Glenn Beck, Bill O'Reilly, and Adam Foss dissect fears of a Democratic "gun-grabbing jihad" versus the reality that mass shootings dropped 50% since the 1990s. While O'Reilly supports raising the purchase age to 21 and expanding background checks, he rejects unconstitutional bans on AR-15s. The trio also critiques modern parenting, noting how constant electronic entertainment eliminates necessary boredom, a concern echoed by tech leaders like Apple and Facebook executives removing devices from their homes. Ultimately, the episode argues that societal devaluation of life stems from both political rhetoric and a culture of digital distraction rather than simple aggression. [Automatically generated summary]
America is afraid in two different ways, and we need to understand the fear on each side.
One, there's a group of people in America that is legitimately afraid of guns because they didn't grow up around guns.
They don't understand guns.
They see these weapons on television and they look very, very frightening.
You have television saying, you know, what do you use as a sporting rifle?
Well, that is a sporting rifle.
In fact, it wasn't a weapon of war.
It was originally designed in the 1950s as a sporting rifle.
But it happened to be more rugged, and so Colt had the license and they made them for the military.
So this was a hunting rifle that then was adopted by the military.
Well, you can't have high-capacity magazines.
High-capacity magazines have been in rifles since 1911.
High-capacity magazines, some say, were invented in either 1820 or 1840, but we know that they came to market in 1893.
So they've been around for a very long time.
But people are afraid because they don't have any experience around them.
And we have to understand that if you're a gun owner or you're a member of the NRA or you're into the Second Amendment, you have to understand people's fear.
Now, let's flip this around.
The left has to understand our fear.
And our fear is, you're coming after our guns.
No, we're not.
No, we're not.
We've heard that for years.
We're not coming after your guns.
And yet, we have had the whispers of Democrats who have then said, well, yeah, we're going to start here.
But that's always been brushed off as conspiracy.
This is why the right does not want to have a conversation with anyone in Washington about common sense gun legislation.
Because we don't believe that you're not going to take all of the guns in the end.
When President Obama said we want to do what, you know, look at Australia.
Well, let's look at Australia.
It was gun confiscation.
Well, look at what happened in England.
It was gun confiscation.
So those are the two fears.
So now what do we do?
Well now we look at how this is playing out.
Democrats are now gearing up for a gun-grabbing jihad.
Now how can I possibly say that?
Well, with real authority, because you can look at the bill that they are developing.
The Washington Examiner reported yesterday that Democrats are proposing a weapons ban and gun confiscation powers.
And the inspiration didn't come from anyone on the left.
It came from their new Muse in the White House.
After his comments on Wednesday, they were emboldened and they believe they have the power to begin the war on guns.
Now, we don't know for sure what is in the upcoming proposed bill, but they are floating things now.
Democrats are beginning to talk just enough for us to get a clue as to what we're looking at.
The details include expanded background checks, the banning of certain kinds of weapons, and a plan to temporarily confiscate anybody's guns if they're deemed to be a threat to themselves or others.
Okay, those all sound like common sense, don't they?
But let's take it line by line.
Expanded background checks.
What does that mean?
Currently, only 38 states require for everybody to put in all of the stuff for the background checks.
Only 38 states.
Well, let's just make sure that everyone is required to put, you know, domestic abuse and things like that into the background check.
But that's not what we're talking about.
We have a background check system, but Democrats are now worried about private sales.
Okay, what does that mean?
Well, if I'm going to sell my gun to a neighbor, you can do that without a background check.
Okay, well, maybe we should be able to have a background check.
If somebody, if I'm advertising my gun in the newspaper or whatever, and somebody says, hey, I want to buy your gun, if it's a neighbor and I know them, do I have to have a background check?
Well, we have to have background check.
Okay.
How?
Do I go to an FFL?
Are they the ones that are going to keep all of the records?
Or do I somehow or another have to keep all of the records?
By the way, does a background check involve a transfer?
My problem here is if I want to give my Henry rifle to my son, does he have to have a background check?
These are the little details that never get disclosed, and I can guarantee you that the Democrats aren't even going to try.
Second, the bill is rumored to contain a ban on, quote, certain weapons.
Now, Democrats are all up in arms over assault-style weapons.
Well, what are assault-style weapons?
Well, even though the vast majority of people in Washington have no clue as to what they're even talking about, Debbie Wasserman Schultz went on CNN yesterday as the poster child for the clueless liberal on guns, and she said we have to keep, quote, high-capacity rapid-fire magazines out of the hands of civilians.
Well, I think that's going to be pretty easy because I don't know what a high-capacity rapid-fire magazine is.
They're also talking about any gun with a detachable magazine.
Okay, if anybody doesn't know, a magazine is what you load all the bullets in and then you put it at the, you know, the bottom of the gun and it loads the gun.
Well, that a detachable magazine also includes handguns and pretty much everything that isn't from the 1860s.
Now, I've never heard of a magazine that can fire its own ammunition, let alone at a high rate of speed.
But we should look into this before it's suddenly banned.
She then went on to say that military-style weapons should be available only to the military.
Okay, but that doesn't include the AR because the AR was designed as a hunting rifle in the 1960s and only was taken in for the military.
I'm sorry, designed in the 50s and taken in by the military during the Vietnam War.
Armalites sold the plans to the military, who then adopted it with burst and rapid fire.
The civilian models do not have that.
It's actually more correct to say that the military is using a civilian-style weapon.
But these people have absolutely no idea what they're talking about.
Democrats want an all-out ban on semi-automatic weapons.
That eliminates 80% of the market.
80.
That will leave you with bolt-action hunting rifles and, you know, Wyatt Earp six shooters.
And finally, gun confiscation.
Democrats are proposing a program where family and law enforcement could petition a court to have someone's gun taken away if they're deemed mentally unstable.
Okay, all right.
If the family can partition that, okay.
But let's look into this a bit and ask, does this extend to anyone on medication?
Will simply being on antidepressants now be enough to label you fully on mentally unstable?
Let me ask you this.
I begged, I begged veterans when this first started to break, how the government was pressuring the veterans.
Just sign and say you have PTSD.
You've never had a bad dream.
Just sign.
You get extra money for it.
Will this include veterans?
What about ADD medication?
We are headed down a dark, dark path.
Yes, we need solutions, but this bill is definitely not one.
Let's hope that the president puts it right where it belongs, in the trash.
It's Friday, March 2nd.
This is the Glenn Beck program.
So yesterday, Condoleezza Rice was on the view, and she was saying, well, we don't need these assault-style weapons.
Okay.
And Megan McCain stepped up and said, wait a minute, my brother, my dad have these weapons.
And it's not a problem.
This is hunting.
And she said, I know everybody makes fun of us when we say we hunt with an AR, but that's what you do.
This is a modern sporting rifle.
That's what it was designed for.
So then we had Joy Behar.
And Joy Behar chimed in.
And she said, well, what did you use when there was a weapons ban on these?
Joy, let me respond.
The same weapon.
Doesn't have any idea what that bill did.
She had no idea.
Unbelievable.
It doesn't take away.
This is the problem.
What they're going to do is at first, they will say, we're going to ban the sales of all these weapons.
You can't buy them.
Okay.
Well, that leaves about 320 million guns out in the system.
And what they'll do is they'll say, you can't sell those kinds of guns.
Anything with a detachable magazine on it.
Okay.
Well, all of those guns are already out in the system.
There is also something, almost Becoming an epidemic in what's called ghost guns because you can buy all of the pieces or make all of the pieces now with 3D printing of guns.
You can assemble them.
You can buy pieces online and assemble them yourself.
Now they're not registered.
Who do you think is going to get that?
Who do you think is going to be doing that?
Law-abiding citizens?
By the way, in all of the shootings, all of the mass shootings in our country, never has there been an NRA member.
No NRA members have ever been a part of that.
I just want to let you know.
So she says, what is it that they, what is it that they used?
They used the same weapon that was just banned.
What you have to do if you really want this to reduce the number of these weapons is you have to then go door to door and confiscate all of them.
Oh, but you've promised us already.
That's not what you want to do.
By the way, out of all of the shooters, what is it, seven of them or nine of them were under 21?
And out of all of those shooters, I believe only one of them purchased their gun, every other gun they got their hands on because of someone else.
They're not going out and buying them.
Oh, hang on.
One other thought, Democrats.
Because I know discrimination is horrible, right?
There are laws to prevent discrimination.
So now you have stores who are going out and they are saying this is a constitutionally legal weapon to sell.
And I will sell it.
I will sell the AR, but I will not sell it to someone under 21.
Yet, that's not what the law says.
The law says that at 18, you can buy the weapon.
Isn't this age discrimination by dicks?
If Dicks decided to say, you know what, we're really having a problem in the inner cities of Chicago with these weapons, so we're not going to sell these to any black people.
Discrimination in Gun Sales Laws00:02:16
Do you think that would be called discrimination?
Because you don't trust people under 21, you are deciding that you aren't going to sell a certain item.
You'll sell it, but just not to these people.
My gosh, what kind of discrimination sounds almost like a wedding cake issue, doesn't it?
I provide that service, but I'm not going to sell it to them.
And it's specifically banned in several states.
I mean, discrimination based on age.
California is a big example of this.
I don't think Walmart or Dicks are going to be able to implement this policy.
Well, I certainly hope somebody, I hope somebody sues them for discrimination.
They should because they're breaking their own laws.
Yep.
Again, I you know, I think there's a and again, the left is again showing themselves as and I and I say this, please, if you happen to be somebody on the left, I say this knowing what the right looks like now as well.
I wish we had some moral high ground, but we don't.
But the left has exposed themselves of, you don't really care about discrimination.
