Attorney General Dave Yost talks gun regulations across the state

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
It's too wet outside to be in the yard today,
and so why not sit back and listen to On
Target this live at LAPD. We have news, we have
a gun of the week, and Attorney Dave Yost is
up next stand by for On Target.

Speaker 2 (00:15):
Good afternoon, Welcome to on Target.

Speaker 1 (00:16):
We're broadcasting live from the studios of LAPD Farms Range
and Training Facility. It's located at nine nine nine Triple
nine Bethel Road, just west of three point fifteen. If
you haven't been here before, guys, we're gonna we usually
try to ease into the show. We're gonna jump into
the show today because we have our good friend and
are a really good friend, Attorney General Dave yosas online
with us.

Speaker 2 (00:35):
How you doing, sir?

Speaker 3 (00:37):
I am well, how are you?

Speaker 2 (00:38):
It is so good to hear your voice.

Speaker 1 (00:40):
I know it's been a minute since you've been on
and I've had all these things rolling around in my
head and I'm so glad you called in today.

Speaker 3 (00:47):
Well let's talk about them.

Speaker 2 (00:49):
Some of them might have to talk about all air,
but that's a whole nother thing.

Speaker 1 (00:53):
But uh no, we saw you in the news today
and actually we picked up on it as well. I
wanted to start out by talking about some of the
oral arguments that the Supreme Court of Ohio heard this week.

Speaker 3 (01:06):
Yeah, it's a really weird case. It might be the
first time in history that I've agreed with Zach Klein,
a leftist city attorney in Alumbos, Ohios. That is case
in front of the Supreme Court is about a very
narrow issue, which is should a one local judge in

(01:29):
one county be able to put a law on hold
for the entire state. And this is kind of the
same thing that's going on at the federal level, where
we've got a few judges that have, you know, think
they're supervisors in the entire federal government and are just
obstructing the way for President Trump and his efforts to

(01:54):
rein in the scope and size and cost of government.
But the thing that brought the case up is the
firearms ordinance, that control ordinance, that is the city of
Columbus tried to enact. Now, for your listeners, Eric, I

(02:14):
know you're you're very familiar with this, but the state
legislature had passed the law that said you can't you know,
we're not going to have a patchwork quilt of different
laws about guns. You know, the state is going to
have one law for the whole state, and we don't
want good Second Amendment citizens that are law abiding until

(02:37):
they accidentally cross a jurisdictional line somewhere. Now there's some
local law that you know, they may they may have
violated unwittingly. So one law for the state. The city
Columbus tries to to pass its own law in spite
of that state law, and Patriots went to Delaware County

(03:04):
and we're part of Columbus is in Delaware County and
sued to stop the law, which is appropriate. We don't
like it when one judge in one county can subvert
the electoral process and the legislative process. So we're in

(03:25):
the Supreme Court right now not arguing about whether Columbus
can do this. And I'm on record in court fighting
and saying Columbus doesn't have any right to do this.
We've already won some cases around this general preemption issue.
But what we're arguing about is, and Zach Klein and
I both agree on this thing, that you can't have

(03:47):
one county judge who is going to overrule the entire legislature,
as all ohiolands that's just not the way it should work,
or it does work, it's anti Democrats attic, and that
was what the argument was about.

Speaker 1 (04:03):
So how do you think it went. I didn't hear
any of the results. Do you know any of the
results at this point? Or is that something we sht
have to wait for?

Speaker 3 (04:12):
Yeah? Yeah, yeah, you know, you don't predict what a
chef or a judge is going to do before they
do it. So we're all waiting. But I'm cautiously optimistic
because particularly Justice Pat Dwine had previously written that this
is a problem that needs to be addressed, that you

(04:34):
shouldn't be able to have a single court judge upending
the Remember, an active legislature has been passed by a
majority of the elected representatives of the people, and it's
been signed by the governor before it goes into effect.
How does a county judge, you know, tell the entire
state that doesn't apply. Now there's people woul say, well,

(04:59):
what if it's you know, horribly horribly wrong, you can
still do a class action for all similarly situated people.
But unless you go through the additional procedural hoops for
a class action suit, the case ought to just be
the case or controversy between the parties in that jurisdiction

(05:21):
and should not be have statewide application.

Speaker 2 (05:25):
Right, We're talking to Attorney General Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost.
Dave it is.

Speaker 1 (05:30):
I mean, and we look at this too. I mean,
it pequked our interest just because of the nature of
this particular case. And you know, we sit around and
we look at what the city have proposed and say, hey,
if what they proposed was so darn good, you know,
why wouldn't we adopt it, you know as a state.

Speaker 2 (05:48):
But it's just not that.

Speaker 1 (05:50):
And you get these cities continually like Columbus, Cleveland, Cincinnati,
who I'm assuming using taxpayer money is to try to
challenge prem which has I mean, has gone up to
Supreme Court. I think John Willy said two or three.

Speaker 4 (06:04):
Times, yeah, yeah, two or three times yeah, and never
have they prevailed.

Speaker 1 (06:09):
So so I mean, going forward, hopefully you know, at
some point they can they can sit back and maybe
I mean, if if they do have a valid argument
on something that would affect crime in the streets, so
let's let's talk about it and run it through up
through Ohio.

