YANG: I saw your friend coming. Did she give you this food?
向杨：我看你朋友刚才来过，她给你带的这些吃的？
JASON: You mean my wife? She's—yeah, she's around here somewhere. She went to grab some water, so she'll probably come back in a second. She's hanging out with me this evening.
YANG: At yesterday's seminar, the lady sitting next to you—
向杨：昨天研讨会上坐在你旁边的那位女士——
JASON: That's my wife.
杰森：那是我爱人。
YANG: That's your wife! Oh, cool.
向杨：那是你爱人，哦，原来如此。
JASON: Yeah.
杰森：是的。
YANG: Fantastic.
向杨：很赞。
JASON: So she'll be sitting with us here, but she's working on some stuff. So where are you from?
杰森：所以她今天也要和我们一起呆在这里，不过她手头有些工作要忙。话说回来，你来自哪里呢？
YANG: Actually, I'm from China.
向杨：我其实是从中国来的。
JASON: Where in China are you from?
杰森：中国的哪里呢？
YANG: Southwest part of China. I've been living in Sichuan for eight years [JASON: Uh-huh.], but my hometown is in the middle [JASON: Cool.] part of China.
向杨：中国西南部。我在四川生活了8年。[杰森：哦。] 但我的家乡是在中国的中部地区。
JASON: Where's—so I did a trade mission where we went to Shanghai, Beijing, and a place called Hebei?
杰森：是哪里？我之前有个贸易访问，所以去了上海、北京还有一个地方，好像叫河北？
YANG: Hebei, yeah.
向杨：河北，对的。
JASON: I don't know if you're from anywhere near any of those places.
杰森：我不知道这几个地方里头有没有哪一个离你在中国住的地方比较近。
YANG: Yeah, I actually went to all of them.
向杨：是的，这几个地方我其实都去过。
JASON: Oh, okay, cool.
杰森：噢，是嘛，很棒。
YANG: Hebei is like the province that surrounds Beijing.
向杨：河北是围绕着北京的那个省。
JASON: Yeah.
杰森：是的。
YANG: It's heavily polluted. [LAUGHS] But I'm not sure when it will get better in the future, [JASON: Yeah.] but it's been part of the agenda in this Party Congress.
JASON: So are you hoping to stay, or are you planning to go back to China?
杰森：那你是想留在这里呢，还是打算回中国？
YANG: Both are fine.
向杨：都可以。
JASON: Both are fine?
杰森：都可以？
YANG: Both are fine.
向杨：是的。
JASON: They're very different things.
杰森：这两个选择很不一样
YANG: Yeah, it takes 14 hours to get from here to China [JASON: Yeah.], so. [LAUGHS]
向杨：是的，但目前只要花14个小时从这儿飞中国。[杰森：是的。] [笑]
JASON: It's just—it's good that you're in a place where you're like, eh, either one is fine. [YANG: Yeah.] They're two very different things.
杰森：你觉得两个选项都可以，这个状态真的不错。[向杨：嗯。] 毕竟两国有很多东西不一样。
YANG: Yeah, I live comfortably in Chicago. [JASON: Mhm.] I mean, I can brave through the winter. [LAUGHTER]
向杨：是的。我在芝加哥也挺安逸。[杰森：嗯。] 我现在都能挺过这里的冬天。
JASON: Where you're from in China, does it not get anywhere near as cold as it gets here?
杰森：你在中国呆的地方是哪儿来着？那里的天气会像这里一样冷吗？
YANG: In Sichuan, the weather was very benign.
向杨：在四川。那里的天气要温和的多。
JASON: Yeah? That's nice.
杰森：是嘛，那挺不错的。
YANG: It never gets cold. [LAUGHS]
向杨：那里一直就没怎么冷过。[笑]
JASON: Yeah, I couldn't bear Chicago weathers for—I couldn't do it, so. Okay, well, cool! So what do you want to—
杰森：嗯，我扛不住这里的寒冷，我做不到。所以，你真的很厉害。那你今天来是为了—
YANG: Actually, I'm just curious about [the] gun issue in the United States [JASON: Sure.], and actually, I used your gun control ad when I was giving a lecture in China.