You will discriminate if you want it bad enough.
You'll discriminate.
You're doing it here with weapons.
How?
Remember some of these states that will not allow ladies' nights at bars because you can't give cheaper drinks to women or free drinks to women and not to men or free admission to women and not to men.
You can't do that because it violates these discrimination laws.
How this bill by, or this move by Dix and others doesn't violate that, I have no idea.
Well, there's one way that it will be heard in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is wrong more than any other is over.
Their decisions are overturned more than any other court in the land.
But also because justice in America is no longer blind.
Trade Wars and Wealth Redistribution00:15:05
Let me tell you about the, do you remember the data breach at Equifax last September?
They exposed social security numbers, names, and birth dates of over 145 million customers.
Well, it looks like there's even more sensitive information that was exposed.
Documents provided to a Senate committee reveal that tax IDs and driver's license details may have also been exposed.
This puts those people at grave risk.
There are lots of threats in today's connected world, and it takes one weak link for criminals to get in.
Life lock identity theft protection adds the power of Norton security to help to protect you against the threats of your identity and the devices that you can't easily see or fix on your own.
If you have a problem, their agents are going to work to fix it.
Now, nobody can stop all cyber threats, prevent all identity theft, or monitor all transactions at all businesses.
But Lifelock with Norton Security is able to uncover the threats that you might miss.
So go to lifelock.com or call 1-800-LifeLock.
Use the promo code back for an extra 10% off your first year.
That's promo code back.
Save 10%.
Glenn Beck Mercury. Glenn Beck.
All right.
So we have some more good news.
We have a trade war starting.
President announced yesterday that he was going to take steel and aluminum and protect our nation.
And so we've started a trade war.
And this morning, he tweeted.
Can you give me the exact tweet?
Because it's pretty remarkable and I don't want to get it wrong.
Yeah, it's probably a good thing.
I mean, because we're talking trade wars here, it's a very, it's an interesting proposal here.
When a country, parentheses, USA, and parentheses, just in case you weren't sure what country it was.
When a country, USA, is losing many billions of dollars on trade with virtually every country it does business with, trade wars are good and easy to win.
No, they're not.
No.
And they're not good.
And let me just give you a little page of history.
Smoot Hawley, it was a, was the beginning of a trade war.
The Smoot-Hawley bill barely passed the Senate, passed the populist House in 1920s.
And President Hoover, even though he was, they begged President Hoover, a thousand economists came out and said, please don't do this.
Trade wars are easy to win.
Let me just read this.
Smoot Hawley contributed to the early loss of confidence on Wall Street.
Hey, what happened yesterday?
Stu, did you hear about Wall Street?
It was really good, up a zillion points, I believe.
Yeah, either that or over two days of trading between up and down, it's a thousand points spread.
Thousand points.
At one point yesterday, it was down 550 points.
Anyway, so first, it was the early loss of confidence on Wall Street, you know, 1929, 1930, and it signaled to the markets isolationism.
By raising the tariffs by some 20%, it also prompted retaliation from foreign governments.
Later, overseas banks began to fail.
Gee, other countries, two dozen countries then joined in the war.
This is a trade war, and you don't win them.
You're listening to the Glenn Beck Program.
Okay, so the Dow's only down another 248 points at the opening bell.
But, you know, that's no big deal.
It's no big deal.
It has nothing to do with the trade war that we're going to win because you always win trade wars.
Look, the president has done some really good things.
He has done some really good policies.
His policies on judges have been really good beyond Gorsuch.
He has done some good things.
Universally praised, I think, by conservatives.
Yes, I'll take the tax cut.
It's not what I wanted, but I'll take it.
It was good.
It's better than going the other direction.
Jerusalem was great.
There are some policies that he has done.
The EPA, the reduction of all of these, you know, all of the regulations.
Really good.
And I support him on that.
And we have to support him when he's right.
When he's wrong, we must call him out.
Trade wars are not winners.
No one wins.
No one wins.
Neither side.
Let me just finish this from the history books here.
In 1928, the campaign for the Republican was Herbert Hoover.
He promised to increase tariffs on agricultural goods.
But then when he took office, lobbyists from other economic sectors stepped in and said, you know, there needs to be a broader increase on just about everything.
So he passed it and signed it.
Smooth Hawley, this is the Smoot Hawley trade bill.
It contributed to the early loss of confidence on Wall Street, signaled the U.S. isolationism by raising the average tariff by 20%.
It also prompted retaliation from foreign governments, and many banks began to fail.
Within two years, two dozen countries adopted similar beggar thy neighbor duties, making worse an already beleaguered world economy.
Now, good thing we don't have a beleaguered world economy and reducing global trade.
U.S. imports and U.S. exports to Europe fell by two-thirds between 1929 and 1932.
Okay.
Those years are good years, though.
29 to 32.
Those were great years.
Those were great years.
And, you know, and that didn't help push, you know, Hitler over the edge or anything.
It did nothing.
Everybody won, especially our side.
Let me just recap.
Let me just see if I have this right.
So there was a Republican candidate who was Herbert Hoover.
And Herbert Hoover was known as this great capitalist, this great industrialist.
He was a builder of things, Hoover Damn.
He was a builder.
He was a great businessman and industrialist.
And so everybody thought, well, he's got a handle on things.
And he was a big believer in trade war.
And so he campaigned on trade war.
Then he got into office and his second year in office, he passed a trade bill and he started the trade war because we can win a trade war.
When he announced it, the stock market took a nosedive.
And then other countries started to retaliate.
And then it went horribly wrong.
We were in the Great Depression, which led then to a socialist progressive movement where they were accusing the Republicans and the conservative movement for not understanding how an economy works.
And they were blamed for the economy, which led to 15 years of progressive, socialist kind of economics and kept the United States in a depression until there was a global war.
I don't see the good thing is I don't see any similarities at all.
I don't see any similarities.
I think we're okay.
Really?
Because what you just said has a lot of similarities to what we're facing.
I don't see any of them.
Really?
I don't see a single one.
It's incredible.
I mean, this is, you know, there's a couple of ideas of how this was going with the president because I think everybody, even most of the supporters of Donald Trump, recognized that he had some really good ideas and some really bad ideas.
And so the idea was year one, was it, A, he decided to, the people around him and him decided to do the things that were his good ideas and wait until year two to do the bad ones.
In other words, the people around him talked him into prioritizing the things that they liked, right?
Is it that?
Or was it the optimistic side?
Trump gets into office, realizes sort of the realities of the situation, maybe throws away some of the worst rhetoric about trade and some of these other issues that would be damaging and just decides not to do them.
We still don't know what the real answer to that is because he's hasn't done a lot of the trade stuff.
He's announced these tariffs are not in effect yet.
He has done other tariffs.
I mean, if you want to be optimistic, you hope that he doesn't actually follow through with these things.
Maybe he sees the thousand-point stock market drop.
And again, he likes to win.
He's not going to like the idea of a falling stock market.
Maybe he changes his mind.
It will really hurt him.
It will really hurt him.
By the way, you know, as you were talking, I thought, okay, I know why Stu is starting to see some similarities.
Oh, okay.
Okay, but it was a different time, Stu.
A different time.
It was a different time.
Okay.
For instance, back then, there was this big movement by one party to say that Russia is fine and it's good and there are friends.
And then there was the other group, they were all saying that National Socialism isn't Nazism, but even Nazis were starting to grow up all around the country and the world.
So there was a.
Yeah.
So there was an embracing of Russia and also National Socialist.
So big time asterisks.
Yeah, it's totally different.
Totally different.
Totally different.
Wow.
It's scary because protectionism breeds more protectionism.
It's one of those things, it's like spending on schools.
Oh, well, we're not spending enough on schools.
Then you increase the amount you spend on schools and you realize, well, that hasn't improved the situation at all.
That's because we're not spending enough on schools.
And so you spend more on schools and then you say, well, that's not really doing anything.
That's because we're not spending enough on schools.
Wait a minute.
Now we're spending more on schools than any other nation in the developed world.
Yeah, but we're not spending enough on schools.
That's the answer.
And that's what happens with these trade situations.
So isn't it interesting?
They aren't high enough.
Isn't it interesting, too, that Vladimir Putin came out yesterday and said that he's got a new weapon?
Have you heard about this?
Yes.
It's indestructible.
It's indestructible.
Like the Titanic.
And it sounds like scramjet technology, which we've never been able to develop scramjet technology because all alloys melt at that speed.
It just can't hold up at that speed.
So if we had that technology, we could do things where you could be on the planet, you know, anywhere in the planet in 20 minutes.
You know, you could be anywhere in the planet in five minutes if you have scramjet technology.
They apparently have that.
It's amazing.
And so he did an interview yesterday with Megan Kelly where he said, yeah, we have it.
Of course, they're only showing, you know, an animation.
They're not showing any of the footage of it, which makes some skeptics say He doesn't really have it.
Now, this is entirely different.
I want you to understand, historically, this is entirely different than when in the 1980s, Russia was mired in a never-ending war, and they were on the economic brink, and they were doing all this crazy stuff, and their ruble and the banks, and they were starting to lose faith with all the rest of their allies.
And then Ronald Reagan came in and said, I've got Star Wars technology, lasers, which will shoot things out of the sky.
And of course, we didn't have that technology, but it started an arms race.
Oh, oh, oh, it's entirely different.
Yesterday in the interview with Megan Kelly, Vladimir Putin said, We're in an arms race now.
So the best thing we can do, if we learn from history, is engage in that arms race and just spend like crazy.
Well, then now you've really blown it up because Reagan's dead.
So it can't be the same.
And let me just say that again: Reagan's dead.
Dead.