Speaker 2 (06:26):
But stop this, like you said, patchwork.

Speaker 1 (06:28):
I can only imagine if we allowed these cities to
put into place a magazine ban in Westerville and and
this ban and Whitehall, and you would have no idea
as you drive through these cities how to handle yourself
if you're a lawful gun owner.

Speaker 3 (06:46):
Well, and that's what the left wing folks want. They
want to make it so difficult for you to own
a gun or to carry it to defend yourself that
you'll just give up. Fortunately, our legis has active to
make sure that there's one uniform law across the state.
And I'm hopeful that we're nearing the end of this

(07:08):
argument and it's going to be settled going into the future.

Speaker 1 (07:12):
Yeah, as well, let's talk about some positive things. I
was reading as well that we're kicking off the VR
goggles again for ELI training going forward. For those who
don't know about that, talk about that for a minute.

Speaker 3 (07:29):
So your typical training for a police office, so you
get a little bit of hands on, you get a
lot of book learning like you did in school. But
any cop that's been on the beat will tell you,
and I know you're sitting with a couple there, the
book and the classroom is not the real world. And

(07:50):
when it goes down, it goes down fast. So we
have After you get out of school and get your certificate,
you typically go on a training where you ride with
an older officer what we call an FTO or a
field training officer to kind of get a feel for it.
But a rookie still rookie, and you don't really know

(08:10):
how you're going to respond to that trauma, that stress
moment when fight, flight or flee kicks in from your
lizard brain. And what the VR stuff does is it
actually puts you in the situation. It's incredibly immersive and powerful.
You get the same emotional stress reactions. And so the

(08:35):
only difference between doing that and being on the street
with your FTO is if you take your gun out
and shoot somebody and it turns out you're mistaken, there's
there's no harm there. You know, you can learn from
that and you can you know, go through other scenarios this.

(08:56):
It's been incredibly well received by officers that have done it.
We've got lots of real world scenarios at this point,
including you know, people in psychotic breaks and you know,
mental health issues, your domestic violence, which as you know,
is one of the most dangerous stops or one of
the dangerous incidents an officer responds to. And we're really

(09:20):
excited about this because we think it brings an added
dimension to the training that is going to get officers
ready for the street much more deeply and much more quickly.

Speaker 1 (09:32):
Yeah, and I mean you should be you and your
stat should be committed. I mean this is in the
time that I've been in law enforcement and certainly add
for you the progression of trying to immerse law enforcement
into real world scenarios. When I started, it was as
simple as you're on the range, the targets are edged
and all of a sudden they turn and there's good
guy bad guy. That was the extent of it. And

(09:55):
now what you're talking about is remarkable. I mean, you
put on the goes and you are immersed. I mean
it's kind of a weird feeling because you feel like
you're there and in law enforce, not like in many
other professions. It's all about that repetition. It's doing, it's practicing.
So if you're ever in that scenario, you know in

(10:15):
your mind, I've been here before. Oh I've seen this
play out before, and you can hopefully react in a
more natural manner than having to think.

Speaker 2 (10:24):
That, oh geez, now what do I do?

Speaker 1 (10:26):
And you wanted to become second nature, and this type
of tool does that, and we're so thankful for it.

Speaker 3 (10:32):
I got to tell you, I fancy myself a kind
of a tough guy. I mean, I was a newspaper
reporter for a while and was on crime scenes, and
then I was a prosecutor. I've seen lots of really
awful stuff out there, lots of blood and gore and
dead bodies. And I put these things on and went

(10:54):
through about a twenty minute scenario that ended up in
a fatal use of force. And when I took those
goggles off, I was shaking, and you know, my eyes
were missing, and I mean I had a reaction as

(11:15):
though I had been there when the lethal force was used.
It is a powerful, powerful tool, and I think it
has I really think it has the potential to take
our officers to the next level.

Speaker 1 (11:31):
Is there any I mean, have you ever I'm sure
you guys have. Have you ever put local media through it?
Or civilians? I mean, I think there's a lot to
be said to show some of these these people who
are you know, quick to come on the scene and
say the officer should have done X, Y Z. But
to put them through something like this, and it's a simulation,
to show them, you know.

Speaker 2 (11:51):
A fraction of what the actual stress level would be
under an actual scenario. I think that would be so powerful.

Speaker 3 (11:59):
You know, that's a great idea, Eric, I think we
ought to do. Of course, for years, right after the
George Floyd thing, when we were having all the nonsense
about you know, well, you know, why don't the police
just you know, shoot them in the leg or shoot
the gun out of their hands, like on TV, we

(12:21):
started bringing into the simulators, which are not as advanced
as the VR, but we've been using those for about
fifteen years, and we would have we would bring the
TV reporter in, put the blue gun in their hand,
bring up a scenario and say, all right, you're a

(12:41):
police officer, go into this scenario and make the right decision.
And most of the time the reporters died in the simulation,
but they came out of it with their eyes wide open.
I can only imagine if they went through this sells
what would look.

