THANKS FOR TUNING IN.

THE NEW REPUBLICAN CHAIR AND CONTROVERSY OVER GUN SAFETY LEGISLATION, AND THAT'S OUR LEAD STORY ON OFF THE RECORDED.

ON THE PANEL BEN SOLISE, JORDAN HERMANY AND CHAD LIVENGOOD.

"OFF THE RECORD."

PRODUCTION OF OFF THE RECORD MADE POSSIBLE IN PART BY MARTIN WAYMIRE, A FULL SERVICE STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY PARTNERING WITH CLIENTS THROUGH PUBLIC RELATIONS, DIGITAL MARKETING AND PUBLIC POLICY ENGAGEMENT.

LEARN MORE AT MARTIN WAYMIRE.COM.

>>> AND NOW THIS EDITION OF "OFF THE RECORD" WITH TIM SKUBICK.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, WELCOME BACK TO "OFF THE RECORD", GUNS, GUNS, STILL THE ISSUE HERE.

THEY LEFT TOWN WITH SOME UNFINISHED BUSINESS BUT WHAT DID THEY DO BEFORE THEY SPLIT IN THE HOUSE?

>> SO OUT OF THE HOUSE THEY PASSED UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECK LEGISLATION, THEY'VE ALSO PASSED SOME SAFE STORAGE LAWS.

THE BIG HANG-UP RIGHT NOW IS EXTREME RISK PROTECTION ORDERS OTHERWISE KNOWN AS RED FLAG LAWS.

HONESTLY, IT'S PROBABLY THE MOST CONTENTIOUS PART OF THAT TRIO OF GUN LEGISLATION THAT THEY'RE HOPING TO PASS.

IT'S BEEN KICKED BACK OVER TO THE SENATE NOW.

THE SENATE'S OWN VERSION OF UNIVERSAL BACKGROUND CHECKS AND SAFE STORAGE LAWS HAVE BEEN PASSED.

THE HOUSE ALTERED THEM.

THEY UNALTERED THEM.

THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS AT WHAT'S GOING ON.

I DON'T NECESSARILY EVEN KNOW IF DEMOCRATS KNOW WHAT THEY SORT OF WANT IN THESE FINISHED PRODUCT ITS OF THESE BILLS BUT IT'S ONLY MARCH, AND WHEN THEY COPY BACK FROM SPRING BREAK IN TWO WEEKS, I AM CERTAIN THE CONVERSATION WILL ABSOLUTELY RESUME.

>> THE GUN SAFETY THING WAS AN EASY LIFT.

>> IT WAS, AND IT WAS SOMETHING THAT GOT REPUBLICAN SUPPORT AT LEAST IN THE HOUSE AS WELL, TOO.

I THINK THAT THEY CAN AGREE THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVING LAWS THAT REQUIRE LOCKING UP GUNS AROUND MINORS IS SOMETHING THAT PEOPLE CAN GET BEHIND AND SOMETHING THAT'S MAYBE REPEALED GROUPS.

>> THEY PICKED UP FIVE REPUBLICAN VOTES.

WHERE WAS THE REST OF THE REPUBLICAN CAUCUS?

>> THEY'RE HIGHLY AGAINST A LOT OF THESE LAWS.

IN FACT, YOU KNOW, MOST OF THE REPUBLICAN CRITICS OF THESE LAWS DON'T THINK THAT THEY NEED ANY NEW LEGISLATION WHATSOEVER.

THAT THEY SHOULD BE REI FORCING THE LAWS THAT THEY DO HAVE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THAT'S KIND OF A STICKY WICKED BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT BACKGROUND CHECKS, THE ONLY THING THAT REQUIRES THE BACKGROUND CHECK REALLY RIGHT NOW IS THE PISTOL REQUIREMENT BECAUSE IN ORDER TO GET A PISTOL LICENSE, PURCHASE LICENSE, YOU NEED A BACKGROUND CHECK.

AND ALSO THE FEDERAL FIREARMS LAWS SAY THAT IF YOU BUY FROM A FEDERALLY LICENSED DEALER, YOU GOTTA DEBATE BACKGROUND CHECK, TOO.

SO THERE'S SOME TREPIDATION THAT WILL HAVE AN EFFECT.

>> WITH THE BACKGROUND CHECK, IT GOES AFTER PRIVATE SALES, GUN SHOWS.

YOU AND I EXCHANGE RIFLES, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A BACKGROUND CHECK INVOLVED.

AND THAT'S HOW THAT ONE'S GONNA CHANGE BIG TIME.

YOU KNOW, THE GUN STORAGE BILL, THERE IS A BIT OF REAL REALITY IN OUR LIVES IN MICHIGAN.

JUST THIS WEEK, THE COURT OF APPEALS RULED THAT THE PARENTS OF OXFORD SHOOTER ETHAN CRUMBLY CAN STAND TRIAL FOR MANSLAUGHTER RELATED TO THEIR ACTIONS AND THE ABILITY FOR THEIR SON TO GET A HANDGUN, PUT IT IN HIS BACKPACK, TAKE IT TO SCHOOL, TO SHOOT UP THE SCHOOL.