Doesn't really sound optimistic.
Dead.
I was trying to be optimistic.
Dead.
You're not very, very dead.
Stu.
Help me out here.
We can sit down.
I don't know.
You know, look, we just, you have to hope that he doesn't do these things, right?
I mean, you have to hope that he has one bad experience with his terrorists.
He's never going to admit it.
It was a mistake.
But you hope that after he sees the results of these things, maybe he decides not to go out on a limb because all of his economic advisors inside, I mean, Larry Kudlow is hammering on him.
He's one of the guys who designed the tax plan for Donald Trump.
You know, Gary Cohn, they're talking about him potentially leaving the administration over this.
He does not have, with the exception of a couple really anti-trade people that he's put into the administration, most people in the administration don't agree with him on this.
Well, here's the good thing.
Completely unlike 1929, where a thousand, a thousand economists said, don't do this, Mr. President.
And the scary thing is, Trump really believes this one.
Oh, yeah.
This one is him.
Yeah, this one is him.
This is the one that we were really afraid of.
I mean, we were afraid of a lot of things, and he's come through on a lot of things.
Yeah.
This one we were really afraid of because I remember saying, I guarantee you this will happen because he believes this.
And this is something that he has, he's rooted himself on, and he believes to the depth of his soul.
And I can give you all the numbers on the other times we've tried this, that the best case scenario is over $300,000 per job.
That's the best one we've been able to accomplish.
Best ZipRecruiter Hiring Strategies00:03:58
They go a lot worse.
The worst one was $2.34 million per job saved in the steel industry.
And these are much smaller tariffs.
Let's just write a check for a million dollars for all the people that might lose their job in the steel industry.
Yeah, it would certainly save us a lot of money.
But I mean, forget that even.
Think about it from a conservative ideological level.
Let's say Obamacare.
Take tax hikes that are going to fund programs.
Why don't we like those?
Because they're a redistribution of wealth, right?
The government's getting involved in the middle of this process and saying, hey, I'm going to take from group A and give to Group B. Remember Joe the Plumber, right?
It's a redistribution of wealth.
We're taking from group A and we're giving to group B.
We as conservatives don't like when the government makes those decisions.
Now go to tariffs.
What is that?
A tariff is the government adding a tax on consumers taking from group A and distributing it to group B, the favorite industry of the moment, steel, aluminum, washing, and washing machines, whatever the product is.
It is a redistribution of wealth.
Forget whether it works, which it doesn't, but it is a fundamental violation of everything we've argued about over the past 30 years.
Whatever.
If you, is that what?
That is the attitude.
Yeah, whatever, whatever.
I mean, if you were right, the Dow would be down 320 points.
Oh my gosh, it's down 320 points.
that's weird we have to watch the uh watch wall street Wall Street has broken some psychological barriers and it could fall between 3,000 and 5,000 points in the next few days.
And that becomes a bear market.
Many people believe we are now, we've entered, as of yesterday, a bear market.
The technical number to watch for is to see if the Dow closes at 23,860.
If it declines below that number, that's a psychological barrier.
And into a bear market, we're at 24,276.
So we got a long way to go.
Don't worry about that.
All right.
Sarah, our sponsor this half hour is ZipRecruiter.
If you're hiring, you need great people.
ZipRecruiter is there.
Something better than posting your job online and just praying for the right people to see it.
ZipRecruiter has a smarter way.
They've built a platform that actually finds the right candidates for you.
And ZipRecruiter learns what you're looking for and identifies the people with the right experience and invites them to apply for your job.
These invitations have changed the way things work.
You know, if you were posting before, you had to wait for it, you had to, you know, sort through a whole bunch of stuff, and you were hoping that somebody who was really great was going to apply for your job, would see your ad.
Now, 80% of employers who post a job on ZipRecruiter get a high-quality candidate through the site in the first day.
And they go further than this.
They spotlight the strongest applications that you receive so you never miss a great match.
The right candidates are there.
They're waiting for you.
Reach out to them with ZipRecruiter.
Find out today why ZipRecruiter has been used by businesses of all sizes and industries to find the most qualified job candidates with immediate results.
ZipRecruiter.
Try it for free at ziprecruiter.com slash Beck.
That's ziprecruiter.com slash Beck.
Glenn back Mercury.
Kushner's Political Strategy Backfire00:16:05
Glenn back.
So I'm anxious to talk to Bill O'Reilly because there are days that Bill and I don't agree on anything.
And I'm not sure where he stands on tariffs or I'm not sure.
He likes the politics of it, though.
I mean, that's what he likes to dive into.
I don't.
I really, I'm tired of looking at politics as a sport.
There's too much at stake.
It's not like, oh, my team didn't win.
Oh, well, next year, my team is the country.
Yeah.
No, I mean, it'll be interesting.
I think, you know, look, we're joking about the DAO being down at some level.
Like, you can't judge these things immediately by them.
The DAO may be up in a week and replace all these gates.
There's a hundred things that can happen at bad policy.
Yeah, this time next week, we should know about the DAO.
And, you know, and it took a couple of years for protectionism to really destroy the global economy.
And there may be no retaliation over this if it's limited to this.
Have you seen what China has done?
They've just made, you know, they've just made an emperor out of their president.
He's a great leader, though.
Yeah.
And he did ban.
I'm not kidding, you stu.
He did ban the letter N this week.
The letter N has been banned in China.
Wait until you hear the reason.
It's crazy.
Glenn back.
Mercury.
Love.
Courage.
Truth.
Glenn back.
President Trump made the biggest blunder in his presidency yesterday, bigger than the NRA meeting that he had, because this one will actually affect the economy.
And the economy is what keeps him afloat.
Trump announced yesterday that his administration will impose a 25% tariff on steel and 10% on aluminum.
The move has been debated inside the White House for months and advisors have been split, but Trump is going for it.
He sees this as a way of helping struggling industries in the U.S., but it almost never helps.
For decades, the U.S. steel industry has lobbied the government to help them compete with foreign steel.
But the data is clear.
Protectionist policies only make things more expensive for consumers with few benefits for the protected industry.
Past presidential attempts to give the steel industry a boost has not gone well.
In 2002, President Bush placed tariffs ranging from 8% to 30% on steel products.
One year later, there was so much international backlash and bad economic consequences that he got rid of the tariffs.
Top advisors warned about retaliation from other countries.
The Defense Department warned about how this will affect close allies.
But Trump was eager to make the announcement anyway.
And in a room full of steel and aluminum executives at the White House, he said, you know, when it comes to a time where a country can't make aluminum and steel, you don't have a country.
Stock market didn't take kindly to this announcement.
The Dow dropped 500 points.
They are now saying that we are approaching a bear market.
Some people are saying that in the next few days, the bears will take over and we could drop anywhere.
I've heard the kindest drop of 2,000 additional points all the way to 5,000 points.
Companies that make products with steel and aluminum are not happy, already warning about losses of jobs in those industries and increased prices for consumers.
Increased prices for consumers?
Wonder where they got that idea.
Oh, that's right.
That's right.
History.
Ben Sasse had a surprisingly strong reaction in a statement saying, let's be clear, the president is proposing a massive tax increase on American families.
You'd expect policy this bad from a leftist administration, but not a supposed Republican one.
Why now?
Perhaps Donald Trump thought it would end his week of bad press on a more positive note.
I'm doing something for the American workers.
But if that was his strategy, it is going to backfire.
It's Friday, March 2nd.
This is the Glenn Beck program.
Bill O'Reilly, this has not been a pleasant week to be in the White House.
I kind of feel bad for Donald Trump.
His advisors all around him, the ones that he has trusted, are leaving.
And now the long knives are out for Kushner, and he's kind of left there in a tough spot this week.
Bec, I think, number one, you should be Secretary of Commerce.
I definitely think you should get that job.
Okay, good.
Thank you.
I'm about six blocks away from Mar-a-Largo right now.
All right, sitting here in South Florida, beautiful weather, looking at lots of boats on the intercoastal waterway, all made of steel and fiberglass.
But I got to tell you, and your audience, that I don't know what I'm talking about when it comes to tariffs or any of that business stuff.
You're much smarter than I am in that area.
Perhaps the only area that is okay.
As far as Jared Kushner is concerned, I don't know him.
I met him one time in a dank New York City bar after the Saturday Night Live show that Trump did.
I don't think Jared Kushner is going to affect the U.S. government one way or the other, whether he's there or he's not there.
But, you know, look, Trump is a gambler kind of guy.
He's rolling the dice that his bellicose style is going to back people down overseas, and then he'll quickly make deals that are great for America, you know, blah, blah, blah.
That's what this is all about.
So you don't think that he'll actually do this?
Is he spooking the stock market?
No, I don't think he very rarely carries through on these kind of extreme actions.
He puts them out, and then people get nervous, particularly in China.
And then they come to some kind of accommodation.
So if I had to predict, but again, I don't know anything, I would say that would probably be the case this time.
So President G was in China was made, I guess, emperor.
I mean, I don't know what you call it now, totalitarian ruler for life.
And I mean, here's a guy who's literally this week banned the letter N from the alphabet.
It doesn't, I mean, he doesn't sound like a guy who's going to take kindly to a trade war.
They're already starting to rattle the trade war sabers all around the world.
Do you know of a time in history when this has paid off?
Because Donald Trump tweeted this morning, it's easy to win a trade war, and I can't find one where we've won.
No, I don't.
But I got to tell you that I do know China's got some economic problems.
Yes.
And they're more inclined to try to work things out to give Trump, you know, at least symbolic victory than they would be if that was a country that was running on all engines go ahead.
They got problems over there in China.
That's why this guy had to be made emperor for life or whatever.