Speaker 5 (13:01):
Like, right, I'm looking forward to seeing. This is actually
the first I've heard of the new VR system, and
I think it'd be a great opportunity for all departments
to have it at mandatory training for especially for smaller
departments that don't see the crime and don't get involved
in it that much because of where they're located, versus

(13:23):
like the city officers that have so much more calls,
more gun calls, more domestic violence calls, and they get
so much more used to it and are able to
deal with it a little easier than your smaller department, right,
And I think it's awesome, And Dave, I mean, kudos
to you to get this going. I look forward to.

Speaker 1 (13:43):
It and I think too, I mean, I would love
to bring something similar to this to the concealed carrier holders.
I mean to people who are out there. Karen, We've
talked about it for a long time, and it's neat.
With the VR, you don't need the footprint that you
used to have to have when you had the big
you know, simulation rooms and stuff. So, I mean, it's
great technology and some of it even now you can

(14:05):
actually load specific videos, so they have the ability to Okay,
if you live in the north end of town, come here,
do the simulator. We're going to record Walmart down the street.
And it looks like you're walking to Walmart off of
Bethel Road and here. I mean, so it's you know,
it's scenarios where you would recognize the setting. I mean,
that's so powerful. I think it's the possibilities are so and.

Speaker 5 (14:25):
Not only having the media go through this and show
them what the officers go through, have the prosecutors and
the judges do it. I mean, what more information could
they possibly need then to feel that stress and that second,
split second decision making that we have to go through.

Speaker 6 (14:43):
Right, good point.

Speaker 2 (14:44):
Right, we're talking to Attorney General Dave Yostave.

Speaker 5 (14:47):
You have one more second.

Speaker 3 (14:49):
I do well.

Speaker 1 (14:50):
One other thing, and this is more a little bit
on a personal nature, but it came up a couple
of times this week and I just want your.

Speaker 2 (14:56):
Thoughts on it.

Speaker 1 (14:57):
We see what appears to be such discrepancy between prosecutors
and judges from county to county, and this week I
just happened to be involved in a couple things, obviously
in Franklin County, and was really disappointed at the lack
of the system to take a case and go with it.

(15:18):
And one of the things actually hit us here and
we haven't even talked about it yet. And I don't
know if we mentioned this one to you previously, but
we had somebody threatened to come shoot up our store recently,
and it was at the end of January, and they
posted a picture of our building happened to be of
our Trump sign and said something to the effect, looks

(15:38):
like a good day to shoot up a shooting range,
And obviously it put us in.

Speaker 2 (15:42):
A high alert state. Authorities were called.

Speaker 1 (15:48):
I mean, all these things went into place because you
don't know the capabilities of the person posting something like that,
or maybe they're inspiring somebody else.

Speaker 2 (15:57):
And it came down this week.

Speaker 3 (15:58):
I understand that. I wonder if stand you're in a
position to return fire.

Speaker 1 (16:02):
Well, that's a whole different ball game, because.

Speaker 2 (16:07):
Some of the employees were anxious to cover the doors.
Let's just say that.

Speaker 1 (16:10):
But the thing that was so frustrating, and I think
this to be true when this was we know who
it is, and all along we were thinking about this
is probably an inducing panic charge. I mean, it met
all the criteria of inducing panic. Certainly sent us into
a tailspin for a few hours there when we didn't
know if it was imminent.

Speaker 2 (16:31):
We had to check people in the store, and it
seems like that.

Speaker 1 (16:34):
It seems now I think this is true that the
county is saying that that they wouldn't charge that and
the best they can do is disorderly conduct. And I'm thinking,
I mean, how do you How does that set a
message out there that you can go out there and
say something so dangerous and really barely get slapped on
the wrist for that. I mean, it's so frustrating what

(16:55):
we see county to county.

Speaker 3 (16:59):
It is, and I certainly don't want to condone the
soft on crime approach that I see in some of
our big cities. At the same time, I have to
point out that we don't really want to give the
government the authority to decide what's dangerous and what's not,

(17:23):
because brother, this show would be deemed by mayor ginther
to be dangerous, So you do not want to give
them the authorities. So the way a law works in
any of these things, when you're dealing with speech alone,
is that there has to be some additional objective element

(17:45):
that makes it more than just speech. So in inducing panic,
you have to have members of the public that are
panicked in aggravated menacing or menacing threats you have to
have a present capability of being able to carry out

(18:07):
the threats and a bona fide belief that that might
happen in the part of the victim. So there's these
additional pieces that we do that actually protects our freedom.
And I understand what you're saying, and totally, totally I'm

(18:27):
on board. And what they did was wrong on the
other hand on this particular case. And I haven't seen
the file. I just got your thirty second description of
what the facts were. I don't see enough here based
on your summary to go forward with the charge there
might be. That doesn't mean it's not there. I'm just

(18:48):
I want to point out to everybody a little educational moment.
Don't let the government start policing speech because it will
all be in jail.

Speaker 2 (18:59):
Great point. Great point.

Speaker 1 (19:00):
And that's why I mean that, that's why we need
to lean on and look at people like yourself. I
mean that, you know, we're just a lay person in
that regard, and it's it's good to hear that side
of it, and sometimes that we need to open our
eyes up a little bit and say, Okay, you know what,
there's other ramifications and if we do this, then like
you said, who knows what's next though, so definitely appreciate it. Well,
we have taken way more of your time than than

(19:24):
you know. I know you have on a business Saturday time.

