your goals.
What's the best way tocommunicate that concept of this
(15:02):
is hard, we're trying.
Failure doesn't mean failure, itjust means we have to keep
trying.
Or did I just answer thequestion?
So, what what are the beststrategies to combat either
misinformation or disinformationregarding gun violence when
you've got a situation where youknow the something happens,
violence falls, and thepolitician turns to the thing
(15:24):
that was happening at themoment, or the public wants to
believe that it's just becauseof non-reporting or whatever
reason that the truth is notbelieved.
How do we fight that as astrategy?
SPEAKER_01 (15:37):
Yeah, look, I think there's three things to do.
I think one is we have toimprove our understanding of
what really contributed to thesereductions year after year after
year after year.
And that's not an easy project.
I think the challenge for ourresearchers is that it's not
about what one individualprogram did in one individual
neighborhood to reduce violence.
(15:58):
It is what are the contributingfactors to a national trend
looking across jurisdictions.
And that's hard work.
And I think it begins with justbuilding a good foundation of
our understanding.
And that's bringing together aninterdisciplinary group that has
different academic backgroundsand different perspectives, and
is able to actually look at whatall went into the work of
(16:22):
violence reduction in 2021 and2022, three, four, five, and
actually start to assess well,what is likely to have
contributed to violencereduction, what's unlikely,
what's promising.
And it should then really thentry to delve into deeper
individual research projects tounderstand what happened when we
really attacked the ironpipeline, the gun trafficking
(16:42):
pipeline with gun traffickingprosecutions and straw
purchasing prosecutions andholding gun dealers that were
most closely tied with illegalguns responsible.
What did it mean when weregulated the ghost gun
industry?
What did it mean when weinvested resources in crime gun
intelligence centers andsupported law enforcement to
improve clearance rates forhomicides and nonfatal
(17:03):
shootings?
What was the effect of anational trend of investing in
community violence interventionor victim services?
Uh and I so I think there's animmediate need of like, let us
actually try to build the rightfoundation for what went into
this and then some real researchthat should be diving deeper.
That's not easy.
I don't pretend that it is, butI think it's necessary because
to see reductions at this scalefor this length of time should
(17:27):
force us all to want to answerthe question of what contributes
to the thing that we're allseeking, which is a safer
future.
And it's not just for communityviolence.
We've seen reductions in massshootings year over year.
And so we have to dive deeperinto what is helping us get to
the place that we are all tryingto get to.
Number two, I think it's we haveto keep up the work of
sustaining, taking what we thinkhas been effective and really
(17:49):
doubling down on investment.
And that could be into officesof violence prevention, it can
be into building the right crimegun intelligence center and
homicide and non-fatal shootingreview teams.
And it certainly is in investingin community violence
intervention and victimservices.
And lastly, it is how are wecommunicating?
And that's about messenger, it'sabout medium, and it's about
(18:10):
message.
And I think we too often thinkthat we can tell a national
story with nationalspokespeople, when in fact, I
think the most credible folksare those who are close to the
community.
And we have to be lifting up thevoices of those who are doing
this work in community andlocally so that they're telling
the story of how they'vecontributed.
But I think part of the issue ofwhy we don't break through on
(18:31):
these reductions is thateveryone goes to the thing that
they done first.
They say, This is what I did,this is responsible.
And I think we should get morecomfortable, all who want to see
this safer future.
And I think that is a broadswath of saying, this is what's
happening.
These are the things that wethink went into this, because
this is actually what occurredin history.
And here's the role that Iplayed.
(18:52):
Here's the policy I worked toimplement.
Here's what my unit did to solvenonfatal shootings, here's what
my health system did to set uphospital intervention programs.
And I think that's a differentway to think about how we
communicate on these reductions,is we should start with the big
collective effort and then moveto the thing that we did, as
opposed to just trying to makeit about the thing that we did
(19:13):
and that that was what is deeplyresponsible.
And so I think that's adifferent way to communicate.
It's lifting up those localvoices, telling those local
stories, finding the rightmediums to tell them in, and
being willing to share creditwith the different folks who've
helped contribute to thesereductions.
SPEAKER_00 (19:29):
So what does the future of gun violence
prevention, of this work looklike?
I'm gonna fuse in with that aquestion I've been asking all of
my guests is that is there arole for AI specifically in
this?
Have you thought through that asa as a potential contributor?
SPEAKER_01 (19:44):
I mean, look, the the future is for the first time
in history the the issue of gunviolence prevention isn't
hypothetical.
It's not in a white paper.
