# data[].attributes.headline
Time: What You Need to Know about March For Our Lives 2018

# data[].attributes.subject
Time: What You Need to Know about March For Our Lives 2018

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The March For Our Lives Protest Is This Saturday. Here’s Everything to Know

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than 500,000 marchers are expected in D.C. alone

# data[].attributes.body
Can schools punish students and teachers walking out?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Students Are Walking Out Over School Shootings. Can Schools Punish Them?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Students are leading walkouts over school shootings, raising questions about whether it is legal for schools to discipline them for protests

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Florida student Emma Gonzalez to lawmakers and gun advocates: 'We call BS' | CNN

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Emma Gonzalez, a senior at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, addressed a gun control rally on Saturday in Fort Lauderdale, days after a gunman entered her school in nearby Parkland, killing 17 people.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
History of Gun Control Laws
Gun control laws are just as old or older than the Second Amendment (ratified in 1791). Some examples of gun control throughout colonial America included criminalizing the transfer of guns to Catholics, enslaved people, indentured servants, and Native Americans; regulating the storage of gun powder in homes; banning loaded guns in Boston houses; and mandating participation in formal gathering of troops and door-to-door surveys about guns owned.

Guns were common in the American Colonies, first for hunting and general self-protection and later as weapons in the American Revolutionary War. Several colonies' gun laws required that heads of households (including women) own guns and that all able-bodied men enroll in the militia and carry personal firearms. Read more history...

Pro & Con Arguments

Pro 1

The Second Amendment is not an unlimited or individual right to own guns.

Further, the Second Amendment was intended to protect the right of militias to own guns, not the right of individuals to own guns. Former Justice John Paul Stevens, in his dissenting opinion for District of Columbia et al. v. Heller, wrote, "the Framer's single-minded focus in crafting the constitutional guarantee 'to keep and bear arms' was on military use of firearms, which they viewed in the context of service in state militias," hence the inclusion of the phrase "well regulated militia."

Michael Waldman, President of the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, stated there is nothing about an individual right to bear arms in the notes about the Second Amendment when it was being drafted, discussed, or ratified; the US Supreme Court declined to rule in favor of the individual right four times between 1876 and 1939; and all law articles on the Second Amendment from 1888 to 1959 stated that an individual right was not guaranteed.
Read More

Pro 2

More gun control laws would reduce gun deaths.

Approximately 50% of unintentional fatal shootings were self-inflicted; and most unintentional firearm deaths were caused by friends or family members.

Five women are murdered with guns every day in the United States. A woman's risk of being murdered increases 500% if a gun is present during a domestic dispute. During the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, 5,364 US soldiers were killed in action between Oct. 7, 2001 and Jan. 28, 2015; between 2001 and 2012 6,410 women were killed with a gun by an intimate partner in the United States.

Researchers found that a "general barrier to firearm access created through state regulation can have a significant deterrent effect on male suicide rates in the United States. Permit requirements and bans on sales to minors were the most effective of the regulations analyzed."

Gun licensing laws were associated with a 14% decrease in firearm homicides, while increases in firearm homicides were seen in places with right-to-carry and stand-your ground-laws.

More gun control leads to fewer suicides. When US gun ownership goes down, overall suicide rates drop; meanwhile, each 10 percentage-point increase in gun ownership is linked to a 26.9% increase in the youth suicide rate. In Indiana and Connecticut, after "red flag" laws to remove guns from people who may pose a threat were enacted, gun suicides decreased by 7.5% and 13.7% respectively, while suicides by other means did not decrease during the same time. A person who wants to kill him/herself is unlikely to commit suicide with poison or a knife when a gun is unavailable.

The US General Accountability Office (GAO) estimated that 31% of total accidental shooting deaths could have been prevented by installing safety devices on guns: 100% of deaths per year in which a child under 6 years old shoots and kills him/herself or another child could be prevented by automatic child-proof safety locks; and 23% of accidental shooting deaths by adolescents and adults per year could be prevented by loading indicators showing when a bullet was in the chamber ready to be fired.

Marjorie Sanfilippo, PhD, Professor of Psychology at Eckerd College who has researched children's behavior around guns, stated, "We put gates around swimming pools to keep children from drowning. We put safety caps on medications to keep children from poisoning themselves.... [B]ecause children are naturally curious and impulsive, and because we have shown time and again that we cannot 'gun-proof' them with education, we have a responsibility to keep guns out of the hands of children."
Read More

Pro 3

The presence of a gun makes a conflict more likely to become violent.

The FBI found that arguments (such as romantic triangles, brawls fueled by alcohol or drugs, and arguments over money) resulted in 1,962 gun deaths (59.9% of the total).

An editorial published in the American Journal of Public Health noted, "gun-inflicted deaths [often] ensue from impromptu arguments and fights; in the US, two-thirds of the 7,900 deaths in 1981 involving arguments and brawls were caused by guns." A study published in the same journal found that "the weapons used [in altercations]... were those closest at hand." And thus, according to another study, "[r]ather than confer protection, guns kept in the home are associated with an increase in the risk of homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance."

Common sense gun control laws can decrease the likelihood of a violent situation turning deadly. President Ronald Reagan and others did not think the AR-15 military rifle (also called M16s by the Air Force) should be owned by civilians and, when the AR-15 was included in the assault weapons ban of 1994 (which expired on Sep. 13, 2004), the NRA supported the legislation. A Mother Jones investigation found that high-capacity magazines were used in at least 50% of the 62 mass shootings between 1982 and 2012.When high-capacity magazines were used in mass shootings, the death rate rose 63% and the injury rate rose 156%.
Read More

Pro 4

A majority of adults, including gun owners, support common sense gun control such as background checks, bans on assault weapons, and bans on high-capacity magazines.

According to a Feb. 20, 2018 Quinnipiac Poll, 97% of American voters and 97% of gun owners support universal background checks. 67% support a nationwide ban on assault weapons, and 83% support mandatory waiting periods for gun purchases.

As much as 40% of all gun sales are undocumented private party gun sales that do not require a background check (aka the "gun show loophole").

53% of all adults surveyed approve of high-capacity magazine bans. 89% of adults with a gun in the home approve of laws to prevent the purchase of guns by the mentally ill, and 82% approve of banning gun sales to people on no-fly lists.

77% of Americans support requiring a license to purchase a gun.

Don Macalady, member of Hunters against Gun Violence, stated, "As a hunter and someone who has owned guns since I was a young boy, I believe that commonsense gun legislation makes us all safer. Background checks prevent criminals and other dangerous people from getting guns."

Many would like to see the U.S. enact more laws like other countries, citing the fact that countries with restrictive gun control laws have lower gun homicide and suicide rates than the United States. Both Switzerland and Finland require gun owners to acquire licenses and pass background checks that include mental and criminal records, among other restrictions and requirements. In 2007 Switzerland ranked number 3 in international gun ownership rates with 45.7 guns per 100 people (about 3,400,000 guns total). In 2009 Switzerland had 24 gun homicides (0.31 deaths per 100,000 people) and 253 gun suicides (3.29 deaths per 100,000 people). Finland ranked fourth in international gun ownership rates with 45.3 guns per 100 people (about 2,400,000 guns total). In 2007 Finland had 23 (0.43 deaths per 100,000 people) gun homicides and 172 gun suicides (4.19 deaths per 100,000 people).
Read More

Con 1

The Second Amendment of the US Constitution protects individual gun ownership.

The Second Amendment of the US Constitution reads, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

Lawrence Hunter, Chairman of Revolution PAC, stated, "The Founders understood that the right to own and bear laws is as fundamental and as essential to maintaining liberty as are the rights of free speech, a free press, freedom of religion and the other protections against government encroachments on liberty delineated in the Bill of Rights."
Read More

Con 2

Gun control laws are discriminatory and infringe on citizens' rights

Current gun control laws are frequently aimed at inner city, poor, black communities who are perceived as more dangerous than white gun owners. Charles Gallagher, Chair of Sociology at LaSalle University, stated that some gun control laws are still founded on racial fears: "Whites walking down Main Street with an AK-47 are defenders of American values; a black man doing the same thing is Public Enemy No. 1."

Background checks and micro-stamping are an invasion of privacy. Background checks require government databases that keep personal individual information on gun owners, including name, addresses, mental health history, criminal records, and more. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) worried that Senator Harry Reid's 2013 proposed background check legislation (the bill failed 54-46) would have allowed the government to keep databases of gun purchases indefinitely, creating a "worry that you're going to see searches of the databases and an expansion for purposes that were not intended when the information was collected." Micro-stamping similarly requires a database of gun owners and the codes their personal guns would stamp on cartridge cases. Senators Rand Paul (R-KY), Mike Lee (R-UT), and Ted Cruz (R-TX) wrote that they would oppose any legislation that infringes "on the American people's constitutional right to bear arms, or on their ability to exercise this right without being subjected to government surveillance."

Gun control laws infringe upon the right to self-defense and deny people a sense of safety. The police cannot protect everyone all of the time. 61% of men and 56% of women surveyed by Pew Research said that stricter gun laws would "make it more difficult for people to protect their homes and families." Nelson Lund, Professor at George Mason University School of Law, stated, "The right to self-defense and to the means of defending oneself is a basic natural right that grows out of the right to life" and "many [gun control laws] interfere with the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves against violent criminals." A Pew Foundation report found that 79% of male gun owners and 80% of female gun owners said owning a gun made them feel safer and 64% of people living in a home in which someone else owns a gun felt safer. Even Senator Dianne Feinstein, a gun control advocate, carried a concealed gun when her life was threatened and her home attacked by the New World Liberation Front in the 1970s.

Gun control laws, especially those that try to ban "assault weapons," infringe upon the right to own guns for hunting and sport. In 2011, there were 13.7 million hunters 16 years old or older in the United States, High-powered semiautomatic rifles and shotguns are used to hunt and in target shooting tournaments each year. According to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, "So-called 'Assault weapons' are more often than not less powerful than other hunting rifles. The term 'assault weapon' was conjured up by anti-gun legislators to scare voters into thinking these firearms are something out of a horror movie... [T]he Colt AR-15 and Springfield M1A, both labeled 'assault weapons,' are the rifles most used for marksmanship competitions in the United States. And their cartridges are standard hunting calibers, useful for game up to and including deer." According to a Feb. 2013 Pew Research report, 32% of gun owners owned guns for hunting and 7% owned guns for target or sport shooting.
Read More

Con 3

Gun control laws simply do not work.