Speaker 6 (19:31):
Love having you on in person day.

Speaker 1 (19:32):
Yeah, let me know when you want to come by
and brush up on some of the shooting and stuff.

Speaker 2 (19:36):
I would love to go out there with you again.

Speaker 3 (19:38):
Yeah. I tell my security detail yesterday that I've had
I've had a very high level of frustration the last
three or four weeks. And I usually shoot, as you know,
a nine or a three eighty, depending on what I'm wearing.
But I'm thinking I need to get that forty smith

(20:00):
out and do a couple of hundred rounds uh and
hurt my wrists, just that kind of.

Speaker 6 (20:05):
Work it out.

Speaker 2 (20:07):
We're ready for you anytime.

Speaker 5 (20:08):
Just yell, I move that forty up to a forty five.
There my friend.

Speaker 2 (20:15):
You guys, Well, thanks so much, David, have a good
great what are we lost?

Speaker 3 (20:26):
We'll talk about it and purson over coffee.

Speaker 2 (20:29):
Yeah, this sounds good.

Speaker 1 (20:30):
Thank you so much for calling Attorney in General Ohio
turned General Davie. It is always good to hear from guys.
We got to jump to a quick quick break and
we come back. We're gonna get to news got of
the weekend, so much more on Talker Broadcasting.

Speaker 2 (20:40):
Last ones too is LPD Farms Range.

Speaker 1 (20:42):
We'll be right back. Welcome back to on Talking. I'm
your hysteric joined today in the l EPD shuess. I
didn't even get to say who was here?

Speaker 2 (20:54):
JC is here? Jac I got big edge right.

Speaker 6 (20:57):
Here, yay, and we have an audience here, you have
an audien.

Speaker 1 (21:03):
It's so good to hear Attorney General day ghost. I
mean I could sit here and talk to him for
an hour. We do when he comes in, but so
good to hear from him and thank him again for
giving us a call. Stuff a couple of things, guys.
And since we're kind of flipped around a little bit here,
I wanted to do you know what what I'm still
stuffed ed from all the python I hate last night.

Speaker 2 (21:26):
Yeah, yeah, I mean that's missed out on that.

Speaker 5 (21:29):
How good was it?

Speaker 2 (21:30):
It was really good? Actually, everything was really good.

Speaker 1 (21:33):
We tried Luke and I had We had python, we
had yak, we had camel meatballs, we had all kinds
of stuff, Bobcat chowder, which was phenomenal, Venice.

Speaker 2 (21:43):
And of course, yea alligator.

Speaker 1 (21:45):
It was really really good. We were at the wild
Game dinner last night. Great event. And I do have
one little thing that came out of it, and I
hate to I hate to bring these things up on air.
You know me, you know me, and you're we call
you big Ed because you're kind of a towering person.
You kind of man imposing and yes, all right, you
kind of command presence and stuff. And you're out there

(22:06):
and you deer hunt, and I mean you're I mean,
you're like the man's man. And then I catch when
listen to this JC that in sometime around twenty nineteen,
he goes and gets a deer, but he has somebody
else clean it for him.

Speaker 2 (22:19):
Well, wait a minute, that's what I heard ed. Now,
I don't know, I'm not gonna deny it.

Speaker 5 (22:23):
It's true, but I fact that I asked him to
clean it. He came out when hold on, hold on,
I was bragging about the fact that I shot this
nice buck. Yes, and a good friend of mine that's
out there at the farm where we hunted. He shows
up and he says, Wow, that's awesome, and he goes,
let me clean it for you. No, I'm big ed.

(22:44):
Let me go ahead and clean that. Hey, you know what,
I wanted to get his expertise cleaning and see if
I'm doing it wrong.

Speaker 2 (22:51):
Okay, let me know. I mean, thank you, Jerry, and
thanks for telling him that, Jerry, I have pictures too.

Speaker 6 (22:57):
By the way, Oh my goodness.

Speaker 2 (22:58):
Yes, that's what happens when you don't show up big
ed at these events. Guys.

Speaker 1 (23:02):
We should thank our guests from last week, our good
friend Spencer Badger from CPD. He's the officer who got fired.
And if you haven't heard that interview, definitely worthwhile going
back and listening to. We're gonna post on Facebook hopefully
today a couple of QR codes to his videos and
a QR code if you want to be able to
help him out. And we're also announcing today and I

(23:22):
think it might start up today, if not on definitely
on Tuesday. We are going to raffle off a Smith
and Wesson FPC that's the footing nine millimeter. Yeah, we're
going to raffle those off twenty dollars a ticket, and
all the proceeds of that are going to go to
him and his family because obviously now with him getting

(23:43):
let go by the city struggling a little.

Speaker 6 (23:45):
Bit there, family and the kids and just on the
you know boo.

Speaker 2 (23:49):
Yeah, So stop by this door and get a part
of that is definitely for a good call.

Speaker 4 (23:53):
And all the money is going to go All the
money is going to go to the All the money.

Speaker 2 (23:56):
Is going to the family. Yep. And let's see what
else do we have. Oh, we gott to thank our sponsors.

Speaker 3 (24:02):
You know what.