And that's a joke.
I mean, it's the military that basically tells the Chinese people who's going to run and who isn't going to run.
But, you know, again, there's a lot of stuff that happens that we don't know about, we, the press, don't know about.
I'm not, I'm agnostic on this.
Okay, so let me change, let me change the subject.
So let's go to Russia for a second.
We're going to get to guns because I can't wait to hear your take on what's happened this week.
But let me go first to Russia.
Vladimir Putin said yesterday that he's got a new intercontinental ballistic missile.
It sounds like scramjet technology, which is mythical technology, at least at this point.
There is no alloy that can hold up on the heat for that kind of speed.
But he says they now have it.
They've tested it.
It works.
They're only showing us animation.
And then in an interview with Megan Kelly, he said, we're in another Cold War.
And it started a while ago.
Is this Ronald Reagan and Star Wars?
Are they bluffing?
Do they have it?
And what does it mean either way?
I have no idea on any of those questions.
Holy cow, what are you doing?
I mean, are you just at the beach this week?
What are you doing?
No.
You know, again, the physics spec, you're impressing me, the economic grasp you have.
I mean, this is like I'm going to a tutorial.
Okay, all right.
Okay, so forget about this.
Let me answer.
Here's what I know about Russia.
I know this for sure.
All right.
Vladimir Putin wants to adopt Megan Kelly.
Okay, that's number one.
The papers have already been filed.
He wants her as his, you know, his adoptive daughter.
Number two, Vladimir Putin would like to kill me because in the interview I did with Donald Trump shortly after he was elected, I scolded Trump for dealing with Putin, who I described as a killer accurately.
So if I see anybody with a Russian accent, I'm very nervous at this point.
Number three, the animation, I believe Disney is now going to put that out with the voices of Ellen DeGeneres, Glenn Backnoard, and It's going to be called Missiles Over Disney World.
Right.
And it's going to be really a big hit.
So is he just, is this all he wants to do is shake the cage.
He wants to frighten everybody.
Big Bad Vlad.
I have a giant missile in my garage.
And I'll show it to you, maybe.
But first, you got to watch a cartoon.
I don't know.
I mean, we should not talk to you while you're on vacation.
No, I'm not on vacation.
I'm working.
Okay, so then.
But you got, look, whatever Putin does, you have to step back and say the guy is doing.
Putin's like Trump.
This is what people don't understand.
It's all about show biz.
It's all about presentation.
It's all about attention getting.
Putin and Trump are like the same person, although, you know, Putin's a killer.
I don't know.
I was going to say there's a big difference.
Putin's a killer.
All right, but they're just showmen.
This is P.T. Barnum.
So when Putin sits down with Megan Kelly, you know, I'm going, sure, Putin's going to say anything.
And he does.
And he does.
So, Bill, let me ask you this.
Two things we've talked about, international instability, world problems, and financial potential problems, as we're seeing with the stock market and things like this.
There's two theories that go on with Donald Trump where you have his base level of support at 30, 35%, something like that.
And there's the idea of, are these people super loyal and will stick with him through anything?
Or is the economy, if he loses the economy, what happens to his approval rating?
Finished.
He's at 18%.
So that's why you got to figure that Trump knows that.
The only way he's going to get reelected is if the economy continues to be good.
Okay.
So he knows it.
It's a simple equation.
That's it.
So let's take a break and come back because I really, I've been waiting to hear what you have to say about Donald Trump's comments in the White House this week, the Democrats and their bill, their new gun bill that appears, we haven't been able to see it yet, but it appears to only ban 80% of all guns sold.
And I'd like your thoughts on this and where America is really headed when we come back.
Bill O'Reilly dot com is the place to go to get Bill's analysis in which he on his site.
He answers all the questions.
Yeah.
He comes here and he says he doesn't know anything, but then he goes away.
He has all the answers on his site.
So you can go to billorilly.com.
The answers are subscription-based.
Once you sign up for billoriley.com, then he answers your question about trade in Russia.
Well, he's, you know, he's not going to give away, you know.
Right.
Well, why, why throw pearls in front of the pigs?
You know what I mean?
All right.
Realestateagentsitrust.com.
This is a company that knows there has got to be a better way to choose the right real estate agent.
I mean, it really goes down to the marketing of the agent.
It goes down to the track record of the agent.
I mean, you know, when you take your car to the dealer and something just doesn't feel right, because you're not a mechanic and they're like, you need a new defibrillator.
You stand there like, I've never heard of a defibrillator before, but I'm not a mechanic.
You have to be able to trust the mechanic, right?
Same thing with a real estate agent.
Do you want one who's just trying to get a listing for somebody else to sell it, or worse, one that undervalues your home just to sell it quickly?
At realestateagentsitrust.com, my team has assembled the best agents in your town who I trust will go and get the most money for your home, work harder than anybody else.
Our agents are all full-time professionals who have a great track record.
Their word is their bond, and they're also all big fans of the program.
So they're cut from the same cloth you are.
A handshake is the deal.
They're going to do the job for you.
Go to realestateagentsitrust.com.
You're looking to buy or sell realestate agentsitrust.com.
Glenn, Mercury, Glenn Beck.
It has been quite a week for gun sales in America.
The Second Amendment is under attack.
And let's start with what happened this week with the televised White House meeting with both the left and the right.
What happened there, Bill?
Again, it's the same thing with Putin.
Second Amendment Under Attack00:15:01
It was a TV show, reality-based show.
Truth just says whatever pops into his mind.
And then three days later, he contradicts himself.
But you guys were mocking BillO'Reilly.com subscriptions, which are $50 a year, the best money you've ever spent.
We did an investigation on shootings, mass shootings.
And did you know they're down 50% from the 1990s in the USA?
It really is an incredible stat.
I mean, even people who look at this all the time are amazed by that.
And the school shootings are so rare.
So rare.
Car accidents killing kids are way, way ahead of mass shootings.
Now, that's not to diminish what happened in Browley County at all.
But this whole gun thing, here's what's going to happen.
All right.
I'll just tell you what's going to happen so that your audience doesn't have to listen to all of BS.
Yeah, I know.
I think our audiences stopped listening to the BS on the news channels a while ago.
Oh, well, good.
Because if you look at their ratings, particularly for Fox, they're in trouble.
Yeah.
Okay.
So 21 is going to be the age to buy a firearm in the United States.
That's going to happen.
All right.
And I think it should.
If you look at the insurance for cars between 18 and 21, you pay more because you're not fully formed as an adult with 26, if that, if you ever make it.
Okay, so I'll agree with you on that.
Hang on just a second.
But how do you square I'm sending an 18-year-old to war, but here at home, they're not fully developed enough to be able to protect themselves.
The 18-year-old who volunteers to go to the military is then trained and is doing a job of protection.
So if you do have a law that 21, certainly military personnel will be exempted from that law, as other people will as well.
There'll be exemptions, not everybody.
But generally speaking, it's going to be 21.
Okay.
All right.
The second thing that's going to happen is increased background checks because the technology is there now for a database that shows that certain people shouldn't have guns.
People involved in violence and people involved in psychiatric situations.
Okay, wait a minute.
Wait a minute.
Wait, wait, wait.
Let's stop there with psychiatric evaluations.
What does that mean?
It means that each state, and that's going to have to be done state by state, not on the federal level.
Each state is going to have a database of people that they put on a no-buy list, like a no-fly list.
There's a no-fly list now.
Certain people around the world cannot buy a ticket on an American airline because the government deems them to be threats.
The states are going to do the same thing.
So if you have a person who's been taken into custody five times by the local police, maybe not even with a conviction, that person is going to be on a no-buy list at the state level.
Now, the person can appeal it, can certainly appeal it.
You've got to give people the chance to do that.
But those increased background checks are going to happen.
So wait, I can't get past this guy.
You've said that, I mean, basically, you're saying you're not convicted.
And I understand that.
You're not convicted, but we're going to take your right away anyway.
You're not going to take the right away.
You're going to have to appeal the state's determination that you're a threat to public safety.
Is that backward, though, with the constitutional right perspective, Bill?
And the guilty.
I assume there'll be challenges to that, but I think the states are going to say we have the right to regulate in our boundaries, all right, who has access to dangerous weapons.
So is that not infringement?
What does the court say?
Is that not infringement?
Well, in D.C., they tried to ban all guns, remember?
And then the courts ruled against them.
Okay, so you can't do that.
So will this include, for instance, all those veterans that came back and many of them, you know, said, yeah, I've, because they were encouraged, encouraged by the government to say PTSD because you'll get extra benefits.
If they march so I don't, I don't think that would be, I mean, if I were the governor of a state, and again, this is a state-by-state thing, all right, I wouldn't certainly, anybody who goes for therapy is not going to be on the list.
It's people who have been taken into custody, all right, who have been interacting with the authorities on a level that the authorities are worried about them, not people who are trying to get help for a certain malady.
But I do believe that that's going to happen.
I find this, I've only got 30 seconds, so I will wait for your third thing.
I find this extremely disturbing because we have this problem, not in all states, but certainly in places like Massachusetts, where you have to prove to the state that you should have medical control over your child, and the state will come in and take children away.
And we have seen it over and over again to where the burden of proof is on you.
No, wait a minute.
That's the reverse of the American system.
Back in a minute.
Glenn, back.
Mercury is the Glenn Beck program so So Bill O'Reilly says there's three things that are going to happen with increased gun control.
And the first one was you won't be able to buy a gun unless you're 21.
Bill, does that mean that I can't give my 20-year-old daughter a gun?
Can she carry a gun if dad gives it to her?
Or is it only she can't buy it?
No, you can still carry it and you can go hunting and get a hunting license and all of that.