YANG: I was curious—yeah—you know, to most Chinese, they're very curious about why Americans are so enthusiastic about owning a gun.
向杨：我对这个问题很感兴趣。很多中国人，他们也很想知道，为什么美国人对拥枪的热情这么高。
JASON: Can you own a gun in China?
杰森：你在中国能拥有一把枪吗？
YANG: No.
向杨：不能
JASON: The only way you'd ever get one is in the military, I'd assume? That's the only time you'd handle one.
杰森：我猜你只能在军队里服役的时候得到一把枪，对吧？那个时候你才能拥有枪。
YANG: Yeah. So, just days ago, my father gave me a phone call, saying my grandmother was very concerned about me because she heard all the news about the Las Vegas [JASON: Yeah.] mass shooting, [JASON: Right.] and it's going on so long and so repeatedly. [JASON: Mhm.] So you had that nice gun ad [JASON: Mhm.] which I found very smart—
YANG: —telling a story about you but also gave me a sense of how you should navigate the dark waters of gun culture in the United States. [JASON: Mhm.] In order to bridge the cultural gap, you have to make a lot of strategic concessions [JASON: Mhm.] before you try to make your argument.
JASON: —a Sociology PhD student who is from China and used the gun ad in a lecture in China.
杰森：他是中国来的，在读社会学博士，在一堂中国的课上用了我的那个枪支管控广告。
DIANA: That's cool!
黛安娜：很棒！
JASON: Which is interesting. Sorry, I'm—go ahead.
杰森：真的有很意思，不好意思，你继续。
YANG: So the first question—to many untrained eyes of Chinese, there appears to be a conservative fetish for the Second Amendment. Whenever I heard about [the] gun debates, conservatives would often invoke the Second Amendment, James Madison, or the tyranny of government. [JASON: Mhm.] You know—the tyranny of government sounds a little bit weird, because whenever it comes to national security, it's not the firearms you own in a farmhouse, it's about the [JASON: Mhm.] Minuteman in the missile silo [JASON: Mhm.], for example, in North Dakota... [JASON: Mhm.] So whenever they make this argument, it sounds as if they gain something automatically [JASON: Mhm.], like the ring of gospel truth. [JASON: Mhm.] So from your vantage point—so first of all, what's your rating from the NRA?
向杨：在很多未见识过枪支文化的中国人看来，保守派人士对宪法第二修正案有类似偶像崇拜。（注：美国宪法第二修正案为美国权利法案的一部份，于1791年12月15日被批准。本修正案保障人民有备有及佩带武器之权利）我每次听到有关枪支问题的辩论时，保守派人士都会引用宪法第二修正案，引用詹姆士·麦迪逊啊（注：美国国父之一，第四任总统，被誉为“美国宪法之父”，在美国宪法和权利法案的起草中发挥了重要作用），政府的暴政啊之类的。[杰森：嗯。] 政府的暴政，现在听上去有点奇怪，因为涉及国家安全时，比拼的不是农舍里有多少支枪，[杰森：嗯。] 而是导弹发射井里有多少“义勇兵飞弹”，比如那些设立在北达科他州的发射井。所以每次他们这样争论时，听起来就像是他们自然而然地站到了真理的一边。[杰森：嗯。] 哦，先问一下美国步枪协会给你的评分是？（注：National Rifle Association of America, NRA，总部设于美国弗吉尼亚州的，是美国最大的枪械拥有者组织和强大的利益集团。虽然NRA是非党派性、非营利性的组织，但是它积极参加美国政治活动，在美国政治中具有巨大的影响力。NRA认为，拥有枪支的权利是受美国宪法第二修正案保护的民权，这构成了它的政治活动的理论基础。因此NRA是美国反对枪支限制的主要力量）
JASON: F.
