FM Talk 1065 Podcasts
State Representative Phillip Ensler - Jeff Poor Show - Tuesday 10-01-24
♪ Look away, look away ♪ ♪ Look away, take a look ♪ ♪ Oh, glory, glory ♪ ♪ And in the moon, yeah ♪ - Welcome back to the Jupoor Show of the Fum Talk, 106.5. Thanks for staying with us on this Tuesday morning. Text line, if you wanna be in touch with the program, you know how to use it, 251.34.3, 01.06. That's how you do so. Still come on the program, our monthly visit with Andrew Sorrell, our state auditor, and then it is Tuesday. So, John Wald, your Alabama Republican Party Chairman, will be with us as well. But joining us now, he represents, I guess it's a portion of East Montgomery, other parts, but a state representative, Philip Insler, joins us on the line. Representative, good morning, aren't you? - Good morning, I'm doing well, and appreciate you having me on. - Hey, thanks for coming on. Now, it's a rare opportunity for me to have a Democrat lawmaker on, and I ask the Republican lawmakers this all the time. I think it's a real kind of a rough session for a lot of them, and I know they got a lot of things passed that you probably disagree with, but what was it like from your perspective? Like, have you like, was it a bumpy ride or is every session sort of a bumpy ride? Well, I guess we've been through too, but have they been a bumpy ride? - Yeah, look, I expect session to be up and down time. There's certainly bills that passed that I didn't agree with or that our caucus didn't agree with, but overall, I think Speaker Ledbetter has done a great job meeting the House. I know on our side, there was a lot of support. On our side, I mean, in the House side, a lot of support for gaming and gambling. There was disappointment overall that it didn't end up getting passed. But look, I think session is a, I expected it to be a turbulent time. So, it's good to have a little break and good to end here up for next session. - Oh, it's interesting to hear that. Well, obviously we're on to talking about Glocks, which is, and well, we'll start off here and kind of walk us through your bill generally, the specifics, penalties, and so on and so forth. - Sure, and so I've, you're listeners who don't know, got elected in 2022, so I've been in just for a few years, but during the campaign and since the time I've been on, I've heard from law enforcement in Montgomery, our sheriff, Montgomery Police, others throughout the state who have said that they're increasingly finding these Glockswitches or trigger activators attached to pistols. And that, what's happening is they're turning them over to the U.S. attorneys, they're turning them over to the federal government, but what they want is a state level of fence where they can have the cases prosecuted by district attorneys in Alabama, because the case load was getting so large, they wanted to be able to essentially kind of share it between the federal government and the state government. So that's really where the idea originated. So I've introduced the bill for a few years now, and what it does is make it illegal to have a pistol that's converted into a machine gun. So again, using one of those Glockswitches or conversion devices, there are kind of a few terms that are used, the penalty for it would be a class C felony, and that was, you know, what was recommended and what law enforcement and district attorneys were supportive of, and that's why we've got with that. - Well, let me ask you this as it pertains to that. So the thing that keeps coming up, there's already a federal law out there that handles this. Talk about how that works and what you want to do would work in concert with that or as a duplication. Exactly how would that work? - Sure, so right now it's saying that, you know, sheriff's in Mobile or the, you know, a police officer up in Huntsville or, you know, anywhere in between, you know, if they find one of these devices, what the best they can do is to turn it over to the federal government to then decide if it's prosecuted and for the US government to decide how they prosecute it. That indictment process, that prosecution process can take a long time. So what this will do is, is a free up and empowered district attorneys in Alabama to press charges themselves. And they can do that probably a little bit more quickly and say the federal government can, but it'll certainly then be up to the discretion of law enforcement. You know, do they turn it over to the feds or do they keep it on the state level? So all it is is another accountability piece. It's a way to say, look, we want to deter some of these killing machines, some of these devices, but we also don't want to hold people accountable and make sure that there's another mechanism to hold them accountable should law enforcement find it. You know, and let me say this, that it's a big picture. This is just one small piece of, to improve public safety. I think it starts with supporting our police departments. It supports, you know, it starts to make sure that we're supporting retention and recruitment efforts. So I'm not gonna sit here and fix all of these issues, but at least, you know, I'll add on to it is that we do this all the time. There