You just can't go into the store and buy it.
Okay.
The second thing you said is that we're going to have increased background checks, depending on what that is.
I mean, there is 38 states.
Only 38 states are required to report everything to background checks, which is a real problem.
But depending on what that means, that may be okay.
And you said the third thing is.
You got to have armed security guards in every public school.
And again, that's a state thing.
And it's easy to do because you just put the guards on salary like you have teachers and coaches.
And it said based on population of the school, how many you have.
And that would go a long, long way to providing protection and security to the nation's kids.
Why hasn't any state done this already where they've made a big deal and come in?
No, I don't know.
I mean, I used to teach high school down here in South Florida where I am now.
And I got into a few physical scrapes with students, gang people who intruded on the campus.
And I wish there had been armed security way back then.
So I can't answer that question.
It just seems logical in this crazy age we live in.
But I want to tell all your listeners that, you know, the banning of certain guns, like the AR-15s, that's not going to happen.
Trump would never sign that ever in a million years.
So the Democrats, they can put forth their bill that want to ban everything, this, that, and the other.
That's never, ever going to happen in this country at this point.
Now, if the Democrats take both houses of Congress and the presidency, you know, they try, but I think it would be ruled unconstitutional as well.
If you're a rancher and you're living in Star County, Texas, or you're living near Bisbee, Arizona, and you know that every night there are scores of people coming through your property and you have no idea who they are.
They shouldn't be in this country, and some of them are armed.
You're telling me you can't have an AR-15 to protect your family?
That's insane.
So, I mean, I think the AR-15s have to be licensed.
I think you have to go through training to have them.
I think the government's going to have to know you have them, but you can't ban them.
And that's exactly, and Trump would never, ever sign a law saying that.
Well, the problem is, is the bill that they're talking about is now, you know, anything with a removable magazine.
Well, that's almost every handgun.
That's not going to happen.
But it's not going to happen.
Right.
Okay.
I'm just saying.
So here's what's happened, though, Bill, is the left, and I'm talking about the reasonable left.
I'm not talking about the political left.
I'm talking about the people who are, you know, your average Democrat, hardworking person in the, you know, wherever, okay, that is not involved in politics and is reasonable.
Those people who don't have any access to guns, they are afraid of guns because they've not grown up around them.
They've not seen them.
They're not trying to gun grab, but they are frightened by them.
On the other side, the other side is frightened by the gun grabbers.
And when people say, We're not coming for your guns, but then you propose a bill that would affect all handguns and about 40% of all rifles, that is coming for the guns.
When you have a president say, you know, we'll just, I want to go get the guns and then do process, that's frightening to people who believe in the Second Amendment.
Certainly.
But again, Trump just says whatever's on his mind in the reality show that he creates, and then three days later he goes, well, I didn't really mean it.
I know a lot about what his capacity is, and I know that that's all the Democrats and their seizure of weapons is never going to happen.
However, I would carve out in Illinois, I would carve out an exception that you can seize the weapons from all the gangsters who are killing innocent people by the hundreds in the windy city.
Those weapons you can seize.
All right.
You know, the hypocrisy here is just insane.
But you need an eloquent spokesperson.
And the NRA, you know, their problem is they're too intrangent.
They have to bend a little bit because we are living in an age where there's a lot of insane people running around.
Why do they have to tell you, Bill, I don't think that the NRA is being unreasonable at all.
They don't want 21.
They don't want the 21 age.
There isn't any accommodation that I've seen that the NRA wants.
No, no, no.
They did bump stocks there fine with.
And background checks if they're in line.
You can't just say, we want universal background checks.
Wait a minute.
What does it mean for the veteran?
What does it mean for the guy who has a son or daughter who's depressed on antidepressants or been deemed a danger?
Does mom and dad now, can they have a gun in the house?
I mean, you know, there's a lot of questions to be answered on that, but they're willing to look at those things, as I think most reasonable people are, as long as it's not one more step that gets us closer to a gun grab.
Yes, I'm not disagreeing with any of that, but the NRA needs to basically put forth, all right, a very, very specific viewpoint and convince people who think they're the devil.
We're turning to Bill O'Reilly from Demonized from BillOreilly.com, who is a bit of a Trump whisperer, I would say.
I mean, I will say that these conversations help me translate some of the moments from the week from Donald Trump.
Stu, that's why I'm really here on the planet, to help you and to guide you through the maze that our society has come.
What a sad existence.
I mean, it may not be your goal, but it does happen.
I'm like a Franciscan missionary to the Blendeck program.
I have my sandals on my frock.
And I want to tell, on that note, I want to tell everybody that this week we've released Killing Jesus in paperback, first time.
It's Lent, Easter coming.
There is no one you won't kill.
You know, that was the toughest book that we've written out of the seven killing because we did it as a history and we couldn't rely on the theology.
We had to rely on the Roman records and the Jewish records.
And it was really a swog, but we did it.
That was a massive, massive worldwide bestseller.
But first time in paperback, Killing Jesus, and apropos to the time that we're in.
Okay.
So let's switch gears here and help us understand one more thing.
Jeff Sessions.
I don't understand it.
I mean, he's calling him Mr. Magoo, reportedly, behind closed doors.
That's a bad nickname.
Sessions' nickname should be Rip Van Sessions.
The guy is napping throughout the day.
No, no, no.
Well, here, Stu, again, this is my mission.
This is why you're here.
I want to clarify for Stu.
You ready?
Yes, I'm ready.
If you're Al Capone, are you afraid of Rip Van Sessions?
Are you afraid he's coming for you?
We need a tough guy in that job.
And, you know, Senator Sessions, he's just not cut out for it.
I put him somewhere else.
I bring in Rudy Giuliani or somebody like that.
Hold on just a second.
No, come on now.
Rudy Giuliani.
I like Rudy Giuliani, but Rudy Giuliani.
Listen, if I'm president and he's my attorney general, he'll be in my office and I'll be like, hey, what happened to that gang?
And somebody in the room will just look at me and go, don't ask that question.
I mean, yeah, is he a tough guy?
He's going to get things done for you, but you know, maybe not necessarily the way everybody wants to read about it or hear about it on television.
Need for a Tough Attorney General00:03:49
Jeff Sessions is hard nose, but constitutional.
And that's kind of what the fight was about this week.
He's so political.
He's so CYA.
Oh, you're crazy.
He's not a tough guy.
If he were a tough guy, he would have gone in against the FBI because it's clear the FBI booted the Hillary Clinton email investigation, and that's going to be proven.
He would have gone in against them a long time ago.
So why not use the inspector general?
That's what the system says.
Yeah, but they already know what that report is.
That's why McCabe got booted out of the FBI, the second in command.
They already know that.
But Rip Van Sessions is trying to play it, you know, like, oh, what should I do?
Am I going to get in trouble?
He's out of there anyway.
Trump doesn't like him.
They just have to do it in a way that's not going to, you know, blow the country up because once Sessions goes.
And remember, Sessions was demonized as being a racist, as being this, and being that.
Remember all that?
Yeah, but he was demonic.
When they fire him, TNL is going to canonize them.
Oh, this guy.
How could you let him?
Oh, yeah.
No, you're totally right.
No, you're right on that.
Right on that.
But I mean, when he came into office, he came in from Trump's, obviously, big-time Trump supporter, one of the earliest.
In fact, the first senators to support him, a guy who, to his own words, put his entire career on the line to go against the rest of the Republicans.
And I think was a turning point for Donald Trump.
Yeah, I think in a positive way for his campaign.
He also didn't put his career on the line because Alabama was going to go for Trump no matter what.
So again, come on.
But he was an early supporter of Trump.
And when he got appointed, I was more than willing to give him a chance and say, okay, you got to go against the sanctuary cities.
You got to go in.
Look, this mayor of Oakland should be in cuffs today.
You know what she did?
She tipped off all the criminal illegal aliens, all the felons out there.
The dice was coming in to grab them, and they all split.
I mean, well, why isn't she arrested?
Okay, I'll give you that.
I'll give you that.
I was talking about the internal Washington stuff, but you're right on that.
You're right on that.
Yeah, well, okay, so Rip Van Sessions, somebody wake him up and say, that woman obstructed federal justice.
Arrest her.
Do you think he's got the cojones to do that?
Do you?
Probably not.
Probably not.
You're right on that one.
However, he was a very single thing I said on this broadcast.
Yeah, which included twice, I don't know.
I was right on that.
You were right on that.
So wait a minute.
So what happened to Sessions then?
He's always been known as, you know, a stormtrooper when it comes to illegal aliens.
He hates them.
That's the big reason he supported Trump.
And then you're the stormtrooper.
So what happened?
What changed?
Then what changed?
Because you've got to understand there's a difference between rhetoric and action.
All right.
I mean, all these, oh, I'm going to do this.
And then they don't do anything because there's always blowback.
If you put out an arrest warrant to the mayor of Oakland, all hell's going to break loose.
And you are going to be, you know, the people on CNN are going to start melting down.
He's a Nazi.
You know, and he doesn't want to take the heat.
He doesn't want to take it.
It's clear that Sessions doesn't want to take the heat.
So why do we have him then?
We need a tough guy attorney general in this country.
Stormtrooper Rhetoric vs Action00:03:04
All right.
Bill O'Reilly, thank you very much.
Appreciate it.
Always good to talk to you.
Even when you're in your Franksinskin monk sandals, it's still good to talk to you.
Bill, listeners are pointing out that earlier in the program, you said the word bellicose, but did not identify it as the word of the day.
Is that, would you say that that is?
It is.
It is.
Okay.
Word of the day.
Bellicose.
Bellicose.