Gun control efforts have proved ineffective. According to David Lampo, Publications Director of the Cato Institute, "there is no correlation between waiting periods and murder or robbery rates." Banning high-capacity magazines will not necessarily deter crime because even small gun magazines can be changed in seconds.The "gun show loophole" is virtually nonexistent because commercial dealers, who sell the majority of guns at shows and elsewhere, are bound by strict federal laws. According to a Mar. 10, 2016 Lancet study, most state-level gun control laws do not reduce firearm death rates, and, of 25 state laws, nine were associated with higher gun death rates.

Mexico has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world and yet, in 2012, Mexico had 11,309 gun murders (9.97 gun homicides per 100,000 people) compared to the United States that had 9,146 gun homicides (2.97 per 100,000 people). The country has only one legal gun store (the Directorate of Arms and Munitions Sales), compared to at least 63,709 legal gun stores and pawn shops in the United States as of Feb. 10, 2014. Mexico's gun store is on a secure military base and customers must present a valid ID, go through a metal detector, and turn over cellphones and cameras to guards. To actually buy a gun, customers have to show proof of honest income, provide references, pass a criminal background check, prove any military duties were completed with honor, and be fingerprinted and photographed. If allowed to purchase a gun, the customer may buy only one gun (choosing from only .38 caliber pistols or lower) and one box of bullets. Between 2006 and 2010, Mexico's one gun shop sold 6,490 guns, yet as of 2012, Mexicans own about 15,000,000 guns, or about 13.5 guns per 100 people.

The main reason gun control doesn't work is because laws will not prevent criminals from obtaining guns or breaking laws. Of 62 mass shootings in the United States between 1982 and 2012, 49 of the shooters used legally obtained guns. Collectively, 143 guns were possessed by the killers with about 75% obtained legally. A Secret Service analysis found that of 24 mass shootings in 2019 at least 10 (42%) involved illegally possessed guns.

The logical conclusion is that gun control laws do not deter crime; gun ownership deters crime. A study in Applied Economics Letters found that "assault weapons bans did not significantly affect murder rates at the state level" and "states with restrictions on the carrying of concealed weapons had higher gun-related murders." While gun ownership doubled in the twentieth century, the murder rate decreased. Journalist John Stossel explained, "Criminals don't obey the law... Without the fear of retaliation from victims who might be packing heat, criminals in possession of these [illegal] weapons now have a much easier job... As the saying goes, 'If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.'"

More gun control is not needed; education about guns and gun safety is needed to prevent accidental gun deaths. 95% of all US gun owners believe that children should learn about gun safety. The Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute, Inc (SAAMI), stated, "Whether in the field, at the range or in the home, a responsible and knowledgeable gun owner is rarely involved in a firearms accident of any kind." According to Kyle Wintersteen, Managing Editor of Guns and Ammo, studies show that "children taught about firearms and their legitimate uses by family members have much lower rates of delinquency than children in households without guns" and "children introduced to guns associate them with freedom, security, and recreation-not violence." [82] [85] [154]
Read More

Con 4

Gun control laws give too much power to the government and may result in government tyranny and the government taking away all guns from citizens.

57% of people surveyed by Pew Research in Feb. 2013 said that gun control laws would "give too much power to the government over the people."

The NRA's Wayne LaPierre stated, "if you look at why our Founding Fathers put it [the Second Amendment] there, they had lived under the tyranny of King George and they wanted to make sure that these free people in this new country would never be subjugated again and have to live under tyranny."

Concurring, Alex Jones, radio host, stated, "The Second Amendment isn't there for duck hunting, it's there to protect us from tyrannical government and street thugs... 1776 will commence again if you try to take our firearms!"

Marco Rubio (R-FL), US Senator, speaking about gun control laws during his 2016 presidential campaign, stated, "If God forbid, ISIS visits our life, our neighborhood, our school, any part of us, the last thing standing, the last line of defense could very well be our ability to protect ourselves."
Read More

Did You Know?

1. A Pew Foundation report found that 79% of male gun owners and 80% of female gun owners said owning a gun made them feel safer, and 64% of people living in a home in which someone else owns a gun felt safer.

2. The US General Accountability Office (GAO) estimated that 100% of deaths per year in which a child under 6 years old shoots and kills him/herself or another child could be prevented by automatic child-proof safety locks.

3. The Centers for Disease Control listed firearms as the #12 cause of all deaths between 1999 and 2015, representing 1.3% of total deaths. They were also the #1 method of death by homicide (67.3% of all homicides) and by suicide (51.9% of all suicides).

4. Mexico has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world and yet, in 2012, Mexico had 11,309 gun murders (9.97 gun homicides per 100,000 people) compared to the United States that had 9,146 gun homicides (2.97 per 100,000 people).

5. Carrying a concealed handgun in public has been permitted in all 50 states since 2013, when Illinois became the last state to enact concealed carry legislation.

6. Five women a day are killed by guns in America. A woman's risk of being murdered increases 500% if a gun is present during a domestic dispute.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Proponents say the Second Amendment is not an unlimited right to own guns. Opponents say the amendment protects individual gun ownership.

# data[].attributes.headline
Florida School Shooting: What we know about the suspect

# data[].attributes.subject
Florida School Shooting: What we know about the suspect

# data[].attributes.body
ABC News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Florida school shooting: Details emerge in timeline, what we know about suspect | ABC News

# data[].attributes.headline
March for our Lives Home Page (mission statement)

# data[].attributes.subject
March for our Lives Home Page (mission statement)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Find a chapter

Join the fight! Sign up to be a part of March For Our Lives in your community.

OUR POWER 2020

Our Power will keep up our movement despite the obstacles because we all deserve a safer, more peaceful America. This is our year to make sure young people get a say in the future of this country.

A PEACE PLAN FOR A SAFER AMERICA

We have a bold, comprehensive policy platform to end the gun violence epidemic in America that claims nearly 40,000 lives every year. If we're going to end this, we need to address the root causes of gun violence. Created by survivors, so you don't have to be one.

DEMAND CHANGE

Now is the time for the youth vote to stand up to the gun lobby when no one else will.

This is the price of each student's life in Florida, based on the millions of dollars politicians have accepted from the NRA. It's up to us to change this.
Stay informed on the latest from our fight.

So it's #InaugurationDay, we kicked a fascist out of office. This is exciting. MFOL has never existed outside of the Trump era. As Biden enters his role as president, we remind him who delivered this win, BIPOC youth.
about 2 days ago

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Join the fight! Sign up to be a part of March For Our Lives in your community. Our Power will keep up our movement despite the obstacles because we all deserve a safer, more peaceful America. This is our year to make sure young people get a say in the future of this country.

# data[].attributes.headline
What If We Treated Gun Violence Like a Public Health Crisis

# data[].attributes.subject
What If We Treated Gun Violence Like a Public Health Crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When U.S. officials feared an outbreak of the Zika virus last year, the Department of Health and Human Services and state officials kicked into high gear.

They tested mosquitoes neighborhood by neighborhood in Miami and other hot Gulf Coast communities where the virus was likely to flourish. They launched outreach campaigns to encourage people to use bug spray. And they pushed the development of a vaccine.

"The response was swift," says former Surgeon General Vivek Murthy, and was even faster during the Ebola outbreak a year earlier.

But last month when 50 people died and more than 400 were injured in Las Vegas, and weeks later another 26 died in Texas of the same cause, public health officials have had almost no role.

That's because the victims in Las Vegas and Texas were killed with guns. And over the last three decades, Congress has made it clear that they don't want the public health community looking too hard into the causes of the violence.

"If you look at the number of people who have died or been injured from gun violence, that dwarfs the number of people who have been affected by Zika or Ebola. There's absolutely no comparison," Murthy says.

More than 30,000 people are killed with guns in the U.S. every year. That's more than die of AIDS, and about the same number as die in car crashes or from liver disease. But unlike AIDS or car crashes, the government doesn't treat gun injuries or deaths as a public health threat.

Murthy and other public health experts say it should.

"It should be no different than the approach we take to cancer, heart disease or diabetes," he says.

But such an approach would have to start essentially from scratch. The government spends only about $22 million a year on research into gun violence - a tiny fraction of what it spends on other major health threats.

That's because of Congress. Back in 1997, lawmakers added a provision in the bill that funds the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention barring the agency from doing anything that would "advocate or promote gun control." At the same time, they cut CDC's budget by the exact amount it had been spending in gun violence research up until then.

So government research into the causes of gun deaths virtually stopped.

The issue comes up routinely after mass shootings. Two years ago, after a young man killed nine people in a church in South Carolina, a reporter asked former Republican House Speaker John Boehner about the CDC restrictions.

"The CDC is there to look at diseases that need to be dealt with to protect the public health. I'm sorry but a gun is not a disease," he said at the time.

After the most recent shootings, Democrats in Congress have called for more restrictions on guns while Republicans, including President Trump, say the problem is mental health.

But neither conclusion is backed by research, says Dr. Georges Benjamin, the executive director of the American Public Health Association.

"When a new disease, particularly an infectious disease, enters the community ... we have a mechanism to anticipate it, track it, get our arms around it," he says. "We do that when he have measles, mumps, chicken pox, zika. But firearm-related death and disability, we don't."

That kind of prior knowledge could lead to policies that reduce the toll of gun injuries without cutting off access to them.

"Firearms are a tool, and ... a consumer product. And unlike other consumer products, we're not working hard to make that consumer product safer," he says.

Take cars for example. Benjamin points to the combination of safety features - airbags and seat belts - and safety policies like requiring licensing and banning drunk driving - that have made cars less lethal, while ensuring they're still available.

A similar strategy with guns could lead to some laws or regulations that make them safer.

That could involve barring large ammunition clips to limit the number of shots a person could take, or requiring trigger locks that open by fingerprint, allowing only the gun owner to fire a weapon.

"We could think about where firearms ought not to be," he says. "Alcohol and firearms and people who might get a little rowdy probably are not a good combination. There are solutions to that."

Creating more shooting ranges may be a good idea so gun owners have a safe place to use their weapons, he says.

Today, Benjamin says, there is no data to show whether people are safer in communities with more or fewer guns.