are plenty of things that are illegal or in Alabama, we're elected to enact things on the state level, so we very much should act. - How widespread do you think this is? And like, I'm very, that there are really open a lot of people's eyes to this. But how much, how many of these like devices or how many of these are in use? How widespread of a problem is it in Alabama? - Yeah, so it essentially our larger cities, it certainly is more of a problem. The reports I've gotten from law enforcement are bad. They're probably at least a few on your end of these devices out there and therefore potential cases every year. I think there was an analysis done from amount of mobile. A couple of years ago, that says it was like a 300 or 400% increase, at least in the number of devices that law enforcement found. So really in the last two years, they proliferated and the reason for that is that they're really easy to make, they're really cheap. So a lot of people are getting their hands on them and that's why law enforcement is just having an even tougher time, trying to crack down on it. - Well, what occurs to me, and it may be this is in your law and I'm just not aware of it. I haven't read it or your bill, I should say. What about the people who manufacture these? Now it'll be at somebody with a 3D printer and a basement somewhere or I don't know how these things are made or how you get one, but it would occur to me that like, what would be the penalty for manufacturing these devices? Wouldn't that maybe serve as a deterrent as well? - Yeah, great question. The federal law covers that right now and the idea is that the US attorneys, the federal government can go over the bigger, go after the bigger fish, so go after the manufacturers, go after those who are dealing those. The state level offense would deal more on an individual level with those who are making the choice not to them to test those. And the idea would be if the state district attorneys can handle more of the individual cases, the federal government, it frees up some resources for them to go after those that are manufacturing these and really spreading these out into communities and into the state. - I mean, do you think they're being made in Alabama, or do you have any sense of where these things are coming from? - You know, it's a great question. I mean, they could be made in Alabama, but also they could be coming from overseas, they could be coming from outside of the country. And that's why, you know, we have to take the all hands on deck approach to make sure that we're addressing, you know, if they are coming from out of state or out of country, make sure that we're going after the source, but then to the extent that they are making their way in, you know, making sure that there is just one other way to deal with it in Alabama is really important. And look, you know, what I've heard from law enforcement is that when seen firsthand through demonstrations that once these are fired, you know, the bullets spray everywhere, they're really dangerous. So this isn't about self-protection, you know, we certainly want people to be able to protect themselves, to be able to, you know, have their second amendment right, have a firearm. But what we want to do is just say, you know, for law enforcement that are increasingly now at risk because they may encounter someone with these really, really dangerous devices that they don't know how to use, that we want to make them a little bit safer, especially for law enforcement. And I've heard people talk about these representatives and just how hard it is to control the actual firearm when one's attached to it. And maybe that's it, like, maybe your colleagues don't realize this, but it's, yeah, you get the, whatever the performance objective is, but it's just like a wildly, you're just swinging wildly away, putting a lot of people in harm's way. - Exactly, and the Montgomery Sheriff did a demonstration here a couple of weeks ago where they had one of their, well, an ATF, arms expert, you know, do a demonstration and, you know, he filed a fire, a regular pistol, you know, hit the target, spot on, over and over again, then tried firing one that had a switch on it. And the bullets just went in every which direction, they barely hit the target. And that's why they are so dangerous because they can then get bystanders, you know, someone, especially who's not a trained expert, aspiring one of these, and they're in a car driving by or they're, you know, holding it with one hand, it just puts people, innocent people and bystanders at even a greater risk. - Well, joined by state representative Philip Insler of Montgomery here on the program, I spend a lot of time talking about the problems of Montgomery Birmingham on a mobile show, probably did the chagrino, some of my listeners, but representative, and since this is sort of your home base, I mean, Montgomery, certainly I'm up, during session I'm up there once a week, probably during football season, we stay in Montgomery before we go to Auburn. I'm there enough, and it doesn't feel as safe as it once had. What do you, I mean, just from your ground level perspective there, what do you think is the problem