Bill O'Reilly, BillO'Reilly.com and Killing Jesus.
Just another one on his, you know, on his, just another notch on his belt.
Killing Jesus is out in paperback.
Bill O'Reilly from BillO'Reilly.com.
Thanks a lot.
Can you imagine taking a car on a 100-day test drive or getting a pair of new shoes and having 100 days to walk around and feel just how comfortable they are?
I can't wait to get home to take these shoes off.
Honey, we haven't left the garage yet.
I don't think that, I don't think a 100-day shoe test drive for women changes a damn thing.
I know they're really uncomfortable, but they look good.
Oh, okay.
Anyway, Casper, if you're looking for a good night's sleep, 100 nights to test the Casper mattress in your own home with their 100-night sleep challenge.
The Casper mattress has a unique combination of foams that provide the right pressure relief and alignment so you feel perfectly balanced and comfortable.
And it ships free right to your door.
And if you don't love it, they're going to come and pick it up for free and give you a full refund.
So there's nothing to lose.
The choice is test a mattress by actually sleeping on it for 100 nights in your home or go to a store fully clothed in your shoes and your jacket and roll around on a few mattresses for a few minutes each.
This is really a no-brainer.
Take Casper's 100-night sleep challenge.
You'll love your new mattress.
Casper, they guarantee it at casper.com.
Use the promo code Beck and you'll save 50 bucks on select mattresses.
That's promo code Beck at Casper.com.
Casper.com.
Terms and conditions to apply.
Mercury Glenn Beck Frank in Washington.
Welcome to the Glenn Beck program.
Good morning, Glenn.
How are you?
I'm well.
Say, I'd like to raise with you a topic that I've been aware of for a good 15, 20, 25 years, maybe even as long as I've been active in the gun rights issues.
But it cannot get an honest hearing before the NRA.
It can't even get an honest hearing before, quote-unquote, pro-gun Republicans.
What is that?
That is the blind, it's the blind identification database system, known as BIDS for short.
It would be an alternative to NICS.
And the prime selling point about it is that rather than the database of prohibited persons residing at a cube farm in Washington or Virginia or wherever, that database resides at the point of sale.
Flaws in School Safety Systems00:16:00
So all federal firearms licensed have a database of prohibited persons.
When somebody comes in and wants to buy a gun, they're checked against the database and they're either approved or denied.
If they're approved, the federal government does not know that a transaction took place other than the records that the federal firearms dealer keeps.
And furthermore, if I want to sell a gun private party, we can both go down to a federal firearms licensee and pay him the $15 or $20 fee, whatever it is for his services.
And I can check my buyer against the database.
So this idea has been around for a long time and it was floated back in the days of floppy disks.
Okay.
Nowadays, we've got blockchain.
So, Frank, I have to tell you, I don't know anything about it, but let me look into it over the weekend.
We'll do some research, and I'll get back to you on Monday.
Sounds like a good idea on the surface.
We'll look into it.
Glenn, back.
Mercury. Love.
Courage. Truth.
Glenn Beck.
There is nothing better than lifetime appointments to power.
Okay?
Just keep track.
We want to start a list.
George Orwell's Animal Farm, Winnie the Pooh, and the letter N. What do they all have in common?
Well, they're just the beginnings of things that have been banned in China this week.
Why?
Because they promote the criticism of Chinese President Xi Jinping.
Right?
The letter N. Hello.
It does.
He is.
Believe it or not, it does.
He has announced that he is extending his presidency into a lifetime appointment.
He's the first to do so since Mao.
And, you know, he's worried that reading Animal Farm will make citizens question communism.
And you know what?
When the Chinese get a lifetime ruler, it always works out well.
Winnie the Pooh, apparently, is a problem because there is a specific image of the bear clutching honey, you know, and next to the quote: find the thing that you love and stick with it.
It must have some other meaning in China.
Apparently, he is spouting cynical commentary about President G's indefinite position.
Now, the letter N apparently not sure on this, but apparently is used as a code letter if you're printing something that is against the government.
So you can't use the letter N anymore.
That caused some real problems, you know, online.
For instance, this would be the Gletbeck show.
And on the internet, you know, the use of all the letters of the alphabet is probably needed.
So they unbanned that one pretty quickly.
Now, this isn't new to the Chinese people.
President G has been, you know, periodically censoring specific things for years.
He controls the media.
He controls the government in almost every aspect of Chinese citizens' lives.
But it's about to get much worse because he's now a lifelong dictator.
And as I said before, that usually doesn't work out all so well for the people.
It's Friday, March 2nd.
This is the Glenn Beck program.
Adam Foss is a new friend, and he's the founder and executive director of Prosecutor Impact.
He is a juvenile justice reformer, and he is somebody who will challenge your thinking.
And I think is an honest, open guy that wants to really have a dialogue.
And I called him earlier this week and asked about what was happening in Parkland High School.
Because the last time Adam was on, we talked about how we needed to be able to get kids so they are not going into the justice system.
What can we do to keep kids out of the justice system?
I read about Parkland High School had the promise, which was kind of along those same lines.
And I wanted to know from Adam, is this the same kind of program?
And if so, what's gone wrong here in Florida?
Welcome to the program, Adam.
How are you?
Good.
I'm doing well.
Thanks for having me back.
It's good to talk to you.
All right.
So as somebody who believes that the justice system is flawed and that we are putting just, we're just putting people into a system that just is broken.
However, I want to make sure that the bad guys, the people who can really do damage, also aren't given so many chances like this kid was in Florida.
Can you tell me what you know about the system of the promise and where it failed, if you think it did?
Sure.
The rhetoric right now about this having anything to do with the failure of school discipline policies is, to me, politicizing something that started back at Columbine, where in the wake of Columbine, we instituted zero tolerance policies to prevent mass shootings in schools.
What those zero tolerance policies did a really good job of was creating the school-to-prison pipeline, which is one of the many things that have contributed to mass incarceration, but certainly disproportionately affects young people of color and poor kids, kids with special needs and disabilities in school, because it gave teachers and administrators the tool of arrest as opposed to other things that we grew up with to discipline school kids.
That's not what happened here.
In fact, Mr. Cruz was suspended and expelled from his schools.
It wasn't the reticence of teachers to discipline this kid.
It was the failure of people to see what was going on when he was out of school on social media, in his home, and in the FBI.
So do you have any idea, being a prosecutor, you know, the sheriff has said, well, you know, we couldn't do anything.
Was this, because there's speculation that the school district was trying to, you know, not have their record tainted, et cetera, et cetera, and not have these problems and sort of sweep them under the rug.
Does that seem logical to you?
Or does that seem like what you know, does that seem like that could have happened?
And do prosecutors have a right to go in with this particular kid and say, okay, there's something going on here.
We need to make sure he's away from guns, et cetera, et cetera.
Prosecutors don't have a right to do anything.
The government doesn't have a right to do anything unless there's reasonable suspicion or probable cause or somebody makes a complaint.
And to me, there were several people making complaints long before Parkland.
He was suspended or expelled from two different private schools.
He was 19 when he was in this school.
People knew who he was coming in.
And from the investigation, it looks like there was plenty of evidence on social media of his intention.
It was literally this kid crying for, I don't want to say crying for help, but there were plenty of red flags that were missed somewhere along the line.
What's ironic to me is that being a prosecutor in an urban city, we use social media all the time to target quote-unquote at-risk youth for their behavior on social media.
I don't think that this is much as much as a school district trying to sweep something under the rug.
I think it is the disparate treatment of children from different socioeconomic and different racial backgrounds coming to a really tragic end.
Could that be just because of the different communities?
I mean, this is a community that cares about their image a great deal.
And so they're not looking at the social media as they should.
Or is this, you just do believe that it's just race?
I don't want to say that it's just race.
I see lots of kids who are not black or brown getting swept up into the system because they have special needs, they have disabilities, they have behavior problems in school.
I certainly think it's more of a socioeconomic and a race issue.
With regard to the image of the community, we know that lots of things go on in wealthy or more affluent communities that don't get reported.
And so this is just opening a wider conversation about a cost-benefit analysis.
How much do we care about the way that we look?
And what are we going to do to sacrifice to me?
That's what this feels like, that it's a community or some leaders in the community or school or sheriffs.
I don't know what, but some reason they had to, you know, let's just kind of sweep this under the rug.
Let's not, we don't need this kind of image.
And that's a real problem.
Yeah, the thing that I've been sort of like chewing on about this is what if it swings the other way?
And now every time a kid says something on social media that is concerning, every time a kid is acting in a way in school, what does the other side look like?
So we have to be really careful, but certainly there must be middle ground to come up with interventions that are short of arrest or short of suspension and expulsion because of what we know happens to kids when they're suspended one time.
There must be some middle ground to take care of young people who are expressing these things and stop mass shootings from happening before they start.
Isn't there, Adam, it seems like there's a line here because what you're doing, what this program is trying to do, a lot of this has come along with really positive results and certainly really positive intent, where you're taking people, instead of, you know, they make one mistake, you're not throwing them in jail or they're not having to necessarily interact with the legal system.
And there's possibly a risk where people running a school might overlook someone who, or I guess not overlook, but punish within the school system instead of taking them through the legal system if there was a real problem.
But in this particular case, isn't just the number of incidents enough that it would overwhelm any rational idea that you should only deal with this person with in-school sort of punishments.
And it had to blow up into something bigger because of the scale and also the types of things he was doing, things like bringing weapons to school and things like that.
Absolutely.
And I don't understand how it got to the point that it did where, you know, even the day before the shooting happened, the kid was posting on his social media that this was happening.
Yes, he didn't get a report.