Something has to change, because up until now, "We have done everything we can to ensure that this epidemic of death and disability from firearms is only going to get worse," he says.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What If We Treated Gun Violence Like A Public Health Crisis?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When U.S. officials feared an outbreak of the Zika virus last year, the Department of Health and Human Services and state officials kicked into high gear. They tested mosquitoes neighborhood by neighborhood in Miami and other hot Gulf Coast communities where the virus was likely to flourish.

# data[].attributes.headline
Gun Violence: Comparing U.S. with Other Countries

# data[].attributes.subject
Gun Violence: Comparing U.S. with Other Countries

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Editor's Note: This story was originally published in October and has been republished with updates in the wake of the shooting Sunday in Sutherland Springs, Texas.
Barely a month after the massacre in Las Vegas, another horrific attack has underscored the persistence of gun violence in the United States. At least 26 people are dead after the shooting this Sunday at the First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas.

If the mounting death toll has you thinking that attacks like this seem to be more frequent in the United States than in other rich nations, you're right. Statistics on the rates of gun violence unrelated to conflict underscore just how outsize U.S. rates of gun deaths are compared with those in much of the rest of the world.

Take countries with the top indicators of socioeconomic success - income per person and average education level, for instance. The United States ranks ninth in the world among them, bested only by the likes of Luxembourg, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Iceland, Andorra, Canada and Finland.

Loading...

Those countries all also enjoy low rates of gun violence, but the U.S. has the 31st highest rate in the world: 3.85 deaths due to gun violence per 100,000 people in 2016. That was eight times higher than the rate in Canada, which had 0.48 deaths per 100,000 people - and 27 times higher than the one in Denmark, which had 0.14 deaths per 100,000.

The numbers come from a massive database maintained by the University of Washington's Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, which tracks lives lost in every country, in every year, by every possible cause of death. The figures for 2016 were released this fall. As in previous years, the data paint a fairly rosy picture for much of the world, with deaths due to gun violence rare even in many countries that are extremely poor - such as Bangladesh and Laos, which saw 0.16 deaths and 0.13 deaths respectively per 100,000 people.

Prosperous Asian countries such as Singapore and Japan boast the absolute lowest rates, though the United Kingdom and Germany are in almost as good shape.

"It is a little surprising that a country like ours should have this level of gun violence," says Ali Mokdad, a professor of global health and epidemiology at the IHME. "If you compare us to other well-off countries, we really stand out."

To be sure, there are quite a few countries where gun violence is a substantially larger problem than in the United States - particularly in Central America and the Caribbean. Mokdad says a major driver is the large presence of gangs and drug trafficking. "The gangs and drug traffickers fight amongst themselves to get more territory, and they fight the police," says Mokdad. And citizens who are not involved are often caught in the crossfire.

Loading...

Mokdad said drug trafficking may also be a driving factor in two Asian countries that have unusually large rates of violent gun deaths for their region: the Philippines and Thailand.

Loading...

With the casualties due to armed conflicts factored out, even in conflict-ridden regions such as the Middle East, the U.S. rate is worse than in all but one country: Iraq.

The U.S. gun violence death rate is also higher than nearly all countries in sub-Saharan Africa, including many that are among the world's poorest.

Loading...

One more way to consider this data: The IHME also estimates what it would expect a country's rate of gun violence deaths to be based solely on its socioeconomic status. By that measure, the U.S. should only be seeing 0.79 deaths per 100,000 people - almost five times less than its actual rate of 3.85 deaths per 100,000.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gun Violence: Comparing The U.S. With Other Countries

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Editor's Note: This story was originally published in October and has been republished with updates in the wake of the shooting Sunday in Sutherland Springs, Texas. Barely a month after the massacre in Las Vegas, another horrific attack has underscored the persistence of gun violence in the United States.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
High school students across the United States have been leading the call for more gun control since the school shooting in Parkland, Fla.

Some have called them the " voice of a generation on gun control" that may be able to turn the tide of a long-simmering debate.

But past polling suggests that people younger than 30 in the U.S. are no more liberal on gun control than their parents or grandparents - despite diverging from their elders on the legalization of marijuana, same-sex marriage and other social issues.

"Sometimes people surprise us, and this is one of those instances that we don't know why," says Frank Newport, editor-in-chief of Gallup.

Over the past three years, his polling organization asked the under-30 crowd whether gun laws in the U.S. should be made more strict, less strict or kept as they are now. On average, people between the ages of 18 and 29 were 1 percentage point more likely to say gun laws should be more strict than the overall national average of 57 percent.

"Young people statistically aren't that much different than anybody else," Newport says.
'What a whole generation feels'?
Polling by the Pew Research Center last year came to similar conclusions: 50 percent of millennials, between the ages of 18 and 36, said gun laws in the U.S. should be more strict. That share was almost identical among the general public, according to Kim Parker, director of social trends research at Pew.

Pew did find significant differences between millennials and older generations on two gun control proposals - banning assault-style weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. The results showed that a greater share of millennials - both Republicans and Democrats - are more conservative when it comes to those bans compared with Generation Xers, baby boomers and members of the silent generation.

"What we're hearing now in the immediate aftermath of Parkland might not be representative of what a whole generation feels," Parker says.

To be clear, many demographers argue that millennials make up one part of today's generation of young people. Some say that millennials include people born in the 1980s and all the way through 2000.

The teenage high school activists who have been organizing since the Florida shooting, they say, are part of a separate group some call "Generation Z." Pollsters generally don't count the views of those under 18, so there probably won't be national polling on this group until more of these young people are officially adults.
'A more progressive generation'?
Still, for 19-year-old Abigail Kaye, who considers herself a millennial, these polling results about her peers come as a shock.

"I think that's surprising because I feel like we're a more progressive generation," says Kaye, who attends the University of Delaware.

Kaye says she remembers hearing about the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., when she was growing up about a couple hours away in Scituate, R.I.

"We've grown up more, I think, with this kind of gun violence, so you'd think maybe we'd push for more regulations," she adds.

The poll findings also surprised some members of Students for the Second Amendment, a club at the University of Delaware.

The club's treasurer, Jordan Riger of Lutherville, Md., 22, says that after taking an National Rifle Association course on pistol shooting when she was 18, she has seen firearms as tools for self-defense. But she thinks many of her millennial peers don't.

"We are living in a time right now where we're seeing a lot more of these mass casualties," Riger says. "I think when people don't know that much about firearms, when they see it on the news used in horrible fashion, that's like all they associate it with."

Sitting outside a student center on the University of Delaware's campus, Cahlil Evans of Smyrna, Del., 20, says while he doesn't need a gun, he can understand why people would want hunting rifles and handguns. He draws the line, though, for assault-style rifles.

"There's no need for these high-caliber rifles that pierce through walls," Evans says. "People can say they use them for hunting or whatever, but why do you need a weapon with such high caliber that it would pierce through the animal and like eight trees behind it?"

Still, 22-year-old Jeremy Grunden of Harrington, Del., says he is encouraged to hear that millennials are less likely to support banning assault-style weapons.

"I base what we need off of what the military has," says Grunden, who is president of Students for the Second Amendment at the University of Delaware. "When it comes to ... the Second Amendment, we're supposed to be a well-armed and well-maintained militia and all that. Quite frankly, we need that and plus more."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Millennials Are No More Liberal On Gun Control Than Elders, Polls Show

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
High school students across the United States have been leading the call for more gun control since the school shooting in Parkland, Fla. Some have called them the " voice of a generation on gun control" that may be able to turn the tide of a long-simmering debate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The devastating shooting in Parkland, Florida, is the latest in a string of outbreaks of gun violence across the U.S. Many believe that officials have failed to act in response to the numerous tragedies and now the victims are taking things into their own hands. Who are the March For Our Lives organizers? These high school students are letting the world know that enough is enough.

The upcoming march on Washington was organized by five student survivors of the Parkland shooting - Jacqueline Coren, Emma Gonzalez, Cameron Kasky, David Hogg, Alex Wind - along with school staff, members of the Parkland community, and a nonprofit. The march is planned to begin at 10:00 a.m. Eastern Time on March 24 and organizers are anticipating a crowd of 50,000 attendees and protestors, according to The Washington Post, including big names like George Clooney and "student speakers, musical performers, guest speakers, and video tributes."

This group of organizers have spoken out numerous times about the motivation behind their movement, calling for action. Kansky, a junior, spoke with CNN about the need for such a movement. "We are losing our lives while the adults are playing around," he said. He and his fellow students are out to make a statement.

The student activists appeared on Face the Nation, where they spoke in depth about the goals that they hope to achieve and how the march plays into the bigger movement. In that interview, Wind explained that they are just getting started making change:

This is the first march. But I can guarantee it will not be the last. We will be marching for the 17 we lost at our school. We will be marching for everyone we lost at the Newtown Sandy Hook shooting, at Columbine, at Virginia Tech in San Bernardino, Orlando at the Pulse shooting and at Las Vegas. This is only the beginning.

March For Our Lives is a movement "created by, inspired by, and led by students across the country who will no longer risk their lives waiting for someone else to take action to stop the epidemic of mass school shootings that has become all too familiar," according to its website. Gonzolez explained during an interview with ABC News' This Weekthat another goal of their march is inclusion - it's not just about those who were lost in Parkland. "The kids who need to take part in this are kids, everyday kids just like us," she said. "All students should realize that a school shooting could happen anywhere."

Along with students and community members, the nonprofit organization Everytown for Gun Safety is helping organize the march. The organization is dedicated to bringing awareness to every community, according to its website:

Everytown is a movement of Americans working together to end gun violence and build safer communities. Gun violence touches every town in America. For too long, change has been thwarted by the Washington gun lobby and by leaders who refuse to take common-sense steps that will save lives.

Along with the students and Everytown, concerned parties across the country are organizing sister marches for the same day and time. Organizers have asked that sister march events be posted to the official March For Our Lives Facebook page to keep track of satellite marches across the U.S. There are currently marches planned in Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, Las Vegas, and many more cities.

You, too, can get involved in the movement even if you can't make it to Washington. By joining or planning a march in your local area, you can show your support for victims and survivors. I have a feeling that change is on the horizon. The Parkland student organizers and their growing following are just getting started.
Check out Romper's new video series, Romper's Doula Diaries: Watch full episodes of Romper's Doula Diaries on Facebook Watch.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Here Are The Faces Behind The March For Our Lives

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The devastating shooting in Parkland, Florida, is the latest in a string of outbreaks of gun violence across the U.S. Many believe that officials have failed to act in response to the numerous tragedies and now the victims are taking things into thei...