there? Well, what do you think needs to be done? - Sure, no, and look, public safety is the biggest issue that I hear about in my district, and it doesn't matter if it's white residents, black residents, you know, upper middle class, working class, it's something that all people want to have safe neighborhoods. I am really glad and give a lot of credit to the crime suppression unit that in the last few months, especially this summer, has been a partnership of Montgomery police, of the sheriff's, the attorney general's office, Leah, that has shown results, and I think they can share that we continue to focus on in Montgomery recruiting and retaining the strong police department, and also though having those kind of partnerships, you know, between the city and the state, you know, has shown the results, and we need to continue to do that. You know, I will add in that when it comes to public safety and I hear this from residents, you know, no matter their playable background, a lot of them think that it does start at home, it starts with families raising their children to make good decisions, and that's something that, you know, no city or government or police department can control, but to the extent that government can take action, there are things also that we can do more of, you know, I work a lot with young people to try to, you know, steer them in the right direction and as far as conflict resolution, you know, having that skill set, you know, that's kind of on the early end, but then making sure that, right, that we have a police, you know, force that's supported and able to do their job well. And that's why, you know, I've introduced this bill over and over again, is because I've heard from law enforcement that it's just one tool in the toolbox and being able to crack down on crime. - What do you think of the, I mean, the gang problem? And I, there's a, it seems like there's a reluctance to even acknowledge it in some places. - And maybe it's not quite a, more of a, more of a Birmingham phenomenon than a Montgomery phenomenon, but I mean, like we saw Dadeville, I mean, I'm sure you're familiar with all these instances where it looks like it was gang related. I don't, I mean, this just seems like something that's happened here lately, representative of where it's sort of, sort of increased or whatever really showed up on our radar more. - Sure, no, and I'm not, you know, pretty to why, you know, the police department or law enforcement, you know, they identify as gangs or not, but I know that if there are gangs or not if there are, there are, you know, we should acknowledge that, you know, and should make sure that we go after that. You know, it's interesting, someone once said to me that when it comes to crime, you know, they always have to think about how it has impacted those that have been victimized, those that have been impacted, those that have lost someone. And I think the more we humanize it, the more that we talk about, well, if someone has lost the family member to a gang member, or they have lost the loved ones to gun violence or to a crime, you know, making sure that we approach it, you know, with that heartfelt sense, you know, it is really important. - Oh, lastly, and it sounds like Montgomery's training in a better direction than it was, say, six months ago, when you had that innocent bystander out of Atlanta Highway in that incident, but like immediately Sarah Barfoot, your colleague, Reed Ingram, talking about like a takeover of police departments. And it seems like a lot of Republicans have kind of, are kind of cool to that idea. They're not really big on that. What do you think at some level of the state's involvement there, especially in your hometown? - Sure, yeah, and I do not support that bill. And, you know, here's why I think that partnerships like the one we see now between the state and the city are effective, that has increased morale. But we elect mayors and, you know, city councils to then make those local decisions about hiring a police chief and, you know, budgets. So I think keeping that, you know, within our cities, it's a very heavy-handed, top-down approach to having the state get involved in that sense. But I do think, and I look forward to the state, I think there are other ways we can support, you know, whether it is through, you know, additional funding, whether it is through additional resources, you know, supporting local police departments that they'd be having a tough time. I think that kind of partnership effort is much better than kind of forcing or mandating something. - Well, Representative, you've been very generous for your time. And I, like I said, I appreciate you making time for us. And maybe we could talk again soon. - Absolutely no. Look, let me say that that, you know, it is a healthy and good thing that there are different viewpoints at times and, you know, I think coming on your show and having the conversation is meaningful. So I appreciate you having me on. - Anytime, thanks for making time for us. State Representative Philip Inzler there, we got to get a break. This is the Jeff Plors Show it. If I'm talking 106.5. (upbeat music) (upbeat music) (upbeat music) (music)