Speaker 2 (24:02):
I actually had a chance this week to go call
the sponsors, and actually haven't talked to them all that
much in the last couple of months, but I wanted
to give a shout out us. Law Shield has been
a great sponsor of ours. They do so much for us.

Speaker 1 (24:16):
A great company, and they not only partner with us,
but they partner with a lot of people around the
country that carry firearms. And it is if you haven't
checked into it, it's certainly worthwhile checking into it. They
are a good company, and they have a new program
going on. I think if you come here and sign up,
not only do you get the first month first month free,
I think they're given a twenty dollars gift card to

(24:37):
spend in the store as well.

Speaker 2 (24:38):
So a lot of good things. Definitely one that we recommend.

Speaker 1 (24:42):
Another sponsor we haven't talked about in forever is Jackson
Egress Windows. They have been a sponsor of ours since
the beginning, and you might say, who is Jackson Egress Windows?
If you have a basement and you want to really
turn that into a living space, they have the ability
to take that basement window that's small windows sometimes you
see that you know, in the basement, and make that
into an exit or I mean really open up a

(25:05):
basement to be living space. They do a wonderful job
and have been a sponsor of artist from the beginning.

Speaker 2 (25:11):
And what else.

Speaker 1 (25:12):
Of course, Black Shooting Center a lot of events coming up.
Their Spring Trap League is getting ready to start, so
you want to check that out on May night though.
On May nights it's their annual clay shoot to support
Lifeside Ohio and the suicide prevention. This is the one
that we're in part part of. We sit on the
board along with Vance Outdoors and Black Wing And I

(25:33):
sent a message to those guys this week they're gonna
come and join us again for a show.

Speaker 2 (25:37):
I don't know if you remember that, all right?

Speaker 4 (25:38):
I remember all these shows. Yeah, it's an excellent, excellent, right,
especially in shotgun outdoor.

Speaker 2 (25:42):
Shoot Yeah, definitely, and it's a fush star. Always good
to partner with Marcover Advance and of course Joe at
at Black Wings, so that's coming up torely.

Speaker 1 (25:51):
And then finally finally River's Edge guys, if you haven't
been to their new place, you got to check it
out in Hilliard.

Speaker 2 (25:57):
It's in the old Bobby Ray Hall building. Yeah, I've
been there, gorgeous building. I popped in this week.

Speaker 1 (26:03):
I was looking for a new carry bag and they
have a great selection of like Vertex and all kinds
of not just one, but like a whole wall of
all kinds of stuff in addition to knives and all
kinds of other little things. I talked to Mike, one
of the owners, and they are close to coming out
with their own line of knives, which is really really neat.
So watch for that and they're gonna pop in and

(26:25):
talk about.

Speaker 6 (26:26):
It here to the River's Edges.

Speaker 2 (26:28):
So with the yeah, there you go, there you go,
and what else? JC, you got a little news we have?

Speaker 4 (26:35):
I have a lot of news, but here's so here's
a big one that just happened this week. On Monday,
the seventh Quarter of Appeals. Uh, this pretty much endorses
the National Firearms Act. There were challenges to that on
somebody who had a short build rifle. They were caught
with a short buried rifle, and they said, look, you

(26:57):
know they're popular, they're out there, and really according to
the Brew and the Heller decisions that they thought that, hey,
they're not uncommon and I shouldn't have to register it.

Speaker 6 (27:06):
That was the challenge.

Speaker 4 (27:07):
So he did get arrested, he did get charged, so
he took it up to the Court of Appeals. Well,
the unfortunate news is the Court of Appeals the three
judges that heard this were all recent bidenpointees one, two, three,
and Judge Joshua Coller I wrote the course unanimous court

(27:30):
opinion that yeah, he can be charged now the seventh
the seventh overseas Illinois, Indiana, and Wisconsin, so all like
Bluish states. I'm very very blue, and I think that's
why they're there and is right. So, but his quote
was simply that the record does not show that such
firearms are commonly used by ordinary law biting people. And yeah,

(27:55):
short built rifles are not as common, so you can't
argue with that. But he said that they're not used
for the lawful purposes of self defense. So this ruling
pretty much further backs the NFA's one of the first
rulings they had, but pretty much when the court was established,
and it was called the US versus Miller, And this

(28:17):
is back in the days with the gangsters, you know,
sought off bars and all of a sudden, we're shooting
up everything, Robin Banks and with all the prohibition stuff.

Speaker 6 (28:26):
That's how long it goes back.

Speaker 4 (28:27):
And they said it at metter fact that case actually
was on a sought off shotgun that the person said
that the court upheld that.

Speaker 6 (28:34):
So they they did that. Here's what surprised me about this.

Speaker 4 (28:37):
I guess it shouldn't have surprised me based in this court.

Speaker 6 (28:39):
But the judges, the three.

Speaker 4 (28:41):
Judges appointees Kanda's Ejection A Kuwumi, John Lee and as
I in the previous mentioned judge, what they noted in
the writing They said, they noted that the that the
law doesn't outright ban short bailed rifles and instead it
seats to collect taxes on them and register them. Uh

(29:03):
and because they're not that common, So they didn't they
believe that that was Okay, Well, here's why I didn't like,
He goes.