AND THIS IS GONNA BE -- THIS IS A GROUND-BREAKING EFFORT BY THE PROSECUTOR IN OAKLAND COUNTY TO HOLD PARENTS ACCOUNTABLE, AND THIS BILL IS INSPIRED BY THAT -- THOSE ACTIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO -- PARENTS ARE GONNA HAVE TO LOCK UP THEIR HANDGUNS SO THAT THEIR CHILDREN CAN'T GET ACCESS TO THEM.

>> I THINK THAT'S THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THIS.

IF THIS BILL DEALS WITH LOCKING UP FIREARMS AROUND MINORS, THOSE UNDER THE AGE OF 18, WE HEARD A LOT OF TESTIMONY OF PEOPLE SAYING, YOU KNOW, MY WIFE AND I AND THERE ARE OLDER INDIVIDUALS WHO INDICATED THAT THEIR KIDS ARE EITHER GROWN OR THEY DON'T HAVE CHILDREN AND SAY IF SOMEBODY BREAKS IN, HOW AM I GONNA GET MY FIREARM.

THIS BILL DOES NOT PERTAIN TO YOU.

THIS BILL DOES NOT PERTAIN TO YOU, AND WHEN THE BILL DOES PERTAIN TO YOU AS SOMEBODY WHO DOES NOT HAVE A CHILD, WHEN YOU HAVE REASON TO ASSUME THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE A CHILD ON THE PREMISE.

MY HUSBAND AND I DO NOT HAVE KIDS.

WE OWN A GUN.

MY SISTER-IN-LAW SAYS I'M COMING OVER WITH YOUR NIECE.

THEN WE HAVE TO LOUNGE OUR GUN IF IT'S NOT LOCKED UP ALREADY.

BUT ANY OTHER TIME, THAT COULD BE SITTING -- NOT THAT WE WOULD EVER, BUT THAT COULD BE SITTING OUT ON THE KITCHEN TABLE.

>> WELL, IT WAS INTERESTING BECAUSE THE REPUBLICAN LEADER IN THE HOUSE WAS A YEA VOTE WHICH SORT OF CAME OUT OF NOWHERE.

WERE YOU GUYS SURPRISED WAY IN?

>> YES AND NO, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT POLLS VERY WELL.

PEOPLE WANT TO SEE AT LEAST SOME SORT OF MEASURE TO KEEP THEIR KIDS SAFE FROM FIREARMS, WHETHER THAT'S, YOU KNOW, FROM THEMSELVES AS GUN OWNERS OR FROM, YOU KNOW, IF A CHILD GOES OVER TO SOMEONE'S HOUSE, THAT PERSON OWNS GUNS, THAT PARENT PROBABLY WANTS TO KNOW THAT THAT GUN IS LOCKED YOU.

>> WE SHOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT THE OTHER REPUBLICAN VOTES THAT ARE IN SWING DISTRICTS, PEOPLE IN ARE IN DISTRICTS THAT ARE CONTESTED.

WHY DID THEY COULD THAT?

>> BECAUSE THEY KNEE THIS IS COMING, THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE GONNA USE GUNS AND GUN SAFETY AND GUN CONTROL AS THE ISSUE LIKE THEY USED ABORTION AGAINST THEM IN THE LAST ELECTION, THIS WILL BE PROSECUTED IN THE 2024 ELECTION.

>> DUE PROCESS, THE OTHER SIDE IS SAYING YOU'RE TAKING MY GUNS AWAY.

IT'S NOT AS IF THE COPS ARE GOING TO COME IN AND TAKE YOUR GUN WITHOUT ANYTHING HAPPENING IN BETWEEN.

>> NO.

THAT'S NOT AT ALL -- WE LOOK TO OTHER STATES DO HAVE RED FLAG LAWS IN PLACE, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I'VE TALKED WITH BILL SPONSORS ABOUT.

THIS IS A PROCESS THAT NEEDS TO BE IRONED OUT BECAUSE THE LAST THING YOU WANT TO DO IS SOMEBODY WHO'S HAVING A MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS, TAKE HIM TOUT SAY, HEY, MAYBE THIS INDIVIDUAL BE SHOULDN'T HAVE FIREARMS, THE LAST THING YOU WANT TO DO IS SAY BY THE WAY, POLICE WANT TO FEEL TAKE YOUR GUNS AND YOU CAN BARRICADE YOURSELF IN YOUR HOME AND TURN IN T INTO A FAR WORSE SCENARIO.

IT'S ALMOST LIKE A DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROTECTION ORDER WHERE THERE'S A PROCESS.

YOU GO THROUGH A COURT PROCESS.

YOUR GUNS COULD BE REMOVED FROM YOUR HOME FOR A PERIOD OF TIME.

MOST STATES HAVE AT MOST, I BELIEVE, A YEAR OR SLIGHTLY LONGER.

BUT AT ANY POINT IN TIME, ESPECIALLY THIS IS PERTAINING TO SOMETHING LIKE A MENTAL HEALTH CRISIS, ARE YOU ABLE TO GO BACK AND PETITION THE COURTS AND SAY, HEY, I THINK THIS NEEDS TO GET REVISITED, AND YOU COULD HAVE YOUR FIREARMS RETURNED, YOU KNOW, AS SOON AS YOUR MENTAL HEALTH STATE PROVEN TO BE IN A BETTER PLACE.