杰森：不及格，F。
YANG: F, okay, that's good. No pressure. [LAUGHS] So from your vantage point of getting an F from the NRA, what arguments from gun rights advocacy groups have you found actually very persuasive?
YANG: Yeah, what arguments do you find actually persuasive?
向杨：是的，你觉得哪些论点其实很有说服力？
JASON: Well, there's really only one dominant gun rights advocacy group in the United States in the conversation right now [YANG: Yeah.], and it's the NRA. [YANG: Yeah.] And I don't find them persuasive as far as the NRA leadership [goes], because I don't find them credible, and [YANG: Yeah.] the thing that most Americans are not talking about—and I've been trying to persuade people to talk about it in this debate—is that the leadership of the NRA is bankrolled by the big gun companies. [YANG: Mhm.] And what that means is, is that the NRA's leadership—the reason why there is a gulf, you know, a division between the NRA's leadership and the membership, is because the membership believes in the right to own a gun. And by the way, most members of the NRA believe that there should be limitations on that. The majority of them think we should have background checks that are universal. But the leadership of the NRA's responsibility is to preserve the right to sell as many guns as possible. [YANG: Mhm.]
And nobody ever talks about that. [YANG: Mhm.] When you are running for office in America, and you get a questionnaire from the NRA [YANG: Mhm.], you would think that it would be all about gun ownership. [YANG: Mhm.] It's not. Most of the questions are about the rights of federally licensed gun manufacturers to sell guns. [YANG: Mhm.] So it's just a big business special interest, is all it is. [YANG: Mhm.] The reason that the NRA is now pushing for the legalization of silencers [YANG: Mhm.] is not because of hearing protection [YANG: Mhm.]—although that's what they claim. When I was in the army, we protected our hearing with earplugs, right. [YANG: Mhm.] It's that they make silencers, and they would like to be able to sell them, and they'd like to be able to sell more of them. The reason that they don't want there to be universal background checks [YANG: Mhm.] is because if there were universal background checks, fewer guns might be trading hands in the private marketplace, which means fewer people would then turn around and buy new guns. They sell guns. The reason that they want reciprocity with concealed carry [YANG: Mhm.]—meaning if you have a concealed carry permit in one state, it's good in every other state—is because it means more people would be buying pistols, and they sell pistols. So that's why I don't find them credible, because a lot of the stuff they're pushing for [YANG: Mhm.] is just about selling a product. And, you know, that's why the leadership has no credibility.
YANG: Yeah, I heard about [how] the NRA has over 5 million memberships, and many of them have been very aggressive. [JASON: Mhm.] They would bother to make phone calls to the congressional offices, donate more money than [JASON: Mhm.] the other side of this debate. And also they—
JASON: A lot of the money that goes to politicians from the NRA doesn't come just from the members. [YANG: Mhm.] It comes from really big donations to the NRA's political action committees from really big gun companies.
YANG: What I mean by "persuasive argument" are more like rebuttals to some—
向杨：我说的“有说服力的论点”更像是反驳一些—
JASON: Oh, sure. Oh, you mean—
杰森：噢，没错，你是说—
YANG: —arguments from the gun control side.
向杨：反驳那些控抢派的论点。
JASON: So I thought you mean, is there anything the gun rights groups—I thought you said— that they believe I agree with. Okay.
杰森：所以我想你的意思是，拥枪派有没有说过什么他们觉得我会认同的话，对吧。
YANG: Yeah, I think these debates are really muddy. Sometimes, you know, they don't have to be proactively championing something, they just give some rebuttals to some arguments from the gun control side.
JASON: So you're saying, what should my side of the argument be saying?
杰森：所以你是说，我所站的这一边该说点什么？
YANG: Yeah.
向杨：是的。
JASON: You're asking, right?