Speaker 6 (29:09):
He also concluded that the effective.

Speaker 4 (29:10):
Guns aren't in common use, as I mentioned, especially since
they're less popular than the AR fifteens, that we've already
concluded the government can ban.

Speaker 5 (29:22):
Wow.

Speaker 4 (29:23):
So they said, you know, knowing that that was their mindset,
what what would pass muster there? But they've already concluded
the government can ban.

Speaker 7 (29:32):
The sale of AR fifteen and I would I would
argue had said it would be short barreled rifles would
be much more popular if there wasn't a tax stamp
on I mean, I would only imagine that it would
be up there.

Speaker 6 (29:45):
But to the fact that how could that stand a chance?

Speaker 4 (29:48):
Where he goes, Oh, right, well, we already conan all
the AR fifteens, of which there's over thirty million of
recently on the and that that statistic of thirty million
that was from nineteen ninety to nineteen twenty two when
this period came out the FBI, and it has been
for sale since January of nineteen sixty four, So how
many were from sixty.

Speaker 2 (30:07):
Four all the way up?

Speaker 4 (30:08):
They didn't even include though, So there's a lot of
those out there. So anyway, they can appeal it to
the scent to the full Seventh Circuit, which already made
that opinion on the air fifteen s R taken the
Supreme Court. Okay, that's a big one that we talked
about earlier and you sent me that information. Since then,
I found out something else more woes for sig sour.

(30:28):
The Washington State Criminal Justice Training Commission has prohibited recruits
from training with a sigur P three twenty. This is
just new as being the pistol from the Commission's campuses
after report that it can fire without pulling the trigger.
So this was issued on February twenty fourth by the
executive director, Monica Alexander, who made a permanent prohibition of

(30:52):
the SIGs hour three twenty on February. Prior to that,
on October of last year, they put a temporary band
because of recruit and the basic training class that they
hadn't Spokane reported that a sig sour self discharged as
he drew it to fire targets on the police range
and the round instruct the ground behind him, wounding a

(31:13):
recruit and injuring a firearm instructor. The recruit insisted this
trigger was indexed alongside the frame, and it was outside
the trigger guard when he drew the weapon.

Speaker 6 (31:25):
So people go, yeah, yeah, that's what they insist.

Speaker 4 (31:26):
But the firearms instructor confirmed, stating he watched the recruit's
hand and that the weapon immediately fired when he's withdrawing
it and his finger was not on the trigger.

Speaker 2 (31:37):
So what did they do?

Speaker 4 (31:38):
They did something smart. They said, hey, after all these incidents,
let's get a temporary ban until we worked this, and
they performed a working group of police officials, firearms instructors,
Criminal Justice Training Commission staff, and representatives from SIG. They
had working groups. They had four meetings and what they
did was review reports but also videos, and the work

(31:59):
group uncovered a number of lawsuits and videos of the incidents,
including a six hour P three twenty firing while in
a holster and included a twenty twenty two bodycam video
of an officer in Milwaukee who was wounded when his
partner's gun.

Speaker 6 (32:14):
Discharged what was in the holster? And I love this one.

Speaker 4 (32:18):
I loved it, but another no one got injured, but
another body camera video in twenty twenty three incident in
New Jersey where an officer's holstered firearm goes off in
the lobby of the police station, so they had videos
of all this. So the Washington Post and this firearms
investigation group, normally our friends, the Trace, in a story

(32:39):
published in twenty twenty three, detailed the safety issues surrounding
the P three twenty six hour and found more than
eighty instances where people were injured by their own gun.
There were several saying, hey, it went off, it went off,
but no one got hurt. But they had eighty and
many of those were supported by Several of those were
supported by body cams. This gun has been out since

(33:02):
twenty fourteen. There's over five hundred thousand in circulation in
the United States. And of course this is the firearm
that's the standard arm called the M seventeen and M
eighteen for our US military. So this all happened and
on the date of this this this came out. But
so what did SIG do? They just responded and number one,

(33:24):
when I saw this, which you sent me first, I said,
confidential for sigstaff. But then it seemed like another public
release that was released on letterhead, and they just called
it the truth about the SIG P three twenty That
was their headline and it just starts out the first sentence.
And this was a March seventh they released this. The
P three twenty capitalized all the way cannot under any

(33:48):
circumstances discharge without a trigger poll.

Speaker 2 (33:52):
That is a fact.

Speaker 4 (33:53):
Now I'm reading verbatim from this, and then this is verbatim.
The allegations against the P three twenty are nothing more
than individuals seeking to profit or to avoid personal liability,
and recently anti gun groups, members of the mainstream media,
triveal attorneys, another uninformed, agenda driven parties have launched attacks
on one of six hours most trusted, most tested, and
most popular products, the P three to twenty pistol. In

(34:16):
all cases, these individuals have an ulterior motive behind the
baseless allegation the P three twenty can fire without a
trigger pull, and they have no evidence, no data, no
empirical testing to support any of their claims. Instead, they
choose to misrepresent clear negligent discharges as a design problem.

Speaker 6 (34:34):
It goes on.