>> THE OTHER SIDE HAS ARGUED IF THERE'S A DISGRUNTLED FAMILY MEMBER THAT YOU'VE HAD A FEUD WITH FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS, THIS IS A PERFECT VENUE TO MESS UP YOUR LIFE, BY ACCUSING YOU WITH THAT, AND THEN YOU'VE GOTTA GO THROUGH THE PROCESS, HIRE AN ATTORNEY, ET CETERA, ET CETERA.

>> THERE'S STILL JUDICIAL DISCRETION.

THAT'S NOT A BLANKET -- IF THIS GETS BEFORE A JUDGE, THEY'RE GONNA TAKE AWAY YOUR GUNS.

>> BUT YOU COULD BE CHARGED KNOWING THAT THE CHARGE IS NOT GOING TO HOLD UP?

>> SURE.

AND I THINK -- THE THING IS THAT THE DEMOCRATS ARE REALLY FOCUSED ON NOT JUST CURBING THIS MASS SHOOTING CONTAGION BUT TRYING TO STOP SUICIDES THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH GUNS, STOPPING THE INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE THAT YOU SEE WITH GUNS.

IN FACT, THAT INTIMATE PARTNER VIOLENCE SEES REALLY ONE OF THE BIGGEST PIECES HERE.

A LOT OF STATISTICS SHOW THAT MASS SHOOTINGS ARE REALLY THE OUTLIER AND THAT REALLY A LOT OF THE GUN VIOLENCE THAT YOU DO SEE IS BETWEEN INTIM MATE PARTNERS, AND THE RED FLAG LAWS ARE A WAY TO REALLY CURB THAT DOWN.

>> WE'VE GOT A CASE THIS WEEK, A MAN STOLE HIS ESTRANGED WIFE'S HAND GUN, SHOWED UP AT HIS INLAWS' HOME.

KILLED HIS FATHER-IN-LAW, SHOT HIS WIFE AND MOTHER-IN-LAW IN FRONT OF THEIR YOUNG CHILDREN, A SICK-YEAR-OLD KID HAD TO CALL 911.

PEOPLE ARE SEEING THIS EVERY DAY IN THE NEWS, THIS KIND OF -- JUST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WITH GUNS, IN URBAN, SUBURBAN, AND IN THAT CASE EX-URBAN AREAS OF THE STATE, AND IT'S REALLY STARTING TO REALLY SINK IN.

THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE SEEING THE BIPARTISAN DEMAND FOR THESE LAWS.

>> I WANT TO GO BACK QUICKLY FOR A SECOND ABOUT -- AN EXGIRLFRIEND FROM 20 YEARS AGO CAN CALL AND SAY HE NEEDS HIS GUNS TAKEN AWAY.

AND YOU MENTIONED DATA, SPEAKING WITH RESEARCHERS AT JOHNS HOPKINS, THEY HAVE TOLD ME AGAIN AND AGAIN THAT THIS CONCEPT OF, OH, DISGRUNTLED EX, WE DON'T SEE THAT, VERY RARELY DO WE SEE THAT IN DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROCEEDINGS.

WE ARE LIKELY NOT GOING TO SEE THIS AT ALL IN RED FLAG PROCEEDINGS.

WE REALLY DON'T SEE THAT IN ANY OTHER STATE, THERE'S NO REAL DATA THAT SUGGEST THAT IS A PLENTY ISSUE THAT IS OCCURRING.

AND TO GO BACK ON THAT, IF THERE IS, THESE BILLS ARE BEING BUILT -- I'VE SPOKEN WITH THE LEAD SPONSOR OUT OF THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE -- SO THAT FELONIES COULD BE BUILT IN FOR ABUSING THIS PROCESS.

I BELIEVE THEY ALREADY ARE IN THE SENATE.

AND THERE'S ALREADY STUFF ON THE BOOKS THAT DOES, YOU KNOW, FILING A FALSE COMPLAINT -- THERE'S ALREADY LAWS ON THE BOX THAT WOULD PENALIZE YOU FOR DOING THAT.

>> I WAS GONNA SAY THE SAME THING.

IF YOU CALL POLICE AND SAY MY EX HAS A BUNCH OF GUNS, HE'S GONNA KILL ME AND THAT WAS NOT THE CASE, AND THIS GOES THROUGH THE PROCESS, AND THE JUDGE LOOKS AT THIS IS DISMISSES THE CASE, THAT PERSON OPENS THEMSELVES UP TO A CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF FILING A FALSE REPORT.

>> SO IF THE DEMOCRATS ARE DOING THEIR DUE DILIGENCE BECAUSE THE LAST THING THEY WANT IS THE GLEATION THEY JAMMED THIS STUFF THROUGH, THEY'VE GOTTA BE VERY CAREFUL TO CROSS THE Ts, AND DOT Is, AND GIVE THE OTHER SIDE THAT OPPORTUNITY HAVE THE INPUT.

ON A SCALE OF 1 TO 10, HOW ARE THEY DOING ON THAT?

>> IT'S TUFT TO SAY.