杰森：你是在提问，对吧？
YANG: I mean, maybe, I should say, what kind of rebuttal you find actually quite persuasive? Because I'm concerned about the discourse about gun issues in the United State. Part of the reason is from the historical point of view. I know NRA used to be quite neutral [JASON: Mhm.], but it became more politicized since the 1970s. [JASON: Mhm.] And, you know, the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, but it only lasted for 10 years and expired. And after that, all the efforts to legislate gun control bills failed. [JASON: Yeah.] And also the landmark Supreme Court decision in 2008. [JASON: DC v. Heller.] What I want to know is, why liberals keep losing the gun control debates?
向杨：我是说，或许我该这么说，你觉得有没有哪种反驳其实相当有道理？因为我担忧美国枪支问题的这场辩论所用的话语。一部分的担忧来自历史，因为步枪协会以前还是个比较中立的利益集团[杰森：嗯。] ，但从上世纪七十年代开始，步枪协会就拥枪一事变得更政治化了。你也知道，1994年的《联邦突击武器禁令》，但这一禁令只维持了10年就失效了。（注：“联邦禁止武器禁令”（AWB） ，官方全称为“公共安全和娱乐武器使用保护法”是1994年“暴力犯罪控制和执法法”的一部分，该法案是美国联邦法律，其中包括禁止制造民用某些半自动枪支以及一些大容量的弹夹）在那之后，所有试图将枪支管控合法化的法案都以失败告终。[杰森：嗯。] 还有最高法院2008年那次里程碑式的判决。（注：2008年6月26日，美国联邦最高法院以5比4的微弱优势，为“哥伦比亚区诉赫勒案”（District of Columbia v. Heller）做出了以下判决：1、第二修正案保护的是个人持有和携带武器的权利，此权利与民兵服役无关；个人有权为了传统合法的目的，如在家中自卫，使用武器。2、象其他多数权利一样，第二修正案的权利不是绝对的。3、哥伦比亚特区的手枪禁令以及要求在枪械上装配板机扣的法律侵犯了第二修正案）[杰森：哥伦比亚区诉赫勒] 我想知道的是，为什么自由派在枪支管控的辩论中节节败退呢？
JASON: We're not. We're not losing the gun control debate. [YANG: Mhm.] We've won the gun control debate. The majority of American people agree with us, which should not be mistaken for winning votes in Congress. [YANG: Mhm.] Congress has a Republican majority because of gerrymandering, and because of gerrymandering, that Republican majority is overwhelmingly gerrymandering into representing districts that are very far right. [YANG: Mhm.] The majority of the American people agree with the Democrats on gun control. The majority of Congress doesn't, and that's because they're paid not to. Campaign contributions and everything else and they can lose primaries—I mean, too many members of Congress are more worried about losing a primary than they are a general election. If the districts were set up in a such a way that the general election was the highest chance for them to lose [YANG: Mhm.], gun control would have passed years ago.
YANG: From the tactical point of view, it's important to talk about mass shootings, [JASON: Mhm.] the reason why we should have gun control. But from the strategic point of view, using mass shooting to define gun debate would stand in the way of saving lives, because from what I've learned about gun-related deaths [JASON: Mhm.], over 60 percent is about suicide [JASON: Right.] and they usually use handguns instead of those automatic rifles. [JASON: Mhm] And even in mass shootings, most of them are still using handguns instead of those military rifles. [JASON: Right.] I don't know what strategy Democrats are using in this discourse. Is it making a strategic mistake by focusing on mass shooting? What is the debate in the suicide part?
JASON: Well, it's hard not to talk about mass shootings when it's such a cultural event and so tragic, right? [YANG: Mhm.] But yeah, look, I think we have to talk about the fact that gun death is so prevalent in the country. I think it's a reason for background checks, I think it's a reason for saying that somebody who's gonna carry should have actual training. You know, it's all those things. It's why you talk about gun safety. [YANG: Mhm.] But again, like your question—you're looking at it in terms of a strategically convincing people sort of question.
YANG: You're focusing on the margin of the legal regime, but [the] handgun is something the Democrats wouldn't touch—it's too radical.