But this is such an aberration, such an aberration, both in sort of like the level of detail that the kid sort of like laid breadcrumbs to the fact that he's going to do this and to obviously the carnage that he wreaked that I'm reluctant to politicize it in any way to say we need to make stricter school discipline because we, again, and we've been trying to undo the construction of the school defense pipeline because of that.
So I have to tell you, Adam, I am right with you.
I think this is such an aberration of just a series of missed, not red flags, gigantic car flags.
You know what I mean?
Those flags that car dealers have.
They were such huge flags.
The one I heard about just the other day was when he was walking out, he had changed his clothes, got rid of the guns, and he's walking out.
One of the students said that she looked at him and said, oh my gosh, when I heard there was a shooting, I just thought it was you.
And I thought it was so prevalent in the school that some classmate thought, oh, I know who's doing it.
That's incredible.
Yeah.
And the irony is in places like that, in places where, you know, we really should be thinking about where are these shootings happening?
What kind of schools are they happening and what kind of communities are they happening?
And you go into those schools and there aren't metal detectors at every entrance.
There aren't police lining the hallways.
There aren't cruisers waiting out back to take kids to court because they've thrown a pencil in the classroom.
But in inner cities and in other poor communities that I've been to around the country where there have been zero mass shootings, there are metal detectors at every single entrance to prevent kids from bringing weed and slingshots into school.
And so again, I think this goes back to your point about imaging and what we're really talking about in this country is much larger than school defense pipeline.
It is exactly what you're driving at.
We're talking to Adam Foss, founder and executive director of Prosecutor Impact.
Adam, I am gravely concerned that our country is not having a dialogue about kids that are feeling, I don't know, alone, worthless, meaningless.
There's something happening, and it has nothing to do with guns or school or anything.
There's something happening with kids, and we're not having that conversation, and we better have that conversation, or it's going to get worse.
Well, you just, you think about when I was a kid or when you were a kid and you got picked on at school, you could just go home and everything would be okay.
You know, you'd be sad and you might not have a lot of friends at home, but you could shelter yourself from sort of the inundation of reminders of how little you matter in this world.
And I can't ignore the fact that there's been an uptick in this and in suicides and in hate crimes in the wake of sort of what social media has done to our planet where you literally cannot escape all the bad things that kids feel about themselves and all the ideas about what to do about it.
Adam, thank you for having a reasonable conversation with us.
I appreciate it.
Always happy to do so with you, man.
I saw this about the promise and I thought I know that's going to start getting blame on it.
And it's not what you're talking about because there were too many warning signs.
Thank you so much, Adam.
I appreciate it.
Thanks, Clen.
You bet.
You can follow him on Twitter at Prosecutor Impact with no A. Or Adam John Foss on Twitter as well.
I mean, that's the thing.
You can't incompetence doesn't, this is a good idea underneath, right?
And it's just because there's a lot of incompetence doesn't mean that the idea goes away.
The bottom line here is that this is the most preventable mass shooting in U.S. history.
I think so, too.
You know, the idea that this is the one inspiring a gun debate is strange.
Society Becoming Killers00:17:05
Just in fact, there were so many breadcrumbs, so many ways to stop this.
It just didn't happen.
All right, I want to talk to you about your car.
Do you have a vehicle that is maybe out of warranty or running out of warranty?
I have a couple of cars that are out of warranty.
I mean, I've got a 1957 that is out of warranty, but I'm not insuring that one.
If that one dies, that one dies.
I've got a couple of trucks that are still really great.
We use them on the farm, and they're great, and there's nothing wrong with them.
And we've babied them, but they're long out of warranty.
One's an 08, and I think the other one's at 12.
And if something goes wrong, now, I mean, it's going to cost a lot of money.
My son-in-law's brakes on his old jetta that's out of warranty.
They just went out.
He had an ABS sensor go out.
It's costing him five grand fix.
Five grand.
Should have had car shield.
I have them on my cars.
If you have cars that are out of warranty, get car shield.
Car Shield, affordable protection that can save you thousands in covered repair.
Whatever it is you're looking at, a fuel pump or a water pump, that's a thousand bucks.
ABS system on a Jeddah is five grand for the sensor.
They have plans that cover your car's computer, the GPS, all the electronics.
CarShield, the ultimate and extended coverage.
You can get your favorite mechanic or the dealership.
Doesn't matter who does it.
You're not waiting for the check.
They pay them directly.
So save yourself from high repair bills.
Get covered by CarShield.
CarShield.
Go to carshield.com.
Use the promo code Beck or call 1-800-CAR6100-1-800-CAR6800 or CarShield.com.
Promo code Beck.
Glenn Mercury. Glenn Beck.
I want to play a bit of this Matt Bevin answer to a woman who was in Washington, D.C.
He had just spoken to the president with the governor's conference.
And this woman asked him, you know, we've got to do something.
Listen.
How do you reconcile the children's lives are most important with the comments you've made to the media about it's naive and premature to talk about gun control and that it's culture and not guns that is causing these these horrible things?
I'll tell you exactly how I reconcile that.
First of all, a month ago in Kentucky, we had a very similar situation.
Made a very concerted effort to make sure that we removed the media circus from the healing process.
So within 24 to 48 hours, you're probably not even aware, most people aren't, that I had a 15-year-old come into a school in Kentucky last month and shoot 16 children at point-blank range, two of whom died.
A set of twins were both shot and taken to a level one trauma center.
They lived.
This is very real to me.
I've sat with these families.
You also probably are not aware of the fact that I've buried my oldest child, died under different circumstances, but went to school and didn't come home.
She was 17 years old.
I know exactly, not exactly, it's not possible to know exactly what another person's gone through, but I know exactly what it feels like to bury your oldest child.
I know what the impact is on a family.
I don't come at this with a sense of sympathy, but empathy.
The point that I've made that's been largely misconstrued, I'll reaffirm with you and tell you exactly why it comes from, where it comes from.
This idea, just as solving this issue is able to be solved with a single law or rule or change, is naive and delusional.
And so we shouldn't allow ourselves to entertain naive and delusional thoughts.
It is part of a broader construct, just as this issue is.
And the point that I made that I'll reiterate is that if we think that a part of what we are seeing is not a cultural problem, we're kidding ourselves.
And the point that I've made is this.
What has shifted in the last 10, 20, 30, 40, 50 years?
It's not the percentage of guns that we find in homes.
And you can give me a statistic that there's now more guns.
Fair enough.
I'll submit that that may be true.
I'm not going to argue with you.
But the reality is there's fewer homes that have guns in them than there were 50 years ago when children didn't walk into schools and shoot themselves and shoot each other.
That's a fact.
You can confirm that.
But I'll tell you this.
When I was a kid, kids brought guns to school.
Kids brought guns on the school bus.
Kids brought guns to school in their own vehicles.
Kids didn't shoot each other with them.
So some things have not changed.
What has changed?
We as a culture, as a society, and it's very germane to this topic as well.
Stop.
Let him get to this point when we come back.
What has changed?
He makes a list next.
Glenn Beck.
mercury this is the glenn beck program So Matt Bevan was in Washington, D.C. By the way, welcome to Pat Gray on the program.
Matt Bevin was on, and he was talking to a woman who said, you know, how can you possibly say that this doesn't have anything to do with guns?
And he says, how could you possibly say this doesn't have something to do with our culture, with something that is happening inside of our kids?
And he talks a little bit about guns, and then he says, here's what's really going on.
What has changed?
There are more guns, but not more guns per household.
You know, there are more households without guns than ever before.
So kids, when I was growing up, when he said when he was growing up, kids would come to school with guns.
We did.
I mean, kids would go hunting, and then they would leave their gun, you know, in their truck, and it would be unlocked.
They always had gun racks.
Oh, yeah.
In their truck.
Always had gun racks.
There was always a rifle in it.
Right.
And this is just the way things were.
So what has changed?
Listen to what he says.
What has changed?
We as a culture, as a society, and it's very germane to this topic as well.
We don't value human life like we did.
We remove increasingly respect for the dignity of other people.
You look at how rampant pornography is, the degradation and disrespect for women and for human life in general.
It is so systemic.
People of our age have not been exposed like our children have been.
There's not a child in America that hasn't been exposed to pornography.
I guarantee you, if they're above the age of 12, that's a fact.
It is so systemic, it's horrific.
And it desensitizes us at every turn.
And so we're desensitized to the value and dignity of human life.
We're desensitized through, and this is to the heart of what I said that you seem to take exception with, is that through violent video games, where literally you are encouraged, you can roll your eyes all you want, man, but I will say this.
You explained to me the value of a game that encourages somebody to go back and finish them off, where you get points for kill counts and you slaughter people.
We're desensitizing people to the value of life.
So he goes on, and check it out on the blaze.
It's amazing.
He goes on for another four minutes and he talks about different things.
And this woman keeps rolling her eyes and is not open.
And he says at the end, I don't understand how you can say you're open-minded and yet you will reject everything that I'm saying here and blame it all on guns.
I don't understand it.
Yeah.
We're broken.
And it's interesting because President Trump yesterday met with video game industry leaders and most people just dismissed that already.
They moved on past that discussion where that's nothing to do with it.
And I was really impressed that he took the time to talk to these guys about exactly what Matt Bevan's talking about.
Is there some correlation?
Now, a lot of research says no.
I just don't believe that.
A lot of research says yes.
A lot of research says yes.
Your brain is not formed fully and stable until you're 25.
Now, you know, there's also research that shows that the brain internalizes that as an actual event.
So you can say, my kid knows the difference, and they might, but the brain itself does not.
It internalizes that as something real.
And especially the more and more real these games become, the more real the brain is saying it is.
Yeah, and you're first person shooting now.
You know, it's you that's walking through there.