# data[].attributes.headline
Recent "Walk Outs": Recent Student-Led Protests

# data[].attributes.subject
Recent "Walk Outs": Recent Student-Led Protests

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the seven days that have followed the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that killed 17 people, students from the Florida campus have moved from terror to grief to activism, inspiring a national youth-led protest against political inaction on gun reform.

On Wednesday, the Parkland students - still mourning and fueled by anger - made their way to the state capitol in Tallahassee to confront lawmakers to demand a ban on assault weapons.

But as NPR reported, while Florida House lawmakers opened the day's session with a prayer for the victims, they did not open debate on a bill that would ban assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines.

Still, the Parkland victims' protest has mobilized students all over the country who are fearful of yet another fatal school shootings. From coast to coast teens are staging walk outs of their own, urging national and local legislators to enact laws that might prevent future gun violence in schools.

Dozens of students in Bellingham, Wash., began preparing for the walk-out gathering to make signs late Tuesday night. They planned to leave their classrooms at 11:22 - the same time as the Parkland shooting.

In an television interview with KOMO News, one student who's not quite 18 years-old and withheld her name said, "We can't vote, so this is our voice. We're just hoping to make a change by having our voices heard."

High school students in Missoula, Mont., trudged through the snow to participate in the national movement. The yelled, "This is what democracy looks like," as they took their protest to Sen. Steve Daines' (R- Mont.) office.

In Minneapolis Fox 9 has been broadcasting video footage of high school students from the school district in a procession down city streets toward City Hall.

The network reported that "Minneapolis City Council members are working on language to vote on the city taking an official position favoring a statewide assault weapon ban."

Teen protesters from the D.C. metro area converged on the U.S. Capitol and in front of the White House. WAMU public radio reporter Mikaela Lefrak followed along as organizers read the names of the Florida shooting victims.

Hundreds of students held up homemade signs as they marched across the National Mall. One read: "We want education without fear of annihilation."

The Hill reported hundreds of students from Maryland also made their way toward the U.S. Capitol to demand action on gun control.

New Jersey students from Southern Regional High School walked out of class and staged a rally on the campus lawn.

In addition to Wednesday's events Marjory Stoneman Douglas students are also planning a rally against school and gun violence called "March for Our Lives" in Washington D.C. on March 24.

For those who can't make it to D.C. they are encouraging organizers to lead local rallies and protests around the U.S. on the same day.

The Women's March youth branch, EMPOWER, is also organizing a national school walk out on March 14, the one month anniversary of the Florida shooting. CNN says the rallies are scheduled to begin at 10 a.m. in every time zone and last for 17 minutes - one for each victim who lost their life in the massacre.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
From Bellingham To Tallahassee Students 'Walk Out' Demanding Gun Reform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the seven days that have followed the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School that killed 17 people, students from the Florida campus have moved from terror to grief to activism, inspiring a national youth-led protest against political inaction on gun reform.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the days since a 19-year-old gunman stormed onto his former high school campus in Parkland, Fla., killing 17 people with an AR-15 assault rifle, the nation has been embroiled in a debate over what to do about school violence: How do you make it stop?

Here at Argyle High School, they already have an answer to that question: The teachers are packing handguns.

Among those arriving Thursday was teaching assistant Theresa Locastro, who said the school board's decision to allow staff to be armed after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre in 2012 "set an example for various schools that we mean business."

Experts say it's not clear whether such policies reduce the likelihood of school shootings or the death toll. But President Trump and other lawmakers have voiced support for arming teachers - on Thursday the president suggested giving bonuses to school staff members who carry guns. Officials at Argyle and other districts say the policies deter shooters and provide peace of mind, and that other schools should follow their lead. Scores of Texas school districts allow teachers to carry arms.

"It's essential to keep us safe," said Lizzie Dagg, 18, Argyle senior class president, who spent part of lunch Thursday signing a banner expressing sympathy to Parkland students.

Ari Freilich, a San Francisco-based staff attorney with the Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, said studies have shown more permissive concealed-carry laws contribute to gun violence, although he was not aware of studies at schools.

Freilich said that many teachers are already overwhelmed and that "asking them to be first responders too is not in the interest of students."

Amy Klinger, co-founder of the Ohio-based Educator's School Safety Network, said that rather than arming them, schools should train teams of educators to assess threats. The calls by Trump and others for guns in schools have "really taken the focus off things that are more effective," she said. "We need to do things that work, not that feel good."

Klinger said more guns on campus can lead to more accidental shootings, including two earlier this month in Minnesota and Florida, and it's unreasonable to expect even armed staff on large campuses to be able to stop a mass shooter.

"We need to train our teachers how to identify these people. People don't want to hear that - they want a quick fix," she said.

In Texas, school boards must approve arming teachers. At least 170 districts allow employees and in some cases board members to carry firearms, according to the Texas Assn. of School Boards. About 150 districts have their own police departments, and more than 250 districts without police have school resource officers.

"You have to weigh what's best for your district, taking into account the district size, mitigation and threats," he said.

Overwhelmingly Republican, Texas is known for supporting gun rights. The National Rifle Assn. is holding its annual convention in Dallas this May, just a few years after convening in Houston. Texas had more guns registered last year than any other state (588,696), followed by California (344,622) and Florida (343,288).

Texas voters have passed several laws in recent years expanding the right to carry guns openly and on college campuses. Government offices and businesses that don't allow people to openly carry must post signs at their entrances.

But Texas has also seen support for gun control grow. Protesters rallied to oppose campus-carry rights two years ago, mostly notably at the University of Texas at Austin, where opponents formed the "Gun Free UT" alliance.

Some faculty even resigned rather than teach with guns in their classrooms. They worried not only about potential attacks by disturbed shooters, but also about guns firing accidentally or getting lost. Last week some of their fears were borne out when two guns were found left behind in women's restrooms on two different campuses of UT Austin.

Argyle officials consulted other schools that had already armed teachers before approving the policy. Supt. Telena Wright called her counterpart at the nearby Harrold Independent School District, among the first in the country to arm teachers. It's a tiny district - just 115 students - in a county the size of Rhode Island policed by half a dozen sheriff's deputies; response time is a concern.

Harrold Supt. David Thweatt had proposed arming teachers after the shooting at West Nickel Mines School in Pennsylvania's Amish country in 2006. School board members initially balked, then changed their minds after the mass shooting that killed 32 that spring at Virginia Tech.

Thweatt has since worked with Texas state lawmakers to pass a law providing training for school staff who serve as armed "guardians." He tells those who call for advice to keep armed staff anonymous, like air marshals, and to have them carry their weapons at all times.

"You need to be ready," Thweatt said.

Thweatt said he spends less than $1,000 on training and arming teachers, and that bigger districts might pay more but have comparably larger budgets. "It's very cost-effective," he said.

Argyle is a much larger, fast-growing district, with 2,400 students, 850 of them at the high school. Before the school board approved the policy, officials held a town hall that hundreds of residents attended. Many spoke during public comment - all in favor of arming, the superintendent said.

"After that night, I knew the community was going to be solidly behind it," Wright said, and feedback from parents and staff continues to be positive. School officials have fielded calls from districts in Michigan, Oregon and Virginia.

Staff who volunteer to be armed must have their concealed handgun license and pass psychological screening, according to Argyle Schools Police Chief Paul Cairney.

Staff who are approved carry handguns, either their own or those provided by the district, which Cairney also screens to ensure they work. Volunteers attend three to five days of training initially, and annual retraining, including active-shooter simulations.

"Our teachers carry the gun on them at all times. That's because if something happens, it's going to be precious seconds and we want them to be able to immediately enter the fight," he said.

District officials declined to say how much the program costs, how many staff volunteer, and which are armed, but Cairney said they're at every school.

He said staff haven't had any accidents or guns go missing since the program started. He stressed that arming staff is not the district's sole security strategy. They also monitor school-issued student laptops; got a new system to check social media; and lock entrances and electronically screen the identification of all who enter the schools, even parents and former students.

On Thursday, walking through the school's halls, Cairney noted that he had passed several armed staff. Since the Florida shooting, more staff have volunteered to carry weapons.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
As gun debate roils on, teachers in this Texas school are already armed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the days since a 19-year-old gunman stormed onto his former high school campus in Parkland, Fla., killing 17 people with an AR-15 assault rifle, the nation has been embroiled in a debate over what to do about school violence: How do you make it stop?

# data[].attributes.headline
Stoneman Students' Questions to Lawmakers and the NRA

# data[].attributes.subject
Stoneman Students' Questions to Lawmakers and the NRA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Survivors of the massacre at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, took center stage at a CNN town hall Wednesday in Sunrise, Florida. The students, their parents and teachers asked frank questions of Sens. Marco Rubio and Bill Nelson, Rep. Ted Deutch, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel and National Rifle Association spokeswoman Dana Loesch.

Listen to the town hall in its entirety:

Or read the transcript:

JAKE TAPPER, CNN: Good evening and welcome to Broward County, Florida, I'm Jake Tapper.

You're about to witness an historic exchange between survivors of a horrific school shooting and their elected leaders.

In this arena are thousands of people whose lives were changed forever, one week ago today, when a gunman opened fire inside Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School and killed 17 students and teachers. Four victims remain hospitalized.

But since that horrible day, we have seen this community come together and we have seen an amazing and eloquent group of students with various opinions talk about what they feel needs to change.

We're here tonight to facilitate your desire to speak directly to your leaders, students, and family members, and faculty will get to ask questions to Florida's two US senators, Republican Marco Rubio and Democrat Bill Nelson, as well as their Congressman, Democrat Ted Deutch.

And later tonight these students and their families will get to ask questions of the road County Sheriff, Scott Israel, and a national spokesperson for the NRA.

We should note that President Trump declined an invitation to be here tonight, either in person or from the White House, as did the governor of Florida, Rick Scott who declined to be here in person or from Tallahassee.

Before we begin - before we begin tonight, we want to take some time to remember the 17 beloved members of the community who were murdered one week ago today.

(MUSIC)

TAPPER: May their memory be a blessing.

Students, parents, and teachers, the lawmakers are ready to answer your questions.

But first they each wanted a minute to address you, specifically.

I'm going to start with Congressman Deutsch.

REP. TED DEUTCH, D-FLORIDA: Thanks Jake.