Speaker 4 (34:34):
I'm not going to read the but basically they're saying
the ruderics high, this is unfair, and that this gun
has been severely tested and it will not fire. So
it said the end, but they warn the industry, said, industry,
take notice of what's happening today to sig sour with
the anti gun mob and their lawfare tactics. It can

(34:55):
happen tomorrow at another firearms manufacture, and then another and
another today for six hour this ends.

Speaker 5 (35:04):
So there.

Speaker 1 (35:04):
It was a very I mean passionate letter that they
put out, and I feel for them in some respects
because I know some of these things can go down
a rabbit hole and it hit the internet and stuff,
so I feel for them. I just don't know where
I sit because and I've never personally checked into some
of these allegations. I mean, you hear these studies and

(35:26):
this and that, and there was some lawsuits. We talked
about that scene pretty convincing. I haven't seen it with
my own eyes, so I don't know.

Speaker 6 (35:33):
Videos are out there.

Speaker 4 (35:33):
When I first came out, Hey, it was this new
gun and they had a report of it, and they
were dropping it off of a ladder. I mean, you
can still see that that's out there, and they've had
a six foot ladder and on the third time they
dropped it, it was loaded with blanks, but they discharged
on the third time and it was just from the fall.

Speaker 6 (35:48):
Granted it was fall from a ladder, but it was
probably a four or.

Speaker 2 (35:51):
Five foot at the beginning. It was in the beginning.

Speaker 6 (35:53):
Yeah, and they must have done something of the military.
The military has safeties on their guns and they're demanded
to be on. So it's got a manual safety that man.

Speaker 2 (36:00):
I just don't. I don't know, but I don't.

Speaker 6 (36:02):
These are officers.

Speaker 4 (36:03):
Once one was a twenty year old, a twenty year
veteran instructor for the US Army, and his gun went off.

Speaker 6 (36:09):
It wasn't hurt, but it discharged.

Speaker 2 (36:11):
I just don't know if it's colster related, or you know,
maybe maybe there's a common denominator and they're using the
same holster and that holster's pressing up against I don't, I.

Speaker 6 (36:20):
Don't know, don't know.

Speaker 2 (36:21):
I don't know where I fall. I don't.

Speaker 1 (36:23):
I mean, I'm surely not going to say, hey, don't
go buy a say three twenty, because I just don't.

Speaker 5 (36:27):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (36:27):
I don't have a comfort level either way.

Speaker 4 (36:29):
So anyway, but so that's uh, that's their letter, and
that's also there.

Speaker 2 (36:36):
You gotta they are stick to their guys.

Speaker 5 (36:38):
I mean, my thoughts are on it, and if it's
there's so many cases out there of its supposedly going
off on itself that sig would make an office. See
if you don't trust the weapon and you feel like
it's gonna it's not safe, set it back. I'll buy
it back.

Speaker 6 (36:56):
They lost the last two cases.

Speaker 4 (36:57):
What was the first one was like a little over
a million, and then they had a two point three million.
Now there's another eleven million.

Speaker 5 (37:03):
Dollars the damn gun back rather than taking a two
million dollars.

Speaker 4 (37:08):
I don't know you would think so, but I mean,
but let's say six ire some of the best guns out.

Speaker 6 (37:13):
There another period, I mean period. I mean it's so
reliable and less pistols. They're just excellent.

Speaker 5 (37:19):
Guys.

Speaker 1 (37:19):
Let's have to a break here at the appropriate break
time up and when we come back on the other side,
we're going to talk about a couple other things. A
little bit of news and uh maybe a little bit
about uh the uh City lawsuit about gun bands. We're
on target broacasting life from the studios of LAPD Farms arranged.
Will be back right after the break.

Speaker 5 (37:38):
And somebody else made the case here for me one
hundred cases of accidental discharges with its weapon versus thousands,
tens of thousands of these guns being sold.

Speaker 6 (37:48):
I can understand where.

Speaker 5 (37:49):
I can understand where six hour would come back with that.
Of course I understand it too, But I don't you know,
if my thing would be because my name is out
there and because we are such a quality weapon, if
you don't feel safe with that weapon, give it back
to me, I'll buy it back from you. Yeah, and
then you know, make good on your name as well
as the.

Speaker 4 (38:07):
Gun bodycam images, so that's a little different, and the
one where the guy's walking in the in the station
and discharges its.

Speaker 5 (38:17):
I understand that you got videos videos of it, but
here's here's a good point. You watch a video of
a officer on the traffic stop on the body cam,
the human eye sees and picks up so much more
than these body cams and the car videos. So there
may be something that's not being picked up that you're
not seeing, right, I mean, And it's you know, everybody

(38:38):
says officers have to use body cams, they got to
use car cams. Is it's demanded we want to see
what's going on. Well, you got it, you'll see it.
But it's not going to be one hundred percent of
what the human eye picks.