ALL OF THE REPUBLICANS THAT I'VE SPOKEN TO ARED A AN INNOCENT THEY'VE JUST RUSHED THESE BILLS AND ADAMANT THAT THE WAY PEOPLE HAVE BEAT THE SPONSORSHIPS, THAT SOME OF THESE SPONSORS DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT'S IN THEIR OWN BILLS.

EVERY MINORITY PARTY SAYS THAT SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN TAKE THAT NECESSARILY SERIOUSLY.

BUT I DID SPEAK TO ONE OF THE COMMITTEE CHAIRS FROM THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE AND ASKED HER POINT BLANK, YOU KNOW, IF THESE LAWS GET PASSED QUICKLY AND THEY DON'T DO ANYTHING OR THERE'S HOLES IN THEM, HOW LIKELY OR WILLING ARE TO YOU GO BACK AND REVISIT THESE IMMEDIATELY, AMEND THESE IMMEDIATELY?

THEY SAID THAT THEY ARE.

THEY WANT THIS TO WORK, AND THAT IF THAT MEANS THEY HAVE TO ADMIT THEY MIGHT HAVE HAD A MISSTEP OR MISFIRE, PUN, THEY WILL GO BACK AND FIX THOSE.

I DON'T KNOW THAT WILL EASE REPUBLICAN BILLS OR WORRIES, BUT WE'LL SEE.

>> WE'LL SEE AFTER BREAK.

RIGHT.

LET'S QUICKLY CALL IN OUR DESK NOW, THE NEW REPUBLICAN PARTY CHAIRWOMAN.

THERE WE ARE.

GOOD MORNING, HOW ARE YOU DOING?

>> WONDERFUL, HOW ARE YOU DOING?

>> NICE HAVE YOU ON THE PROGRAM.

HERE'S A QUESTION, YOU HAVE INDICATED THAT THE GOVERNOR AND DEMOCRATS ARE INTERESTED IN TAKING AWAY EVERYBODY'S GUNS.

CAN YOU PROVE THAT TO US?

>> THEY WERE PUT IN PLACE TO PROTECT US BY GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS WHO HAVE ASPIRING IDEAS.

I THINK THAT WE AS AMERICANS, A SUPERIOR GROUP OF PEOPLE, THAT WE WOULD BE PRONE TO LEADERS WHO WANT TO ABUSE THEIR RIGHTS.

AND THE POINT IS THAT THE DEMOCRATIC LEGISLATURE ARE PUSHING THROUGH UNCONSTITUTIONAL MEASURES, AND I FIND VERY TROUBLING HOW PEOPLE WANT TO SIT HERE AND TAKE IT LIGHTLY THAT OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS COULD BE INFRINGED ON.

>> THE GOVERNOR HAS CLEARLY SAID SHE DOES NOT WANT TO TAKE ANYBODY'S GUNS AWAY.

YOU DON'T BELIEVE THE GOVERNOR?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION, WHY SHOULD I TAKE THE GOVERNOR'S WORD GOSS SNELL THAT TO ME IS COMPLETELY PERPLEXING.

JUST BECAUSE THE GOVERNOR SAYS SOMETHING THAT MAKES IT TRUE.

DO YOU ASSUME EVERYTHING I SAY IS TRUE BECAUSE I STATE IT?

NO, YOU LOOK AT LEGISLATION AND CONSEQUENCE OF THE LEGISLATION.

ELECTED OFFICIALS ARE NOT SUPERIOR.

THEY ARE PEOPLE JUST LIKE US AND SHOULD BE SCRUTINIZED JUST LIKE US.

THAT COULD BE TROUBLE BECAUSE THE GOVERNOR SAID SOMETHING I'M SUPPOSED TO BELIEVE IT.

>> JORDAN... >> IT'S SO THAT COULD MATTER AS THESE FIELDS DO OPEN THE DOOR FOR OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO DEFEND OURSELVES TO BE INFRINGED ON.

>> CHAIRWOMAN, YOU MENTIONED THIS BEING SOME SORT OF MEASURE AGAINST TYRANNY CAN LEADERS.

DO YOU THINK THAT RONALD REAGAN WAS A TYRANT FOR SUPPORTING THE BRADY BILL AND TO HAVE MANDATORY BACKGROUND CHECKS AND WAITING ?ERDZ.

>> WELL, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS I STAND BY MY STATEMENT OF THE MEASURE.

I DON'T GET INTO THIS WELL, SO AND SO SAYS THIS AND THIS PERSON SAYS THAT.

MY POINT IS I STAND BY MY STATE REGARDING THE LEGISLATION.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE WE SHOULD GET INTO THIS, WELL, THIS PERSON SAYS THIS, AND THIS PERSON SAYS THAT.

THAT'S WHAT YOU CALL A BANDWAGON FALLACY.

THE POINT OF THE MATTER IS THESE BILLS POTENTIALLY OPEN THE DOOR FOR PEOPLE STEPPING ON AMENDMENT RIGHTS TO BE INFRINGED ON AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE RED FLAG LAWS, WHEN YOU LOOK AT LOW INCOME PEOPLE, IT WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO DEFEND THEMSELVES IF THEY ARE FALSELY ACCUSED OF BEING A DANGER.

WHAT ABOUT THESE INDIVIDUALS?