向杨：你聚焦的是在现行法律体系的边缘上修补，但限制手枪是民主党不会碰触的地方，会显得太激进了。
JASON: Well, we do argue that even handguns should require a background check. [YANG: Mhm.] And so—and there are people who have used pistols to commit mass shootings and other murders who should not have one—they would not pass a background check.
YANG: Would that affect suicide rates if you checked—
向杨：如果进行背景调查的话，会影响自杀率吗？
JASON: Not necessarily. So I mean, I think it's a good question. There probably is a blind spot in it. But, you know, there are things that would—like, for instance, you know, trigger locks, you know, "safe guns," or whatever they call it—not "safe guns."
JASON: Smart guns, thank you. And, you know, all that kind of stuff—at least then, you know, if you are—you're not gonna use someone else's gun to do it, you know, that kind of thing. [YANG: Mhm.] So I don't think you can 100 percent prevent suicide through gun violence. You know, you can prevent people committing suicide through a gun that's not their own possibly—you can do that kind of a thing. [YANG: Mhm.] But yeah, but it's absolutely something that should be addressed. Guns are really numerous, and when guns are readily available, and suicide's sometimes an impulsive decision, yeah, it absolutely affects it. A lot of people would argue that that's why a gun registry makes sense. [YANG: Mhm.] I think you're making a good point. There's a blind spot there that exists.
YANG: Is the blind spot driven more by fear from politicians, or it's just not popular?
向杨：这个盲点更多的是由政客们的担忧造成的呢，还是说仅仅因为通过控枪来减少自杀成功率不受欢迎？
JASON: I think it's driven more by the fact that while suicide is an enormous problem, I think it's driven more by the fact that the problem feels so overwhelming right now that people are focusing on the stuff where they think we can force Congress to do something. [YANG: Mhm.] And forcing Congress to do something about how readily available pistols are to people who are mentally ill [YANG: Mhm.], that's on the other side of forcing them to do something about universal background checks, assault weapons, that kind of stuff. So I think it's probably more—there's an old expression—"how do you eat an elephant one bite at a time?" [YANG: Mhm.] You know, so you start at one end, so you're not immediately gonna start talking about the middle of the elephant, right. So I think it's probably more of that. It's probably a sense that I think a lot of Democrats have—look, we're never gonna get there if we can't get this [YANG: Mhm.], you know, so let's focus on this first and then, you know. Whether that's right or wrong, I think—
YANG: Sometimes the arguments from the margin would play in the hands of the NRA. For example, they would say banning assault weapons wouldn't prevent terrorism—think about Paris. They have very harsh gun control laws [JASON: Sure.] but they still have a lot of terrorist attacks.
JASON: But again, you gotta remember, don't fall under the trap of thinking that because America hasn't passed a law [YANG: Mhm.], we have failed to convince people. There's an old Upton Sinclair quote—"It's very difficult to make a man understand something he's paid not to understand." [YANG: Yeah.] Members of Congress who represent heavily gerrymandered districts and depend on the NRA to get re-elected—I don't know what their true belief is. I know what they're saying in order to get re-elected. But the vast majority of the American people think that the average person does not need an assault weapon, thinks that there should be universal background checks, thinks that, you know, gun owners—I'm a gun owner—but gun owners are actually a minority in this country—not by a lot, but it's like 40-something percent of people and again, which means close to 60 percent of Americans don't own one. [YANG: Mhm.] So we have won the argument, it's just now we gotta force Congress to actually do what the American people want them to do. Sometimes it's not enough just to win the argument. [YANG: Mhm.] I'm not so sure it's a problem with the argument.
YANG: So which one do you think plays the most important part in blocking this legislation—money from all these interest groups, electoral base, or this singular focus on the gun issue—
JASON: The biggest reason why it hasn't passed is because of the way districts are drawn in the country. The way districts are drawn and the way primaries are run—people—Republican politicians feel like they have to only represent a small segment of the population. That's the biggest roadblock. If we fix that, we fix this and a bunch of other issues.