(APPLAUSE)

Thank you.

And thank you to CNN for being here in South Florida for a very important and yet incredibly difficult evening.

A lot of people have told this community, people from all around the world, that it's too soon - it's too soon to get together to have this kind of forum; it's too soon to talk about preventing another tragedy like the one that struck our community from happening anywhere again; it's too soon to talk about getting weapons of war out of our communities.

It is -

(APPLAUSE)

DEUTCH: - it is not - it is not too soon; it is too late for the 17 lives that are lost.

(APPLAUSE)

DEUTCH: It is too late for the grieving families, too late for the injured, too late for the 3,300 survivors of what happened.

Senator Rubio and Senator Nelson, we represent these fine people; we will not be judged by what we say here tonight, by the quality of our answers or by any back-and-forth in words.

DEUTCH: And Senator Nelson, we represent these fine people. We will not be judged by what we say here tonight by the quality of our answers or by any back and forth in words. The folks in our community don't want words, they don't want thoughts and prayers, they don't want discussions, they want action and we owe it to them (inaudible)

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: Senator Nelson. Senator Nelson

SEN. BILL NELSON, D-FLORIDA: We're all grieving. Your hope gives me hope. Your determination gives me more determination, and what we're facing is what's going to be done. Now there ought to be some common sense solutions like getting the assault rifles off the streets.

(APPLAUSE)

Another -

(APPLAUSE)

Another common sense solution - having criminal backgrounds on every acquiring of a gun.

(APPLAUSE)

So, you have been so strong. Keep it up and keep hope alive.

(APPLAUSE)

Thank you.

TAPPER: Senator Rubio.

(APPLAUSE)

SEN. MARCO RUBIO, R-FLORIDA: The - there's no words that could describe the pain that a parent feels at the loss of a child or when you lose someone that - it's not natural to lose a child. And I am a U.S. Senator, and I'm also a member of this community, and I'm also a father, and I'm also a husband, and I'm also someone who loves but I don't know what the pain is like to lose a child.

I did not grow up in a school or in an era in which children were shot in classrooms, and even as we watch this pain and the nation suffers with you our - we can never know the feeling. I can tell you this. There is a message that's come through loud and clear, and that is that beyond simply the pain - mixed with that pain is a demand for action and...

(APPLAUSE)

- while in that realm, I want to be honest with you. I think all of us would like to see action, but I want to tell you what we're going to struggle with. We are a nation of people that no longer speak to each other. We are a nation of people who have stopped being friends with people because who they voted for in the last election.

We are a nation of people who have isolated ourselves to only watch channels that tell us that we're right. We're a nation of people that have isolated ourselves politically and to a point where discussions like this have become very difficult. I'm here tonight, and I'm here tonight to answer any question anyone has, explain anything you want to know about what I stand for, what I've done and what I plan to do. And to the students that are here tonight, the ones on the stage, the ones in the audience, I want you to know that I'm actually extremely excited about your engagement, and ill tell you why. I'll tell you why, because I think you have a chance to do a lot more then change gun laws.

You should push for that. You have a chance to do a lot more than that. You have a chance to change the way we talk about politics in this country, and the reason why this event here is so important tonight - the reason why this event is so important - none of us wish we were here.

Eight days ago none of you thought you'd be here, but we are here and it's important that we are because tonight people who have different points of view are going to talk about an issue that I think we all believe and that is that this should never of happened and it can never again.

(APPLAUSE)

And if we want to truly ensure that it doesn't - if we want to ensure that it doesn't then we are going to have to find the way of the nation - as a nation to work with people that may not agree with us on certain things, without accusing one another of being evil people and my side is as guilty is that of any.

And, here's what I hope for the students, do not make the mistakes that my generation is making. It may not be - - I hope it's not too late for my generation, but it most certainly is not for yours. Understand that people - - and I think on a regular basis, we do it in the Senate, between Senator Nelson and I.

I think people that disagree on issues can agree on what they want to achieve and can find a way forward, and that's what I hope tonight is beyond anything else. Because, sadly, we cannot reverse what happened seven days ago today, but we can make sure that one of these events never happens again in any community in this country.

And, if tonight is the beginning of that, then we will have said that this was meaningful, and that's what I'm here to do. And, that's what I hope we can achieve together and that's why I'm here tonight.

You might not like everything I say, or everything I stand for, but I want to find a way forward to solve this problem. So that never again will any community have to face this, any parent have to face this, or any child, yours or mine, have to face this in what I believe is the greatest nation on earth.

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: Thank you.

I want to bring in Ryan Schacter. Ryan Schacter's younger brother, Alex, was killed in the shooting. Alex was 14, he played in the school band and the school orchestra. Ryan has a question for Congressman Deutch.

Ryan.

(APPLAUSE)

SCHACTER: Congressman Deutch, my name is Ryan Schacter, I'm a senior at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School. My brother, Alex, was killed in the shooting last Wednesday. I'm supposed to go back to school in the upcoming week.

My friends and I are worried that we are going to be murdered in our classrooms. What reassurances can you give me and what specifically are you going to do to make sure that we can't have this fear?

DEUTCH: Well, first of all, I offer my heartfelt condolences. I'm sorry for your loss. And, I understand why you feel that way, because in our country today what happened at Stoneman Douglas has happened too many times.

What am I going to do? Well, as a starter, next week when we go back to Washington, we're going to introduce legislation to make sure that assault weapons are illegal in every part of this country.

(APPLAUSE)

But, that's not going to help you when you go back to school and all I can tell you is that we stand with law enforcement in Broward County. We stand with the administration and the teachers in your school to provide as much security, as much comfort, as much as can make you feel that you're in a safe place.

But, beyond that, the best way for us to show that is to take action in Washington, in Tallahassee, to get these weapons of war off of our streets.

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: Thank you, Congressman.

I want to bring in Fred Guttenberg. Fred's 14 year-old daughter, Jaime, was lost last week and he has a question for Senator Rubio.

(APPLAUSE)

GUTTENBERG: Senator Rubio, I just listened to your opening and thank you. I want to like you. Here's the problem. And, I'm a brutally honest person, so I'm just going to say it up front.

When I like you, you know it and when I'm pissed at you, you know it. Your comments this week, and those of our president, have been pathetically weak.

(APPLAUSE)

So, you and I are now eye to eye. Because I want to like you. Look at me and tell me guns were the factor in the hunting of our kids in this school this week. And, look at me and tell me you accept it, and you will work with us to do something about guns.

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: Fred, first of all, let me explain what I said this week and I'll repeat it. I'll repeat what I said. And, then I'm going to tell you what we're going to do.

(BOOING)

RUBIO: We're going to talk about guns and we're going to talk about what I said this (inaudible). This is what I said. I said that the problems that we are facing -

GUTTENBURG: Let - - let him speak. I think we need to hear it.

RUBIO: I'm saying that the problems that we're facing here today cannot be solved by gun laws alone. And I'm going to tell you what we've done already and what I hope we'll do moving forward.

GUTTENBURG: Were guns the factor in the hunting of our kids?

RUBIO: Of course they were. And here's what - -

GUTTENBURG: It's the weapons of choice. Can you say that?

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: Number one Fred, I absolutely believe that in this country if you are 18 years of age you should not be able to buy a rifle and I will support a law that takes that right away.

(APPLAUSE)

GUTTENBURG: Fantastic.

RUBIO: I will support - -

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: I will support the banning of bump stocks and I know that the President has ordered the Attorney General to do it and if he doesn't, we should do it by law. I will support changing our background system so that it includes more information than it includes now and that all states across the country are required or incentivized to report all the information into it.

And let me tell you what I've done already. In - - last year when we came up with our budget in the Senate, I pushed for and got approved $50 million a year through the Sandy Hook Initiative to provide a threat assessment fund for - - for all states to be able to stand up in each of the school districts a way to identify people who could potentially do this, and get ahead of it before it happens.

I - - I support - - I support moving forward on that initiative and making it widely available for everyone around the country. Now I think what you're asking about is the assault weapons ban.

GUTTENBURG: Yes sir.

RUBIO: So let me be honest with you about that one. If I believe that that law would have prevented this from happening I would support it. But I want to explain to you why it would not.

(BOOING)

GUTTENBURG: Senator Rubio, my daughter running down the hallway at Marjory Stoneman Douglas was shot in the back.

RUBIO: Yes, sir.

GUTTENBURG: With an assault weapon, the weapon of choice.

RUBIO: Yes, sir.

GUTTENBURG: OK. It is too easy to get. It is a weapon of war. The fact that you can't stand with everybody in this building and say that, I'm sorry.

RUBIO: Sir, I do believe what you're saying is - -

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: I do believe - - I do believe what you're saying is true. I do believe what you're saying - -

(BOOING)

TAPPER: Everyone - - everyone. The Senator has the right to be heard. He's answering Mr. Guttenburg's question.

RUBIO: I do believe what you're saying is true. I believe that someone like this individual and anyone like him shouldn't have any gun. Not this gun, any gun. But I want to explain to you for a moment the problem with the law that they call the Assault Weapon's Ban. And if you'll give me - and indulge me for a minute to explain to you the problem. First you have to define what it is. If you look at the law and it's definition, it basically bans 200 models of gun - - about 220 specific models of gun.

GUTTENBURG: Good. Good.

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: But it makes - - but it - - but it - - it allows legal 2,000 other types of gun that are identical. Identical, in the way that they function and how fast they fire and the type of caliber that they fire and the way they perform. They're indistinguishable from the ones that become illegal. And the only thing that separates the two types - - the only thing that separates the two types is, if you put a plastic handle grip on one it becomes banned, if it doesn't have a plastic handle it does not become banned.

So let me explain if I may, just for a moment more.

GUTTENBURG: Are you saying - -

RUBIO: What the problem has been with the law - -

GUTTENBURG: Are you saying you will start with the 200 and work your way up?

RUBIO: I would explain what has happened - -

(APPLAUSE)

GUTTENBURG: I'll - - It's a place to start. We can do that.

RUBIO: Well - - let me - - let me explain to you what's happened. So in New York they have passed that ban. And you know what they've done to get right around it? It took them 15 seconds to do it. They simply take the plastic tip off of it. They just take the plastic grip off of the front or the back - -

GUTTENBURG: So we don't (inaudible)?