DO LOW INCOME PEOPLE NOT MATTER?

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS ARE PUT IN PLACE BASED ON HISTORY AND WHAT WE'VE SEEN OVER THE THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS OF YEARS IN HUMAN HISTORY WHERE PEOPLE -- MANY SUPREME TENDED TO ABUSE THE DEFENDANTSLESS CITIZENSRY.

>> CHAIRWOMAN, WHY DID THE PISHT PARTY THIS WEEK LIKEN LEGISLATION TO THE GERMAN NAZI TAKING AWAY GUNS FROM JEWS AND OTHERS AND A LEAD INTO THE HOLOCAUST.

WHY USE A HOLOCAUST COMPARISON TO THIS LEGISLATION TO TRY TO MAKE YOUR POINT?

>> MY QUESTION, BACK TO YOU, WOULD BE WHY NOT.

THIS IS SOMETHING I WOULD LOVE -- AND I HOPE YOU CAN EXPLAIN THIS TO ME.

WE POINT TO OTHER HISTORICAL EVENTS TO HELP US UNDERSTAND CURRENT EVENTS, TO HELP US FORECAST AND PLAN.

PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME WHY USING OTHER HISTORICAL EVENTS ARE PERMISSIBLE BUT RESPECTFULLY POINTING TO THE HOLOCAUST AS A HORRIFIC TRAGEDY, ONE OF THE MOST WELL-DOCUMENTED HORRIFIC TRAGEDIES IN HUMAN HISTORY, IS SOMEHOW A BAD THING.

COULD YOU EXPLAIN A TO ME?

>> HOW IS BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR PEOPLE, FELLOWS NOT GETTING THEIR HANDS ON GUNS AND PRIVATE GUN SALES, SOMEHOW THAT ANYWHERE NEAR COMPARABLE TO THE EXTERMINATION OF 6 MILLION JEWS?

>> WELL, FOR ONE IT DIDN'T JUST HAPPEN OVERNIGHT.

IF WE LOOK AT THE RISE OF HITLER AND THE LAWS THAT PRECIPITATED THIS HORRIFIC TRAGEDY, IT WASN'T JUST ONE DAY HE WOKE UP AND ALL OF A SUDDEN PEOPLE WERE BEING SLAUGHTERED.

IT WAS A SLOW INCREMENTAL WALK TOWARDS TYRANNY AND ONE OF THOSE STEPS WAS DISARMING INDIVIDUALS.

SO AGAIN THE HOLOCAUST ISN'T THE ONLY SITUATION IN HISTORY WHERE WE'VE SEEN GOVERNMENTS MASS-MURDER CITIZENS.

THERE ARE MANY SITUATIONS BUT ONE OF THE MOST WELL-DOCUMENTED HORRIFIC SITUATIONS IN HISTORY OF WHAT CAN HAPPEN WHEN YOU HAVE A PSYCHOPATH IN POWER.

AND EVEN POINTS TO OUR OWN HISTORY IN AMERICA WHERE WE HAVE SEEN GROUPS PEOPLE BE TARGETED FOR A VARIETY REASONS, LIKE THE NATIVE AMERICANS.

SO WE CAN LOOK AT HISTORY'S RESULT TO SEE THAT THERE ARE SITUATIONS WHERE CITIZENS ARE MURDER BID THEIR GOVERNMENT.

SO ONCE AGAIN, OUR SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS WERE PUT IN PLACE AND THEY HAVE, AS YOU CAN SEE -- THIS IS A SITUATION THROUGHOUT HISTORY, WHETHER IT'S THE FRENCH UNDERGROUND AGAINST THE NAWTZ, AFGHANISTAN, PEOPLE AGAINST THE RUSSIANS, WHERE THERE'S A DECISION FOR JAPAN NOT TO INVADE AMERICA AFTER PEARL HARBOR.

AN ARMED CITIZENSRY WAS WHAT DETERRED OR STOPPED THESE ACTORS, AND WE CAN CLEARLY SEE HOW THESE LAWS CAN BE ABUSED AND FOR US TO SIT AND ACT AS THOUGH JUDGES ARE PURISTS AND WOULDN'T ABUSE THEIR POSITION, THIS SUN BELIEVABLE TO ME.

THIS IS WHY OUR CONSTITUTION IS DESIGNED TO ENSURE THAT POLITICAL POWER IS IN THE HANDS OF THE PEOPLE.

THAT WAY OUR RIGHTS WON'T BE ABUSED.

WHAT WE HAVE TO ASK OURSELVES IS WHAT IS HAPPENING MORALLY IN SOCIETY WHERE PEOPLE ARE MURDERING PEOPLE.

YOU KNOW, THE LARGEST MASS MURDER IN AMERICAN HISTORY HAPPENED BECAUSE OF A BOMB IN MICHIGAN IN THE 1920s WHERE 38 CHILDREN WERE KILLED.

IT WAS THE MURDEROUS HEART THAT KILLED THESE INNOCENT CHILDREN AND ADULTS.

THIS IS THE ISSUE WE HAVE TO ADDRESS.

BUT SOLVING A MORAL COLLAPSE SHOULD NEVER INVOLVE POTENTIALLY SLOW WALKING INTO A POTENTIAL POLICE STATE.