It's not kind of what advocateswould would ask for.
It's reality.
I mean, what we saw in theadministration that I worked for
was us pulling a thousand leversthat were informed by the
evidence and data to actuallygovern for gun violence
(20:06):
prevention.
For literally the first time inour history, we governed for gun
violence prevention.
And we did it through improvingdata systems, like at the CDC,
which produced the first evernational resource on firearm
homicide and suicide that getsyou down to the zip code level
with only a three to four monthlag.
I mean, that is so much fasterand more localized than what
we'd ever seen throughincorporating the data that you
(20:27):
were, Jeff, responsible forunearthing and incorporating
that into our decision making,for helping Nibers to make sure
that we actually are bringing ininformation on non-fatal
shootings and incorporatingthose recommendations.
We did it through policyimplementation when it came to
regulating ghost guns or guntrafficking or machine gun
conversion devices, maximizingour background check system,
(20:48):
improving our crime gunintelligence.
We did it through investing inthe right kind of programs in
community violence interventionand victim services, as well as
larger investments into localgovernment.
And we did it throughpartnerships.
And I think when you ask aboutthe future, we don't have to
live in the hypothetical.
We can live in the reality ofthat comprehensive approach.
And maybe a governor or a mayoror even a president doesn't want
(21:12):
to do all those things, butgosh, that gives you a lot to
choose from if you want toattack this crisis.
And I think the worst thing wecan do is going back to the
mentality of like, let's just gopick the one thing.
Let's just go do this one thing.
This is the thing.
And I say that not as aresearcher or an academic who
might say, well, this is the onething, but no one has, in fact,
told me that yet, if it was thisone thing.
I don't think they ever will.
(21:32):
And I think that is the mistakewe see in debates is we always
try to reduce it to this is theone thing.
Instead of telling people, like,which is what I actually think
they want, is we're doing allthe things.
We're doing the prevention,we're doing the intervention,
we're doing the accountability,and we're doing the recovery.
And I think that is our futureis we lean into all of it.
And that's about the right gunsafety laws and implementing
(21:53):
them responsibly.
It's about the big communitylevel prevention work in terms
of cleaning and greening space.
And making sure we haveeducational opportunities for
youth and economicopportunities.
It's about the targetedintervention for those who are
most at highest risk forcommitting acts of violence.
And it comes through theaccountability of solving
homicides and shootings and therecovery of victim services.
(22:16):
That playbook is no longer ahypothetical.
It is so real.
And I saw it firsthand.
And we could be running it andinnovating on it everywhere.
And if we do that, we have achance to sustain this fragile
progress.
And that's my belief of what wesaw last year.
And to your question on AI, Ihave been thinking a lot about
it.
It is a really excellentquestion.
And I think there's a few waysthat AI can be helpful.
(22:39):
One is there's a lot ofdatabases when it comes to
violence, its effects, and howit's showing up that we need
help assessing better in realtime and vetting.
And we have to be thinking aboutlaw enforcement data and health
data and how do we synthesizethis large amount of input into
something that is kind of usablefor policymaking and decision
(23:02):
making.
I don't think you can everseparate an expert like you or
others who are looking at thedata, ensuring that it is
correct and accurate.
But I do think AI can help usleverage large data sets to get
some better insights.
Number two, I think there'sissues that come with gun
trafficking or emerging firearmthreats where AI could be of
(23:24):
advantage.
And I'll name two.
One of the last things we didwas try to focus on the
proliferation of these machinegun conversion devices.
These are small parts thatattach to a semi-automatic
handgun.
They make it into a machine gun.
Some research has shown thatthat is keeping our homicide
numbers high.
And I think that's important,Jeff.
It's like even though we'reseeing these declines, like a
city like Chicago think thoughtthat, you know, maybe a quarter
(23:45):
of their homicides were due justto these devices.
So how are they getting here?
One is that they were beingillegally imported from China.
Chinese gangs were puttingwebsites up that sold them
directly to consumers.
You know, our administrationfocused on shutting down those
illegal websites because theywere just they were available
through a Google search.
You could go Google machine gunconversion device or what
they're called lock switches,and you could find a website
(24:07):
like it's Amazon and you couldbe ordered into your house.
The administration took steps toinvestigate and shut those down.
We shut down 350, but it was anindividual looking for websites,
taking screenshots, capturingthat evidence.
I actually think there are toolswe can build with AI that would
more effectively scrape thewebsite for websites selling
those illegal products so thatwe're not playing a game of
(24:28):
whack-a-mole, but we in fact aremore effectively using
technology and reducing thecosts to identifying and
shutting down sites like that.