RUBIO: The same gun and it becomes legal, performs the exact same way. So what my belief is - - my belief remains that rather than continue to try to chase every loop hole that's created. That's why it failed in '94. It's why they're getting around it now in California, it's how they get around it in New York - is we instead should make sure that dangerous criminals, people that are deranged cannot buy any gun of any kind. That's what I believe a better answer will be.

(BOOING)

GUTTENBURG: Your answer speaks for itself.

TAPPER: Thank you Mr. Guttenburg. I appreciate your time. The only thing I'm - - I'm not going to tell anybody in this room.

I'm not going to tell anybody in this room not to feel strongly and - - and not to feel emotional. The only thing I will tell you is, when you do this, you're eating up into the time that other people in the audience, other people who want to ask questions are asking questions. OK? So you behave how you want to behave but I want to make sure that as many people in this community - -

DEUTCH: And - and I - and I know - Jake, I know this - I know this is not a debate, but I don't know if we're going to get back to it. And since - and I just want to respond to something Senator Rubio said because - because he told us a lot about - about his views on the assault weapons ban.

And I would just simply say this, if there is a problem with the assault weapons ban - which, by the way, when it expired let's be clear, mass shootings went up 200 percent in the decade after the assault weapons ban expired. But if there was a problem with the way that was written, if there were too many loopholes for - for people trying to get around it to utilize, then let's bring up the assault weapons ban and close all those loopholes so that we have bill that keeps people safe.

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: And Gabe (ph) rose (ph) actually (ph) that is an excellent question. And I want to answer that one, if I may. I know it's not a debate but this is an important point, it really is because it - it is an issue that I want people to understand more about. First of all, it didn't take - I appreciate your words. It didn't - being here tonight is not courage. Courage is what you did, and what you guys are doing, and what those teachers and administrators that - that's courage.

And, Ted (ph), you talked to your story a moment ago. You know, I - I will tell you that what you've done in this effort, irrespective of we may have a different view on something, that's courage. That's real courage. Now on the issue that you've raised about the background checks, relate directly to what you said about the - about the assault weapons ban. It's not the loopholes. It's the problem that once you start looking at how easy it is to get around it, you would literally have to ban every semi-automatic rifle that's sold in the U.S.

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: Fair enough. Fair enough, that - that is a valid position to hold, but my colleagues do not support banning every semi-automatic rifle sold in America.

DEUTCH: I - I believe - I believe that the idea that a gunman like this could march down the halls of Stoneman Douglas High School and fire off 150 rounds in six or seven minutes, that gun should be banned. There is no reason why anybody should own one of those.

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: And that is a very valid point. But my point is that under the law that you support, there would still be 2,000 guns that were legal that could do the exact same thing.

DEUTCH: Well then let's sit down and figure out what they are so that we can ensure people (ph) -

RUBIO: I know, but what I - look, this is an important discussion because now you're seeing what the debate is about the assault weapons ban. And I just ask, will you ban - are you in favor of banning any gun that can do what the AR-15 can do?

DEUTCH: - I -

RUBIO: Yes or no?

DEUTCH: - I - I am in favor, Senator Rubio. If you have a concern about - let me just answer this question because it's important.

RUBIO: It is, that's the whole debate.

DEUTCH: Yes, and the - and the answer to the question is, do I support weapons that fire-off 150 rounds in seven or eight minutes, weapons that are weapons of war that serve no purpose other than killing the maximum number of people they can, you bet I am.

RUBIO: OK.

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: That's important to know. And I want - that is a very fair position to hold, the - so you - and I just want you to understand, that goes well beyond the bill that's before us now.

DEUTCH: Well then sit with me and let's come up with something that you support.

RUBIO: OK. I would - I would - I'd like to let Senator Nelson into this conversation as well. Yes, I - I only raised that, not to get into a debate - and I - and I want Senator Nelson to speak, of course. I just want to say that I - the reason why I raised that point is so you understand, that is what the debate is about. It is about the fact that there are over - virtually every rifle sold in America today, can do what that gun does. We - and - and -

DEUTCH: That's not true.

RUBIO: - it is true. It's absolutely -

DEUTCH: Senator Nelson.

RUBIO: - I'm sorry, go ahead.

NELSON: Let me tell you about the bill that I have co-sponsored. It defines very specifically assault rifle, it lists 200 different assault rifles. It lists, for example, the Kalashnikov AK-47 that - did you know is manufactured in this state. Did you know that the state of Florida, the governor's office gave financial incentives for them to come into the state and manufacture? Tell you another one, that it is listed in that list of over 200 rifles. It's the Sig Sauer MCX. That was the one that Omar Mateen, despite the fact that he had been on the terrorist watch list and was off, went into a gun shop and purchased that high-powered assault rifle.

And on that list, it also includes the AR-15. And did you know that the state of Florida, the governor's office, gave financial incentives for the Colt corporation to come to Kissimmee to manufacture AR-15s, the same one that wreaked such havoc here at and that you all are suffering so terribly from.

TAPPER: Thank you, thank you...

NELSON: And so it can in fact be defined if you're very specific, and that's the bill that I'm a co-sponsor of.

TAPPER: Thank you, Senator.

(APPLAUSE)

I want to bring in senior Ryan Deitsch. He has a question for Senator Rubio.

DEITSCH: First, I'd just like to say to Senator Rubio: Thank you so much for coming out here. I know, especially everybody that I've been working with over the past week, we've just really wanted to reach out and speak face to face to anybody who has a say in this debate.

And I know this is not a debate. This is a discussion. But I'm just thankful to have you here, to be looking at you today. Thank you so much, sir, for coming.

(APPLAUSE)

Now - now I'd like to say, Senator, these drills, code reds, active shooters, they've been a part of my life for as long as I can remember.

When I was in fifth grade, I had to hide in the - in a - in a bathroom for three - for three hours, and just waiting with my teacher and nearly 20 other kids, to see that - just because a shooter has come to our town. Not even in the school itself.

Now, seven years later, I'm in a closet with 19 other kids, waiting, fearing for my own life. Now I'd like to ask you that, after me and several others have been going out of their way, going to the state capital, speaking out, we - we'd like to know, Why do we have to be the ones to do this? Why do we have to speak out to the capital.

(APPLAUSE)

Why do we have to march on Washington, just to save innocent lives?

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: I agree.

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: You're right. You're - you're absolutely right. And let me start by saying - and it goes without saying - that what you've lived through and what you live through is not supposed to be a part of your high school experience. It's just not supposed to happen.

The second thing I would say is that it is unfortunate that, in this country, we haven't been able to make progress on any major issue for a lot of different reasons, and this being one of them.

But you have do - you do have a chance to change it. I really believe it. But the change that we are going to have to figure out, how people that have strong feelings on both sides can agree on things. And I think you are making progress. I can tell you what's already happening, as a result of your advocacy.

For example, I've already announced - and I hope they will pass it. I really think they will, and they should - a concept called the Gun Violence Restraining Order, that allows authorities - and it has to be someone in your immediate family.

It has to be somebody you live with, it has to be your parent, it has to be an administrator - can go to authorities and allow someone to not just be prevented from purchasing any firearm, OK? Not just the rifle. Any firearm. And allow those to be taken from them, and that person will have due process.

Because I believe that if that were in place in Florida, and it - I - about three states already have it - it could have prevented this from happening. And I support that, and I hope they will pass that. And I think that is a result of your advocacy.

(CROSSTALK)

DEITSCH: If I may, I - I do appreciate your words there. But that feels like the first step of a 5K run.

RUBIO: It most certainly is.

(LAUGHTER)

I would say it's more than a 5K run...

(APPLAUSE)

... this issue - this issue will take more than a 5K run because there's so much to do. But that is an important step. And if that happens in the next three weeks, it'll be because of what you guys have done.

And it won't end there. On Monday of this week, I believe we're going to try, Senator Nelson and I, to pass the FixNICS Act, which is fixing the background check system. Because the background check is only as good as the information that's on it.

And one of the problems we have - and this is going to be an uncomfortable discussion for our country - we're going to have to look at HIPAA laws, when it comes to certain things. Because right now, they can't - these people can't even talk to each other if someone is under psychiatric care or something's going on in their lives. That's going to have to be fixed.

(APPLAUSE)

And what I'm saying is - what you're doing now is making a difference, it is making a difference. It's already started to make a difference. I believe it can and will make a difference if this doesn't end here, because the way we were in this country today, and I don't mean that as a criticism of you, Jake, but the cameras will leave, and the issues move on, but the heartbreak will remain.

And so if we truly want this to be the last time, then what you have done cannot end next week or next month or even next year, but I do believe at the end of the three-week session in Tallahassee, you've achieved that restraining order and a few other important things that I believe they're thinking about doing, I would take that, I would herald it as a victory, and I would continue the momentum moving forward until we make sure no community in America will ever have to have a forum like the one here tonight.

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: Thank you, Ryan. President Trump said today that we should consider arming teachers. We'll hear what a Stoneman Douglas teacher things about that, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Welcome back to CNN's Town Hall with the students and faculty and family members of Stoneman Douglas High School. I want to bring in right now Ashley Kirth. She's a culinary arts teacher at Stoneman Douglas.

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: For those of you at home who don't know, because I think Everybody in this room knows, she sheltered 65 students in her Classroom during the shoot out.

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: Ashley, thank you so much. She has a question for Senator Rubio.

ASHLEY KURTH: Senator Rubio, I'm a registered Republican. I voted for Mr. Trump. I still, you know, support the 2nd Amendment. However, with that being said and with all these talks of gun control laws and everything that you guys have been up there saying to us about what you're going to do about it, a lot of the flack that I've been getting back from my friends and from a lot of other people that are around the world is, the answer to the gun problem is to arm teachers.

And when I had those hundreds of terrified children that were running at me, my question to that is, am I supposed to get extra training now to serve and protect on top of educate these children? On - - on how to be these eloquent speakers that are coming up and presenting issues to you? I - - I mean, am I supposed to have a kevlar vest? Am I supposed to strap it to my leg or put it in my desk? How am I supposed to go (audio gap) that way?

RUBIO: Well first, I don't support that.

(APPLAUSE)

I - - I think I join everyone here in saying what you've done is incredible heroism. It reminds us that teachers are heroes everyday. Not just on these days investing in the lives of all of our students. And I think that bears thanks.