THE REASON I AM NOT AFRAID THAT HAVE HAPPENING IS BECAUSE OF OUR SECOND ANTICIPATE RIGHTS, WHICH WE MUST PROTECT.

THIS IS A FREEDOM ISSUE.

>> SO A COUPLE OF THINGS I WANT TO FACT CHECK REAL QUICK.

THERE WAS A GUN USED IN THE BATH SCHOOL BOMBING ACTUALLY FOLLOWING YOUR POINT ABOUT JEWS AND THE HOLOCAUST, THOSE GUN -- THOSE SPECIFICALLY TARGETED JEWISH INDIVIDUALS, ROMAN INDIVIDUALS, PEOPLE IN WERE BEING TARGETED, THESE BILLS ARE BEING HELD ACROSS THE BOARD, THEY ARE NOT TARGETING ONE SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL AND OUR ATTEMPTED TO BE CRAFTED IN SUCH A WAY THAT THEY AFFECT ALL CITIZENS EQUALLY.

SO TO YOUR POINT HOW CAN WE TRUST AN ELECTED OFFICIAL, YOU SEEM TO BE PINING BASE OFF OF I'M NOT SURE WHAT.

SO I'M NOT SHOWER HOW YOU'RE COMING TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THE BILLS ARE AN OVERREACH.

>> WELL, FOR ONE, I THINK I DON'T UNDERSTANDS WHY YOU'RE CONFUSED BECAUSE I STATED QUITE CLEARLY WITH THE RED FLAG LAWS IT STARTS WITH SOMEONE MAKING A SOLE ACCUSATION AND ANOTHER INDIVIDUAL CAN HAVE THEIR WEAPONS TAKEN AWAY FROM THEM.

BUT AGAIN I PERSONALLY LIKE TO LOOK AT HISTORY.

I GUESS FOR MANY PEOPLE THAT'S SOMETHING THEY DON'T LIKING TO DO AND YOU CAN SEE PARTICLES THROUGHOUT HISTORY AND HUMAN BEHAVIOR AND YOU LOOK -- YOU CAN SEE PARALLELS.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT A DISGRUNTLED EX, IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME, WHERE SOMEONE FALSELY ACCUSES THE PERSON OF BEING A DANGER, AND THIS PERSON'S ABILITY TO DEFEND THEMSELVES CAN BE TAKEN AWAY.

AND IT'S VERY AMBIGUOUS.

IF YOU SAY WELL THIS PERSON HAS TO BE CLEAR TO OWN A WEAPON, HAVE WE NOT SEEN ABUSE IN THE MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM?

AGAIN, I LOOK AT HISTORY, AND I GUESS THE SAYING IN HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF IS SO TRUE AND I'M SEEING IT PLAY OUT RIGHT NOW.

ALSO WHEN YOU POINTED TO CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS WERE TARGETED FOR HAVING THEIR WEAPONS TAKEN AWAY AND THIS HAS BEEN HAPPENING HERE, THE ONLY ABUSES THAT HAPPEN IN HISTORY AREN'T JUST NECESSARILY BASED ON RACE AND RELIGION.

THERE IS MANY OTHER CATEGORIES AS TO WHICH PEOPLE SEEM TO DISCRIMINATE OTHERS.

AGAIN, WE HAVE SEEN THE ABUSE OF POWER THROUGHOUT HUMAN HISTORY, SO AGAIN, IT IS TOTALLY NAIVE TO THINK THAT THIS COULD NEVER HAPPEN HERE.

AND I'M NOT JUST OPINING.

I'M POINTING TO HISTORY.

AND THE REALITY IS THAT THE UNFAIR CHARACTERIZATION OF THOSE WHO ARE OPPOSED TO IT IS VERY TROUBLING, AND AGAIN -- >> MADAM CHAIR, YOU'VE SEEN THE STORIES REPORT WHERE A SHADOW REPUBLICAN PARTY IS BEING FORMED BEHIND YOUR BACK.

WHAT'S YOUR REACTION TO THAT?

>> YOU KNOW, THE THING ABOUT IT IS, THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS WHO ONLY CARE ABOUT POWER, WHO DON'T CARE ABOUT THE WELL-BEING OF THE STATE AND THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THREE CYCLES IN A ROW REPUBLICANS HAVE BEEN COMPLETELY DECIMATED AND SO CLEARLY THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THEY WERE DOING OTHERWISE WE WOULDN'T HAVE SEEN THE ARGUMENT THAT THEY SAW.

>> THEY WOULD ARGUE THERE WAS A DECIMATION UNDER THE TRUMP PARTY.

>> WELL, FOR ONE, THREE CYCLES IN A ROW, 2018, 2020, 2022 OUR PARTY HAS SEEN MASSIVE ISSUES.

THE REASON IS THAT THERE ARE -- IS A CONTINGENCY OF PEOPLE WANT TO MOVE US AWAY FROM OUR FLAT FORM -- OUR PLATFORM, AND THAT'S NOT GONNA HAPPEN.

I WAS ELECTED FOR A REASON BECAUSE THE OVERWHELMING MAJORITY OF REPUBLICANS ARE NOT HAPPY WITH THE DIRECTION OF THE PARTY.