The same thing goes for how doyou prevent the illegal 3D
printing of these switches, theother way that they're showing
up.
And I think AI can play a bigrole in developing the
technology technology solutionsthat can prevent the 3D printing
of those illegal machine gunconversion devices.
(24:50):
That's not hypothetical.
That's a project we started thatthe Fund for Safe for Future
continues to support, is thedevelopment of the technology.
And it's so close, Jeff.
Like I literally have seen theprototypes, like it is right
there that we can build inthrough uh sequence analysis and
functionality analysis, alongwith AI, the ability to
basically put an antivirussoftware into a 3D printer or
(25:12):
into slicer software to preventthe 3D printing of an illegal
Glock switch.
And that's like those are prettyremarkable, tangible solutions
that would be very difficult todo without the power of AI.
SPEAKER_00 (25:23):
That's a great answer.
And I think the most productiveanswer I've heard of like very
specific is the ways to use it.
So uh I really appreciate youhearing you telling us that.
My last question is you've livedsuch an and I'm not like this
isn't a postscript to your lifeor career, but you've done so
much so far.
SPEAKER_01 (25:39):
What career advice would you have for somebody that
is interested in making adifference or in just doing
something interesting in the intheir I I think there's a few
things that I've learned alongthe way that I'm happy to share.
And I'm definitely no expert,but it's always be willing and
ready to play your part.
I think do the thing in front ofyou and do it as well as you
can.
Uh, and then you'll get anotheropportunity and another one
(26:00):
after that.
But it's about being willing toplay the part that you have in
that moment.
The second is be good to yourteam and thrive in a team and
realize that success doesn'tjust come from the person on
top, but it's the person all theway down below and everyone in
the middle.
And that real success comes fromeveryone on the team doing their
best at the part they'replaying.
(26:21):
And the third thing is there'sreally no secret.
It's just hard work.
It's being willing to kind ofpush yourself to become an
expert in your particular craft,be it policy or data analysis or
research or communications,whatever it is, the thing that
you have the talents for, try tobecome the master of and then
continue to put the work in.
When I was working at the lawfirm, I remember the most senior
(26:42):
partner who's literally one ofthe best litigators in in the
country, telling me that, youknow, everyone who's preparing
for trial is going to do 80% ofthe work because that's what's
most likely to come up.
And the challenge is can youpush yourself to do that last
20%?
The things that are mostunlikely to happen, but almost
certainly one of those things inthat bottom 20% will come up.
And if you're prepared for thatopportunity, then you can be
(27:05):
successful.
And that literally is thedifference between success and
failure, are sometimes as thinas that like one moment, that
one opportunity.
And so, you know, I think that'sthe advice I would give.
And and the other, the otherthing is kind of what I said at
the top, Jeff.
It's like people can see you orme now and think about like the
biggest accomplishments we'vehad, but it's all of those quiet
moments of hard work that gointo it.
It's answering the phones at thefront desk, it's taking those
(27:27):
entry-level jobs, uh, and it'sdoing all of those things that
aren't seen.
And it's the hard work behindthe scenes that goes into uh a
successful career.
So I guess that's kind of what II probably offer to someone, as
well as as well as to haveoptimism in the thing you're
doing.
That's probably the last andmost important.
Have optimism in the thing youare doing that you if you don't
believe you're gonna besuccessful in the thing you're
(27:49):
doing, you're never gonnaconvince someone else of it.
SPEAKER_00 (27:51):
That's great.
Well, Rob, I really appreciateyour coming on.
This has been a fantasticconversation, and I can't say
thank you enough.
So thank you.
And uh hopefully we'll crosspaths soon again.
SPEAKER_01 (28:01):
Uh I'm sure we will, Jeff.
And and hopefully next timewe'll have uh, you know, not an
awkward hug.
SPEAKER_00 (28:07):
We we we didn't tell that story, so we'll uh we'll
leave the listeners'imaginations to that one.
SPEAKER_01 (28:12):
Great, Jeff.
Thank you so much for having me.
I've really enjoyed talking toyou and and digging into some of
these issues.
SPEAKER_00 (28:17):
Rob, that was awesome.
Thank you so much.
Thanks for listening to theJeffalytics Podcast.
Be sure to subscribe and tolearn more, head on over to
ahdatalytics.com for moreinformation and previous
episodes.
If you like what you heard,please leave a glowing review,
which will help others todiscover the show.
Until next time, I'm Jeff Asher.
Popular Podcasts
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com