(APPLAUSE)

I - - I don't and I don't support that and I - - I would admit you right now I answer that as much as a father as I do as a Senator. The notion that my kids are going to school with teachers that are armed with a weapon is not something, quite frankly, I'm comfortable with. Beyond it, I think it has practical problems, and I'll share what they are. And this is really about the safety of the teachers as much as anything else.

Imagine in the middle of this crisis and the SWAT team comes into the building and there's an adult with a weapon in their hands and the SWAT team doesn't know who is who and we have an additional tragedy that was unnecessary. And so, I - - I understand how some people are saying that and I'm not belittling them. But as a father and as someone who has talked to plenty of teachers including the three in my family and the assistant principal in my family. I - - I don't think that would be a good idea in my view.

KURTH: The first thing that happened when the SWAT team came in, the first question they asked is anybody injured, and the following question is does anybody have a gun. And I wouldn't want to be the person saying, yes, I do.

RUBIO: I agree with you. Yes ma'am.

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: Senator Nelson, President Trump suggested earlier today that - - that he thought arming teachers might be an idea worth considering. Do you think it is?

(BOOING)

NELSON: I think it is a terrible idea.

(APPLAUSE)

You know, I was so impressed on the TV of the students, what they were saying to the President, and then the President comes out with suggestions like that.

(APPLAUSE)

You heard what the superintendent said. He doesn't want to have to arm teachers. Now - - now the sheriff came up with a suggestion that he's going to have a deputy that will be armed, but that deputy can't be in all of your buildings in a school of 3,000 students.

(APPLAUSE)

It will help if it's a deterrent. It is good. But, if the weapon is a high caliber, rapid fire assault weapon, it is hard to go into a fight against that if you've got just a handgun. That's not a fair fight. So get the assault weapons out.

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: I want to bring in -

(APPLAUSE)

I want to bring in Robert Schentrup. Robert lost his sister Carmen in the shooting last week. She was 16. She was a National Merit Semi-finalist. Robert's question is for Congressman Deutch. Robert.

ROBERT SCHENTRUP: Congressman Deutch, today would have been Carmen's 17th birthday. But sadly, we are having to celebrate her life instead of celebrating what a new year might bring. My question is, if a majority of Americans has long supported stricter gun control regulations, but our elected officials who are supposed to represent the people have done nothing, does this mean that our democracy is broken?

(APPLAUSE)

DEUTCH: First of all, I'm so sorry - - I'm so sorry for your loss.

What you're doing here is celebrating her life. What you're doing in asking that question is honoring her memory. And let me answer - let me be pretty straightforward about that. Is our democracy broken? A little bit. A little bit, it is. And I'm going to tell you why. First of all, when it comes - you said it's widely supported.

There is a poll that came out yesterday that showed that 97%, which when you add in the margin of error, is everyone in America, supports universal background checks. Now - so there - look. I don't have a good answer for why something that's supported by 100% of the American people hasn't been passed. Instead, look, there is a bill, there is a bill, Senator Rubio talked about the bill, the president talked about this bill that's going to make sure that they're talking about expanding background checks, making sure that everyone complies with what needs to be in the background check. Great. Let's do that.

But you know what else we need to do? Make sure that every single person in America who buys a gun has a background check. And secondly, look, and this is a bigger issue, is our democracy broken? When any organization spends tens of millions of dollars promoting the interests of gun corporations to influence what happens in our elections, then yes, our democracy is a little broken.

(APPLAUSE)

DEUTCH: - but the way - but here's - here's the beauty, here's the beauty of our democracy. No matter how much money the NRA spends on political campaigns, millions and millions of dollars spent trying to convince people that representing the interests of gun companies is more important than standing up for the safety of the people of America, no matter how much they spend, here's why our democracy is great, because everything we've seen, from the 3,300 survivors of Marjory Stoneman Douglas, the leadership that has been shown is leading a movement that is so much stronger than money spent in political campaigns. That's why the democracy can be fixed and will be fixed.

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: I want to bring in Cameron Kasky, he's a junior, and he has a question for Senator Rubio. Cameron?

(APPLAUSE)

KASKY: I'm sorry, I know I'm not supposed to do this, but I'm not going to listen to that. Senator Rubio, it's hard to look at you and not look down a barrel of an AR-15 and not look at Nicholas Cruz, but the point is you're here and there some people who are not.

And I need to ask two things of you. Number one, Chris Grady, can you stand up? This is my friend who is going to the military. I need you to tell him that he's going to live to make it to serve our country. And then we'll get to the other one.

RUBIO: Not only are you going to live to serve our country, you and you and all of you have a chance to change our country. Change not just our laws but the way we talk about our laws. So absolutely.

KASKY: Thank you. And guys, look, this isn't about red and blue. We can't boo people because they're democrats and boo people because they're republicans. Anyone who is willing to show change, no matter where they're from, anyone who is willing to start to make a difference is somebody we need on our side here. And this is about people who are for making a difference to save us and people who are against it and prefer money. So Senator Rubio, can you tell me right now that you will not accept a single donation from the NRA in the future?

(APPLAUSE)

KASKY: I wish I could have - I wish I could have spoken - I wished I could have asked the NRA lady a question. I would ask her, how she can look in the mirror, considering the fact she has children, but maybe she avoids those.

RUBIO: I'm sorry, what was that?

KASKY: I don't freaking know.

RUBIO: That's okay -

TAPPER: The question is about NRA money.

RUBIO: - so number one, the positions I hold on these issues of the second amendment - I've held since the day entered office in the city of West Miami as an elected official.

Number two - no. The answer to the question is that people buy into my agenda. And I do support the Second Amendment. And I also support the right of you and everyone here to be able to go to school and be safe.

And I do support any law that would keep guns out of the hands of a deranged killer. And that's why I support the things that I have stood for and fought for -

KASKY: No more - no more NRA money?

RUBIO: - during my time here.

KASKY: More NRA money?

RUBIO: I - there - that is the wrong way to look - first of all, the answer is, people buy into my agenda.

KASKY: You can say no.

RUBIO: Well - I - I - the influence of any group -

KASKY: Guys, come on , be quiet. We're gonna be here all night.

RUBIO: The influence of these groups comes not from money. The influence comes from the millions of people that agree with the agenda. The millions...

KASKY: See, I see...

RUBIO: - of Americans that support the NRA, and who...

TAPPER: All right.

RUBIO: - support gun rights...

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: Sorry, Senator.

Guys.

KASKY: Guys, guys, if you...

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: Cameron is having a conversation with Senator Rubio. Let's let them talk.

RUBIO: But I - I - listen. I respect - you can ask that question, and I can tell you that I - people buy into my agenda. I will answer any questions you guys have about any policy issue...

(CROSSTALK)

KASKY: Right - right - right now -

Guys, be quiet, be quiet. You know we're gonna be here all night.

RUBIO: And I - and I just think that, ultimately, that is not our goal here. Our goal here is to move forward...

KASKY: Wait, so, hold on. So - so right now...

RUBIO: ... and prevent - and prevent this from ever happening again.

KASKY: ... in the name - in the name of 17 people, you cannot ask the NRA to keep their money out of your campaign?

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: I think in the name of 17 people, I can pledge to you that I will support any law that will prevent a killer like this from getting a gun.

KASKY: No, but I'm talking about NRA money.

(OFF-MIKE)

RUBIO: No, no. Because I - matter of fact, I bet we can get people in here to give you exactly as much money as the NRA would have...

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: But it's not - I understand. And you're right.

KASKY: Can you stand up and put your name to that real quick? OK. Not a lot. But we'll get it.

(LAUGHTER)

KASKY: I'll do it...

(CROSSTALK)

RUBIO: You're - you're right about that.

KASKY: ... you know, we've raised quite a bit of money so far.

RUBIO: Well, you're right about that. There is money on both sides of every issue in America. And where that leaves us in policymaking, is to look at the issues and make a decision based on what we think is right.

But ultimately, look. The First Amendment is as - is as important as the Second. And therefore, you have every right to ask that question of me, and I...

(CROSSTALK)

KASKY: Are you gonna be accepting money from the NRA in the future?

RUBIO: I - I've always supported...

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: - I will always accept the help of anyone who agrees with my agenda. But my agenda is - I'll give you a perfect example...

(CROSSTALK)

KASKY: Your agenda is protecting us, right?

RUBIO: Well, I'll give you an example, this very evening. I have told you that I support lifting the age from 18 to 21 of buying a rifle. My understanding, before I walked out here, is that that organization is not in favor of that. But I think that's the right thing to do.

I don't know what their position is, on teachers being armed. But I don't think they should be. Because that's what I think the right thing to do is.

When I offered my bill to restrict people on the terrorist watch list, or that have been on the list for the last 10 years from purchasing a weapon, they didn't take a stand. I don't think they - they certainly didn't support my - but I offered it.

I will do what I think is right. And if people want to support my agenda, they're welcome to do so. But they buy into my ideas. I don't buy into theirs.

KASKY: OK. So I knew that was gonna happen. NRA, please just keep the money out of Rubio, OK? If he wants to run again, you guys can...

(CROSSTALK)

TAPPER: Thank you, Cameron. Appreciate it.

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: Stay with us. More survivors of the shooting at Stoneman Douglas High School stand up, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Welcome back to the BB&T Center in Florida and CNN's town hall with the students and families and faculty of Stoneman Douglas High School. Next week students are going to return to campus for the first time since the shooting. Our next question comes from first year student Michelle Lapido (ph). She has a question for Senator Nelson. Michelle.

LAPIDO (ph): I just want to start with my school is not going to be another statistic in the 18 shootings that happened this year. My school's going to be the last and the beginning of gun control. Stoneman Douglas is strong and will be heard because our kids and our staff did not die for nothing. They died for change and they died for each other. Their deaths will not be taken in vain but as a calling for the change, gun control and safety in America. They're watching us from heaven and we are going to save what they died to protect.

So, I had a question for Ms. Loesch but she's not here yet. So for her and the NRA - she's probably watching - and all of you puppet politicians that they are backing. Was the blood of my classmates and my teachers worth your blood money?

TAPPER: Senator Nelson, you don't have to answer that question. Let's move on to the - - to the next question.

(BOOING)

LAPIDO (ph): Excuse me? I'm a student. I should have the - -

TAPPER: I understand that but your question - - I thought you were going to ask Senator Nelson a question. You're question sounds like you wanted to ask Dana Loesch a question in the next segment and I'm happy to do that if you want.