AND SO THE PEOPLE ON TV AND THE TALKING HEADS CAN SAY WHATEVER THEY WOULD LIKE ABOUT HOW THEY FEEL THE PARTY IS THIS AND THEY'RE SO AFRAID, THESE ARE THE SAME PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN IN CONTROL OF THE PARTY FOR HOW MANY DECADES, AND WHAT HAS BECOME OF IT.

CLEARLY THESE INDIVIDUALS WEREN'T DOING A GOOD JOB.

SO THE POINT IS -- MOVING FORWARD, MOVING FORWARD.

THE POINT IS THAT WE ARE A PARTY FOCUSED ON PROTECT EVERYONE'S CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.

THAT IS OUR FOCUS.

OUR FOCUS IS ENSURING THAT THE REPUBLICAN MESSAGE IS EFFECTIVELY COMMUNICATED AND THAT IS WHAT WE'RE COMMITTED TO DOING.

WE'RE FOCUSED ON MAKING SURE LOCAL ISSUES ARE DEALT WITH.

THERE'S TOO MUCH OF A CENTRALIZATION AND FOCUS ON JUST, YOU KNOW, LANSING AND THAT'S IT WHEN THERE ARE SO MANY LOCAL THINGS THAT ARE OCCURRING WHERE WE WANT TO ENSURE THE CITIZEN IS IN POWER TO DEAL WITH.

OUR FOLKS IS EMPOWERING THE CITIZEN.

WE WANT PEOPLE TO BE ENGAGED IN OUR GOVERNMENT AT EVERY LEVEL AND IT'S NOT THE CONSENT TRACE OF POWER IN THE HANDS OF APPEAL.

>> WHEN YOU WERE ELECTED SEVERAL PEOPLE WHO CONSIDER THEMSELVES REPUBLICANS SAID THAT THIS IS TOO MUCH, I'M WALKING AWAY.

THEY LABELED YOU AS TOO EXTREME, AND THEN WITH THE INCIDENT THIS WEEK, I GOTTA IMAGINE THAT THAT PROBABLY CEMENTED SOME OF THEIR FEARS.

WHAT DO YOU MAKE OF THAT, THEY THOUGHT THAT YOU WOULD PROBABLY DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS AND THIS IS WHAT WE SAW FROM THE PARTY THIS WEEK.

HOW DO YOU REFLECT ON THAT?

>> MANY OF THESE INDIVIDUALS AS SOON AS I WAS ELECTED, HAVE HAD A MELT-DOWN.

UNFORTUNATELY POLITICS IS A PLACE WHERE A LOT OF PEOPLE GRAVITATE SIMPLY TO MAINTAIN POWER.

THEY'RE NOT INTERESTED IN ACTUALLY SOLVING PROBLEMS.

AND PEOPLE WITHIN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY, WHO WORK VERY HARD TO FIGHT FOR OUR STATE, ARE TIRED OF PEOPLE IN LEADERSHIP WHO ARE ALL ABOUT THEMSELVES.

SO AGAIN, THESE UNNAMED INDIVIDUALS, THEY WON'T EVEN COME OUT PUBLICALLY TO PUT THEIR FACE OUT THERE.

THEY JUST THROUGH WHISPER CAMPAIGNS, THEY THINK -- AND QUITE FRANKLY, I'M NOT GOING TO WASTE MY TIME OR MENTAL ENERGY.

I MEAN, I'M ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION BECAUSE IT'S A FAIR QUESTION.

BUT I'M NOT GOING TO WASTE ANY MENTAL ENERGY ON THESE INDIVIDUALS.

WE ARE FOCUSED, WE ARE MOVING FORWARD, WE HAVE ELECTIONS TO WIN AND TO WASTE ANY TIME ON THESE, YOU KNOW, WHISPER CAMPAIGNS AND THIS PERSON IS SAYING THIS AND THEY'RE UPSET, YOU KNOW, I JUST CANNOT.

WE ARE GOING TO STICK BY OUR PRINCIPLES.

THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO UNITE THE PARTY, STICKING BY PRINCIPLES, NOT GETTING CAUGHT UP IN CONFLICT AND CONTROVERSY, STICKING BY PRINCIPLES, BEING DIRECT AND TRANSPARENT.

AND IF SOME INDIVIDUALS ARE UNHAPPY WITH THAT, SO BE IT.

>> TO THAT POINT, A NUMBER OF INDIVIDUALS WHO DID WALK AWAY EITHER OUTRIGHT AND STAYED THROUGH THESE WHISPER CAMPAIGNS, THEY ARE LARGE DOLLAR DONORS.

WHEN YOU WERE RUNNING, YOU RELEASED A FINANCIAL PLAN HOW YOU HOPED TO TACKLE FUNDRAISING AND I BELIEVE AT ONE POINT IT WAS NOTED THAT BY THE END OF APRIL, YOU GUYS WANTED TO HAVE SOMETHING LIKE 25,000 SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS RAISING ABOUT $1.25 MILLION BY THE END OF APRIL.

WE ARE A WEEK OUT FROM APRIL.

WHERE ARE YOU AT WITH FUNDRAISING WITH THE PARTY AND TACKLING THAT?