You know, and I tend to be on the opposite side with you guys on this.
But I mean, I think like I think part of the problem when people talk about these things is it's a much more narrow issue than is usually discussed.
Like we talk about this with guns all the time.
There's more guns in America than there has been ever, right?
There's 320 million guns.
Guns have doubled in the past 20 years.
At that time, the crime rate has gone in half, right?
So the correlation, I think, societally, because the rise of violent video games has been in that same period, right?
We went from almost no violent video games to all the ones that we have now in the same period where the crime rates have dropped by half.
The issue, I guess, is more of a focus on that one kid, right?
The one kid who is borderline.
Does he decide to cross a line because of something that he's affected with playing these games?
And, you know, whether you can actually manage that out, I don't know.
I think it's a great, there's no reason to risk it if you're a parent.
I mean, I don't know why you'd want your kids to play these games if you're a parent.
It's the sum total, I think, of everything.
I want you to listen to this.
This is what Dr. James Noel, the director of forensic psychiatry at State University of New York's Upstate Medical University said.
He's a guy who's been studying these killers.
Listen to what he said because people are like, these killers are crazy.
He says, no, they're not.
No, they're not.
Massacre killers are typically marked by what are considered personality disorders, grandiosity, resentment, self-righteousness, a sense of entitlement.
They are collectors of injustice who nurture their injustice with narcissism.
They preserve their egos.
They exaggerate past humiliations and externalize their anger, blaming others for their frustrations.
Now, let me ask, let's take this list one by one.
Are we seeing in our society grandiosity?
Sure.
Self-aggrandizement?
Of course.
We're seeing it everywhere.
I love the phrase collectors of injustice.
What a bright.
So perfect.
Are we seeing a society that is dwelling on resentment?
Yes.
Are we a society that is dwelling on self-righteousness?
I'm right.
You're wrong.
I'm so right.
You're so wrong.
I won't even be your friend anymore.
How about a sense of entitlement?
How about collectors of injustice who nurture their wounded narcissism?
I can't, I'm being inflicted.
Pain's being inflicted on me every day because of this statue.
It's all about me.
Me, me, me.
Collector of injustice?
We are all talking about the injustice of things now.
And to preserve their ego, they exaggerate past humiliations.
This might as well be our constitution at this point.
It is.
And externalize our anger.
Case closed.
We are a society that is becoming killers.
And you can't cure that with taking guns away.
You can't cure that with taking video games away.
You can't cure that with any of these things.
You can ban all of it, and it's not going to change that fundamental problem with society.
Can you imagine a classroom?
And this is in a really nice area of Dallas, Fort Worth, where in a high school, a fight breaks out, a pretty violent fight between two kids.
So what does a teacher do?
Does he jump in there and separate him and tell him, stop it, knock it off?
No, he's standing over on the side with his phone, filming it, recording it, smiling.
I think we have the actual, yeah, look at him.
We have him.
Yeah, look at him.
I mean, they're really wailing on each other.
And the teacher is just standing there.
Even the smiling.
He's kind of enjoying it.
This is great.
Look at him.
Beat the crap out of each other.
Somebody else is periscoping or Snapchat.
Even teachers record fights only at McKinney High School.
I mean, that's despicable.
That's a broken society where a teacher doesn't intervene.
Instead, he records it.
I'm going to post this later on.
This is awesome.
It's crazy.
You say to anyone in the class that takes their phone out to record it, put your damn phone down and help.
Yeah.
But the problem is we live our whole lives through the phone now, right?
We don't experience anything and we don't intervene in anything because we just want to see it later.
Things we usually don't even look at later, but we want to record it and post it.
We just want to show, hey, I was here.
That goes to the narcissism, I think.
I was here and this was really cool.
Look at how cool this was.
This is crazy.
It's true.
We just live on these things.
My wife is currently on a kick of some like reorganizational effort in her life in which one of the people, you know, she's got these gurus she listens to.
And one of them talks about how, and I think this is completely true, that when you wake up and the first thing you do is check your iPad, check your cell phone for your, you know, your emails.
And her point is essentially you're immediately going on someone else's agenda.
Like the day starts with you essentially taking orders from your phone rather than you planning out your day and doing the things in the order and priority that you wish they should be done.
And it's a really, it is a real, it's a real problem.
I mean, because it's just changed us.
It's just, it's totally changed the way.
And again, it's all in a big experiment, right?
I mean, we can get too excited about these things and believe that, you know, cataclysm is coming from every one of these technological changes.
And societies have always done that.
But it is a real fast change that might not cause cataclysm, but really should be something that we shouldn't talk about.
Talk about it.
Let's talk about it.
Let's just not dismiss it out of hand.
You certainly don't dismiss the gun control out of hand.
So why should we dismiss the psychological things that are happening to us and our society?
And you can't say, you know, first of all, you cannot stop technology.
I don't want to censor anything.
Yeah.
And it's not one thing.
It's the entire thing.
We've gone from a society that was basically gentle, decent, good, had real problems.
You know, it's never a wonderland.
But generally, we all agreed.
We all saw each other as part of the solution, not part of the problem.
We trusted people.
There was authority.
There were standards.
Those are all gone now.
All of those are gone.
And so the things that kept us moored even a little bit are gone.
And you add on top of that the emptiness of people's lives.
What has value in kids' lives?
What do they do that has value?
And like no other time in our history, our kids are on antidepressants.
Why are they so depressed all the time?
Can I tell you something?
When did that start?
I don't remember anybody on antidepressants when I was growing up.
But I tell you, Pat, there's nothing that impresses kids.
There's nothing.
No, I know.
Silicon Valley Kids on Antidepressants00:03:07
You go on a car ride, if they have electronics or a movie in the car, they're not looking outside.
They've seen it.
They've done it.
There's no quiet time.
There's no time to think.
There's no time to just look.
There's no time to be bored.
You know what I mean?
Right.
Those are important parts of your life, especially in childhood.
It gives a great point because, I mean, kids don't even say that anymore.
Why?
Because you're continually entertained by your phone or your iPad.
There's no opportunity.
If your kids have electronics, if your kids have electronics, think back.
When's the last time they said, I'm bored?
It's a good question.
The second they didn't have the electronics, they all say that.
And so it's like, oh, yeah.
Or if you put a time limit on it, then you'll hear that.
By the way, Silicon Valley parents, Silicon Valley parents are raising their kids now tech-free.
More and more.
And there was a whole study in the Business Insider from the tech world, you know, the current CEO of Apple, of Apple, of Microsoft, many people at Facebook.
They're saying there's no electronics in the house.
Kids do not have access to the weird.
What do they know that we don't know?
Background leash coming up on the Blaze Radio and TV networks.
Also get the podcast.
Don't forget to subscribe at iTunes or wherever your podcasts are sold.
Every business needs great people and a better way to find them.
And there is a better way to find them.
And it's ZipRecruiter.
ZipRecruiter.com.
ZipRecruiter is a smarter way.
They built a platform that goes out and finds the right job candidates for you.
It not only goes out and posts on the top 100 job sites, but it learns what you're looking for, identifies the people with the right experience, and then reaches out to them.
I mean, they may not see your job.
They may miss it until you hired somebody else.
They won't miss it with ZipRecruiter.
They send out invitations.
Have you seen this job?
You're perfect for it.
80% of employees or employers who post a job on ZipRecruiter get a quality candidate through the site in the first day.
ZipRecruiter doesn't stop there.
They also highlight the applications that you receive and say, this one is 10 out of 10.
This one has everything that you're looking for.
This one's 80%.
So you make sure that you see the best candidates.
The right candidate is out there and ZipRecruiter will find them.
Find out today why ZipRecruiter has been used by businesses of all sizes and industries to find the most qualified job candidates with immediate results.
Right now, you can post your jobs on ZipRecruiter for free.
Go to ziprecruiter.com slash Beck.
That's ziprecruiter.com slash Beck.
Glenn Beck Mercury.
The First Amendment guarantees your right to say stupid things.
Video Games and Family Problems00:02:07
But it doesn't guarantee we have to listen to them.
Share your intelligent thoughts with Glenn and Stu through social media at Glenn Beck and at World of Stu.
Okay, so there is a, there are a couple of things from the mass shooting in Governor Matt Bevin.
The audio we played just a few minutes ago.
Fantastic.
Top pops, right?
Most concise, accurate explanation I've seen.
Well done.
Bevan's good.
He's good.
Chris writes in, if he's as sear as he sounds, the guy should be president.
And Daniel wrote in, you say people fear guns because they didn't grow up with them.
Well, that same concept applies to video games.
Violent crime has gone down at the same time game sales are up, and that's a fact.
And Daniel, you're right.
You're right.
There are studies, however, that show that it is impacting some people.
And I'm not calling for a ban of video games, and I'm not blaming this on video games.
I'm saying that we are devaluing life and some people can be affected by that.
We have to look at all of the pieces.
And again, I am not for banning anything.
I don't believe in that.
Are you going to talk maybe next week about the struggles, if the right word, in your household when it comes to such technologies?
I am.
I've been wanting to talk about it for a while, and it has gotten worse in my family, and that's why I haven't been talking about it because it's causing some real problems in the family.
And so I would like to, I want to talk about it generally next week because it is a struggle for parents.
I think too, like part of this is just, it's not about banning video games, but I think there is a, there's a good chunk of people who just assume that it's okay for their kids to be playing and they haven't looked at what these games are.
And it's just a parental thing.
Like make sure you're making the decision that you think it's okay.
Yeah.
So we'll talk about that.
Maybe we'll, maybe we'll do that Monday.
I keep promising that, but this is an important one.
We'll talk about that and other solutions next week.