LAPIDO (ph): It's actually fine. I had another question for you Senator Nelson.

TAPPER: OK. Let's do that then.

LAPIDO (ph): So, I'm going to have to go back to school. On to the same campus, the same building to pick up my stuff, to resume my classes, to keep studying and I'm never going to feel safe on another public school campus ever again. I never want to have to go through and feel like I'm putting myself in such a vulnerable situation ever because that was one of the worst moments of my life.

So why don't we consider the worst possible scenarios? Because these things have been happening all around the country and it's more common than winning any lottery. Why don't we assume the worst situation like we do on planes, where we have life vests in case we land in the ocean or slides in case we need to an emergency crash. Why don't we have Kevlar vests in classrooms for our students? Why don't we build our walls with Kevlar so that kids aren't being shot through their own walls because they're so cheaply built? Why don't we have more funding to protect ourselves? Why do you guys protect yourselves with guns, protect yourselves with vests and you protect America's children with nothing but drywall?

(APPLAUSE)

NELSON: And my answer is, why don't we get the assault rifles off the street. Why don't we do the criminal background checks so that you have much more of a measure of security when you go to school? No, you shouldn't have to have Kevlar vests. That's part of being in America and that's what your school board, your teachers, your principal, they have done so effectively is, they try to protect you and even stand in the way of bullets to protect you. That is not a fear that you should have.

And although we are all grieving right now - this is a very tough time - there is a great strength that's coming out in the voices that are being spoken here and you've got to let that strength overrule the fears.

But at the same time, you've got to continue to be strong and speak out.

I said earlier your hope gives me hope; your determination gives me more determination to see this through and get some common-sense laws with regards to guns in America.

TAPPER: Thank you, Senator.

(APPLAUSE)

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: - lives, so many teachers lives - all of this, for it to change, why does it have to take so many, by the first time it should've been changed but it's -

NELSON: Less -

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: - gone this far -

NELSON: - let me just say -

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: -inaudible died -

NELSON: - inaudible -

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: - you lost a future Olympic medalist, whose funeral I was supposed to be attending but you know change is more important because that's what they would've wanted.

Why does it have to take so much blood to be spilled, so much money for you guys to gain from not answering the questions, Mr. Rubio?

Why - why is this happening?

Why are we - why hasn't this changed already, why do we have to be the last school, why wasn't the first school the last school?

(APPLAUSE)

NELSON: And you could ask, the same question, why two years ago when 49 lives were taken in the Pulse nightclub, and nothing was done; not in Washington, not in Tallahassee, not one thing offered by the administration in Tallahassee.

And here we are, going through this again.

And it's going to unfortunately very possibly continue unless we get some common-sense laws on the book.

TAPPER: Thank you Senator Nelson.

I want to bring Chris Grady back, Cameron introduced us all to him, he's a senior and he recently enlisted in the Army, and thank you for that.

Chris Grady.

And he has a question for Senator Rubio.

GRADY: I would just like to thank you again for coming out and listening to us because that's a lot more than what can be said for our so-called president and governor.

(APPLAUSE)

GRADY: I believe I speak for myself and my colleagues in the "Never Again Movement" when I say, though we might not see eye-to-eye on a lot of these issues, we need you and your colleagues on both sides to come together with us and find compromise, if we are ever to solve this epidemic that is - I'm sorry - this epidemic that has plaguing our country.

Senator Rubio, I believe a big issue, when it comes to the debate about semiautomatic weapons and automatic weapons is large capacity magazines.

Would you agree that there is no place in our society for large capacity magazines capable of firing off - over - from 15 to 30 rounds and if not more?

RUBIO: First let me thank you for your willingness to serve our country, you're doing it tonight and you're going to be do it in uniform and we're very grateful to you.

(APPLAUSE)

And I'm glad you asked that question because I traditionally have not supported looking at magazine clip size, and after this and some of the details I learned about it, I'm reconsidering that position and I tell you why.

(APPLAUSE)

RUBIO: I'll tell you why.

Because while it may not prevent an attack, it may save lives in an attack. And I'll let - I'll let the authorities discuss at the appropriate time why I say that.

But suffice it to say that I believe that there will be evidence that at a key moment in this incident, three or four people - three or four people might be alive today because of something that this deranged killer date, had to do, and obviously it's not for me to make law enforcement announcements.

I don't know what the right number is. I don't know what - I know that there are for example handguns that has 17 and so we'll have to get into that debate. But that is something I believe we can reach a compromise in this country and that I am willing to reconsider because I do believe that in this instance, it didn't prevent - it wouldn't have prevented the attack but it made it less lethal.

And that's the kind of thing that I hope my colleagues - and that's why these discussions are important because they do lead you to rethink positions after you've taken new information and new input from people.

By the way American politics is the only part of our lives where changing your mind based on new information is a - is a bad thing.

We do it in every other aspect of our lives. And we've got to - and we have to stop doing that as well.

So that is an issue I'll look into absolutely.

(APPLAUSE)

TAPPER: Thank you Senator.

(APPLAUSE)

There's no question that the Republican Party is more allied with the NRA than the Democratic Party. But it also is worth pointing out that the Democrats controlled the House, the Senate, and the White House in 2009 and 2010 and gun control was not a priority. That's just a fact. Senator Nelson, was that a mistake by your party?

NELSON: Yes. When the Senate had 60 votes, as we did until Ted Kennedy died, that's how we got the Affordable Care Act passed. And, yes, gun legislation under those circumstances should have been considered because there'd been a lot of massacres up to that point. It was Sandy Hook that occurred later in the Obama administration that a lot of people thought would be the turning point because of these little first, second, and third graders gunned down.

And yet, nothing was done. And then you go through all the other shootings. And so, I can tell you that in the meantime, until we do get 60 votes again in the U.S. Senate, when we could guarantee that we would get the legislation through, I'm going to continue to work with my colleagues and specifically Senator Rubio to see whatever we can get.

The hard reality is that there are not a majority of senators, primarily the ones that have been supported financially

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Transcript: Stoneman students' questions to lawmakers and the NRA at the CNN town hall | CNN Politics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Survivors of the massacre at Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, took center stage at a CNN town hall Wednesday in Sunrise, Florida. The students, their parents and teachers asked frank questions of Sens. Marco Rubio and Bill Nelson, Rep. Ted Deutch, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel and National Rifle Association spokeswoman Dana Loesch.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why Congress is Hesitant to Pass Gun Control Laws

# data[].attributes.subject
Why Congress is Hesitant to Pass Gun Control Laws

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
During debates about gun control, you'll often hear Democrats complain that 90% of Americans are in support of universal background checks. Then you'll see most Republican lawmakers vote against expanded gun control measures. And finally, you'll see few Republican lawmakers electorally punished for voting against universal background checks. Why?

Part of what's happening is that voters' views on background checks aren't really representative of their views on gun policy overall.

Consider all live interview polls taken over the course of 2017. In them, the question of whether respondents leaned more toward the Democratic or Republican Party on gun policy was asked three times. On average, 1 percentage point more Americans said they leaned more toward the Republican Party than the Democratic Party on gun policy.

Until that changes, Republicans don't really have much of an electoral reason to change their minds on gun control.

2. Americans are very polarized on gun policy

Last year, I l ooked at 10 different issues ranging from abortion to free trade to same-sex marriage that the Pew Research Center polled on. Americans were more polarized on gun policy than any other issue except building a border wall with Mexico. In Pew's latest poll on the subject, 79% of Republicans favored protecting gun ownership rights over limiting gun access. That compares with 20% of Democrats who felt the same way.

In other words, there was a stunning 59 percentage point partisan gap on the issue.

Indeed, as Nate Cohn of The New York Times pointed out, few issues were more predictive of vote choice in the 2016 election than gun ownership. Donald Trump won voters in households with guns in every state but Vermont. He lost voters in households without guns in every state but West Virginia. (There wasn't enough data in Wyoming to know what happened there.)

No doubt the lack of action from Republican lawmakers on gun control is at least partially attributable to them listening to their base.

3. Public opinion momentum is against gun policy

When Pew first asked Americans whether they were more in favor of protecting gun rights or controlling gun ownership in 1993, 35% said gun rights and 57% said gun control. By March 2000 (a year after the shooting at Columbine), 29% said gun rights and 67% said gun control. In the latest survey from Pew, 47% said protecting gun rights was more important than gun control, compared to 51% who said gun control was more important than protecting gun rights.

The rise in those who think protecting gun rights is more important than gun control has been driven mostly by Republicans. Back in March 2000, 40% of Republicans and 19% of Democrats thought that. Since that time, Republican support for gun rights has grown by 39 percentage points. It's grown by just 1 point among Democrats.

4. Gun advocates are more passionate

Last year, Gallup asked Americans whether they would vote only for a candidate who shared their views on gun policy or whether it was one of many important factors they would consider before voting. Among gun owners, 30% said they could vote only for someone who shared their viewpoint. Among those who didn't own guns, it was 20%. Not only that, but since 2000 the percentage of gun owners who said gun issues were key to their vote climbed by 17 points. It rose by just 10 points among those who didn't own guns.

Pew has made similar findings to Gallup. Gun owners are 9 points (21% to 12%) more likely to have contacted public officials about gun policy than those who don't own guns. Americans who favor loosening gun laws have been 7 points (22% to 15%) more likely to contact public officials than those who favor stricter gun laws.

Even if some Republicans were tempted to support stricter gun control, these numbers suggest that they might be pressured into voting against it because gun rights advocates are more likely to make their voices heard.

5. Support for gun control may momentarily rise

Support for gun control measures sometimes rises after mass shootings. After the Columbine shooting and the shooting at Sandy Hook, Americans were more likely to support gun control than in the time periods surrounding them. That has at least to do with the fact that the media covered these shootings to a much greater extent than they have other recent shootings. If this shooting in Florida receives a lot of media attention (compared with other shootings), it's conceivable that support for gun control may temporarily rise.

Again, though, past history suggests that any bump in public opinion in favor of gun control will not hold. The long-term trend is against gun control.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
why congress is hesitant to pass gun control - cnnpolitics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Congress is hesitant to pass gun control

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
During debates about gun control, you'll often hear Democrats complain that 90% of Americans are in support of universal background checks. Then you'll see most Republican lawmakers vote against expanded gun control measures. And finally, you'll see few Republican lawmakers electorally punished for voting against universal background checks. Why?