>> WE ARE DOING WELL WITH FUNDRAISING WITH THE PARTY BUT KIND OF TO THE POINT THERE ARE LARGE DONORS WHO SAID THEY'RE GOING TO WALK AWAY.

WHO ARE THESE INDIVIDUALS?

I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THEIR NAMES.

THE THING ABOUT IT IS THERE ARE LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPORTING THE MICHIGAN REPUBLICAN PARTY.

THOUGH THESE ARE UNNAMED LARGE DONORS WHO WON'T PUT THEIR FACE OUT THERE.

THERE ARE LOTS OF INDIVIDUALS WHO FUND THE PARTY, AND ONE OF THE PROBLEMS HAS BEEN IN THE PAST IS THIS IS IRRELEVANT RESPECTABLE WHETHER YOU'RE REPUBLICAN OR DEMOCRAT, BECAUSE IF YOU A YOU TO MANY OF THE AVERAGE -- THE AVERAGE DEMOCRAT ON THE STREET, THEY FEEL COMPLETELY DISENFRANCHISED.

POLITICS IN THIS STATE HAVE TURNED TO A POINT WHERE ALL POWER IS DEMENTD INTO THE HANDS OF A -- DEMENTED IN THE HANDS OF A SMALL GROUP OF PEOPLE AND EVERYBODY IS RUNNING AROUND IN THE MERCY OF THESE FOUR OR FIVE PEOPLE TO KEEP THEM HAPPY HOPING TO GET THEIR DOLLARS.

THIS IS A PROBLEM.

IS THIS WHAT POLITICS IS ABOUT?

KEEPING FOUR OR FIVE PEOPLE HAPPY AT ALL TIMES, HOPING TO GET THEIR MONEY AT THE EXPENSE OF THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE?

I'M A POPULOUS.

IT'S ABOUT PUTTING PEOPLE FIRST.

WHEN YOU HAVE PRINCIPLES, THE MONEY WILL FOLLOW.

BUT I'M NOT GOING TO -- AND AGAIN, THIS SHOULD BE FOR ANYBODY.

I DON'T CARE IF YOU'RE REPUBLICAN, DEMOCRAT, INDEPENDENT, LIBERTARIAN, WE HAVE GOT TO STOP IN POLITICS, ACTING LIKE PEOPLE JUST CHASE MONEY.

AND IF FOUR OR FIVE PEOPLE ARE HAPPY AND THEY GET WHAT THEY WANT, FEN IT PORTRAYS PRINCIPLES, I DON'T CARE, THOSE FOUR OR FIVE PEOPLE WILL GIVE ME MONEY.

THAT'S A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS THAT WE'VE COME TO IN POLITICS AND I REJECT THAT NOTION.

>> ARE YOU TAKING A PAYCHECK YET?

>> ACCORDING TO OUR BYLAWS, OUR BUDGET COMMITTEE HAS A SET PAY AND WE HAVE NOT MET.

SO THAT ANSWERS THAT QUESTION.

SO AGAIN -- >> ARE YOU GOING TO SUPPORT DONALD TRUMP FOR PRESIDENT?

>> WELL, THE THING ABOUT IT, THAT WOULD BE -- YOU KNOW, AS CHAIR OF THE MICHIGAN REPUBLICAN PARTY, WITH REREQUIRED BY OUR BYLAWS TO REMAIN NEUTRAL IN PRIMARIES AND THAT'S JUST NOT PRESIDENTIAL PRIMARIES, THAT'S ALL PRIMARIES.

>> DO YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE SYSTEM SO THAT THE SECRETARY OF STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL ARE PICKED BY THE PEOPLE OF MICHIGAN, THE VOTERS OR THE PARTY?

WILL YOU FAVOR THAT CHANGE?

>> WELL, AGAIN, THIS IS NOT -- THAT QUESTION I HAVE NOT FLUSHED OUT THOSE DETAILS.

BUT TO YOUR FIRST POINT, THE MICHIGAN REPUBLICAN PARTY REMAINS SO THAT THE PRIMARIES ARE NOT TO SUPPORT WHATEVER COMES OUT AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO IT BEING SUCCESSFUL IN 2024.

>> ARE YOU GONNA WIN THIS NEXT ROUND?

>> WELL, IN 2024?

ABSOLUTELY.

ABSOLUTE VICTORY.

>> CHAIRWOMAN, THANKS FOR BEING ON OUR PROGRAM.

ALSO, THANKS TO OUR PANEL.

NEXT WEEK, MORE "OFF THE RECORD" RIGHT HERE.

>> PRODUCTION OF "OFF THE RECORD" IS MADE POSSIBLE IN PART BY MARTIN WAYMIRE, A FULL SERVICE STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY PARTNERING WITH CLIEBLGHTS THROUGH PUBLIC RELATIONS, DIGITAL MARKETING AND PUBLIC POLICY ENGAGEMENT.

LEARN MORE AT MARTINWAYMIRE.COM.

FOR MORE "OFF THE RECORD," VISIT WKAR.ORG.

MICHIGAN PUBLIC TELEVISION STATIONS HAVE CONTRIBUTED TO THE PRODUCTION COSTS OF "OFF THE RECORD."