Speaker 1 (38:49):
Right that the periphial that you see is so much
different than just the body can Let's uh, let's take it.
There's gonna be a minute for that talking about that cartridge.
I don't want to sort of change it, okay, because
we're down to the last minute, but I do want
to get to south. I think I misspoke. I said
City of Columbus gun band. It may as well be
a gun band. But one of the things that Toorney

(39:11):
General o'davios was talking about with the Supreme Court of
Ohio hearing the arguments this week was the city of
Columbus and part of what they were trying to put
into place was the band on thirty round magazines. The
other part of it, and this is kind of interesting, guys,
and this is something that maybe there's room to grow
and reach an agreement here. The other part of it
was the safe storage of firearms. So remember that was

(39:32):
going to be written into law, so you could be
charged if you didn't have your firearm secured from a
child or something like that. And we said all along,
I mean, that's all part of what you should be
doing if it's not in your immediate possess. The concern
is with how they wrote this is that it appears
that if an officer was at your house for something,
whatever it is, and they visually saw firearm laying out

(39:55):
and they knew you had children, you could be charged
for that. And you might be a family where the
kids are proficient in the firearms and everything else. But
yet the way this was written, you could be charged
for that. So that's why I think so many, you know,
law abiding firearms owners get up in arms with this
stuff because it's so one sided when they wrote it.

(40:15):
Here's something, though, I found out this week that might
lit in credence of doing something. So our argument always
has been if if in these cases when a firearm
is left and a child finds it and does harm
to himself or herself or somebody else, we always say,
you could charge that that parent or guardian with with
a child endangerment. And it's been done many times.

Speaker 6 (40:37):
Here's where it.

Speaker 1 (40:38):
Falls short with the Ohio law. The Ohio law for
Child Endangerment, it reads, in part the beginning of it
is no person who is the parent, guardian, custodian, or
person having custody or control of the person, shall you know,
do something to harm to harm that child. It's important

(41:00):
how they list that because what has come into play,
and I was talking to some prosecutors this week. What
has come into play is when, for instance, boyfriend goes
over to girlfriend's house, leaves their gun laying around, the
child does something with that harms themselves or somebody else.
That boyfriend isn't the parent, isn't the guardian, isn't the

(41:21):
custodial guardian of that, And so the prosecutors aren't able
to charge this, and all they can charge is, you know,
something way less rather than the full force of child endangerment.
In reality, THERC probably needs updated or change to encompass
somebody like that who neglectfully leaves it there who isn't

(41:42):
the custodial parent or guardian, Because they said, that is
happening now a lot, and that's where the prosecutors are
getting hung up not being able.

Speaker 2 (41:51):
To charge these people.

Speaker 1 (41:53):
Yeah, I mean that's just so why don't I mean,
it just goes to show you why aren't the exact
Kleines of the world and the county executors who all
conspire to put these ridiculous city laws into place. Why
don't they bring somebody else in the mix who knows
a little bit, who knows who says it's crazy, because

(42:14):
there could be a valid you know, some validity in
changing the RC to help that. That's something we'd get behind, absolutely,
But the way they write it in such an anti
gun stance, it gets everyone on the defense and we're like,
heck with, they know that whole thing is bad, whereas
there could be something valid in there.

Speaker 6 (42:33):
I've already said that.

Speaker 4 (42:34):
I mean, get the people who are there, work in
the street to work with this problem instead of people
you know, sitting there drinking their martins.

Speaker 6 (42:42):
Oh yeah, we'll do this, this and this, and no
you need to. I mean, it's it's common sense, which
is not common.

Speaker 5 (42:48):
It is but gun haters and it's it's it's it's
somebody so smarter than everybody.

Speaker 4 (42:53):
I didn't know this when I read this. It's no
wonder some of these circumstances, you were there, Why aren't
they charging the parents? Well, because of what parad it
was some.

Speaker 2 (43:02):
Yeah, it was some visitor or something else.

Speaker 1 (43:04):
Let's let's write that law and put it in the
place so those people who are negligent in doing that. Yeah,
let's let's let the law come down on them rather
than putting something in the place like they suggested. That
gets all the gun owners up in arms, because you know,
it could you know, it could be applied to me
if I happen to have something laying around, you know.

Speaker 6 (43:23):
So yeah, that's a I'm going to have to in
that of the law. Yeah wow.

Speaker 1 (43:29):
So what else, guys? Anything else? As we go into
the final minute, that's all I had. I got nothing else.

Speaker 6 (43:35):
That's it.

Speaker 2 (43:36):
I'm going through all my pages.

Speaker 5 (43:37):
I bet John's got something.

Speaker 6 (43:38):
Well, we do. This is a prep for coming up.

Speaker 4 (43:42):
We can talk about next week too, but this is
really an important date coming up the foundation of the
Second Amendment and our constitution. And on April nineteenth, which
is a Saturday this year, yep, two hundred and fifty
years ago. This April nineteenth is when the British government

(44:02):
went to Concord to take away all their guns, their
amo and everything from the citizens.

Speaker 6 (44:08):
And it's when the.

Speaker 4 (44:09):
Shot heard round the world occurred, when farmers and storekeepers
went out and faced the most powerful arm in the world.

Speaker 6 (44:17):
They met at this nail Bridge.

Speaker 4 (44:19):
Shots were fired, so they want everyone to go to
your gun store gun ranges at eight thirty in the morning,
which is about the time it occurred over in the morning,
go to a gun range and take a shot in
memory of the fact that two hundred and fifty years
ago is when our freedom began.

Speaker 1 (44:36):
And we're going to talk much more about that. Jac
I forgot that, which you Happy pie day too, Yes, okay,