Director Steve McQueen attends the 13th Annual AARP's Movies For Grownups Awards Gala at Regent Beverly Wilshire Hotel on February 10, 2014 in Beverly Hills, California.; Credit: Imeh Akpanudosen/Getty Images

Steve McQueen’s “12 Years A Slave” has been a box office hit and critical darling, earning nine Oscar nominations and snagging the Best Picture - Drama award at the Golden Globes.

The film tells the story of Solomon Northup, a free-born African American violinist who was captured by slave traders -- Northup recounted his experiences in his memoir, Twelve Years A Slave. McQueen’s adaptation features a stacked British and American cast, and has attracted attention for being violent and realistic.

In an interview with CNN, McQueen spoke about the lack of films portraying slavery realistically, saying. “For me, being of African descent, I thought there was a hole in the canon of cinema regarding this subject. It was very natural that I wanted to put it on film.”

What inspired McQueen’s direction of “12 Years A Slave”? How have depictions of race in film changed, and how will they continue to transform?

Guest: 

Steve McQueen, Director, “12 Years a Slave,” which received nine Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture. McQueen wrote and directed 2011’s “Shame” and 2008’s “Hunger.”

Pasadena Public Works trash trucks collect garbage and yard waste on October 10, 2008 in Pasadena, California. ; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

The L.A. City Council moved ahead with plans to end an 8-year class action lawsuit over garbage-truck driver breaks, to the tune of $26 million, according to the Los Angeles Times.

The settlement comes after a long battle over restrictions placed on drivers breaks. To avoid the misconception that drivers were sleeping on the job, trash truck drivers were forbidden from napping during their breaks. Drivers were also prohibited from congregating near restaurants or parking in groups.

In his interview with David Zahniser, Matthew Taylor, the lawyer representing the drivers, argues that because their breaks were employer-controlled, they should have been paid for that time. Some City Council members, including Councilman Paul Krekorian argue that seeing a large group of garbage trucks or a sleeping city worker would be “an affront” to constituents. The settlement, backpay for nine years of breaks for over 1,000 drivers, averages about $15,000 per person.

Should garbage truck drivers be allowed to do whatever they want on their breaks? How should they be compensated? what’s appropriate behavior in these circumstances?

Guests: 

David Zahniser, LA Times reporter covering Los Angeles City Hall, local government

Michael Waterstone, Associate Dean for Research and Academic Centers, J. Howard Ziemann Fellow and Professor of Law at Loyola Law School

From left to right: Taylor Parsons, Republique Beverage Director and Sommelier , Christian Philippo, General Manager, Walter Manzke, Chef, Margarita Manzke, Chef, and Bill Chait, Managing Partner.; Credit: Ben Bergman/KPCC

A hot new French restaurant in Hancock Park serves up rich dishes, delicate pastries and a surprise when the bill comes around. Republique servers explain to customers that a 3% surcharge called the “Healthy LA” tax pays for workers’ health care.

RELATED: Healthcare surcharge riles customers at top LA eatery

Managing partner Bill Chait told KPCC’s Ben Bergman, “We knew that we wanted to offer the opportunity to get everybody into the health insurance pool....The problem is the structure for health care really makes it very difficult to insure part-time people... [W]e concluded that the most transparent and effective way to do it was to have a charge that basically was illuminated to the guest as opposed to one that is buried inside of the cost of the food.”

Under Obamacare, businesses like Republique with more than 50 full-time employees have to offer affordable health care benefits or pay fines. (This week, that mandate was delayed again, to 2016.)

However, Taylor Parsons, Republique’s sommelier and beverage director, says he doesn’t see the surcharge as “political at all; it’s a pragmatic decision.”

Taylor continues, “I don't even think about it in the context of health care, I just think about it in the context of having worked in restaurants for the better part of a decade and seeing how broken the existing system is."

Still, some customers perceive it as political and others as just too much information. What do you think? Do you see it as political? Do consumers want to know about a business’ overhead? If you’re a business owner, how much information do you share with your patrons about the cost of doing business?

Poll: What do you think about the surcharge? Let us know:

Guest: 

Ben Bergman, KPCC Business Reporter

Guns seized by the New York Police Department (NYPD), in the largest seizure of illegal guns in the city's history, are displayed on a table during a press conference on August 19, 2013 in New York City. ; Credit: Andrew Burton/Getty Images

A 2-1 decision in the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rules that California will allow law-abiding citizens to carry concealed firearms in public. The decision strikes down the core of California’s permit guidelines for handguns.

State law will require gun-carrying residents to show “good cause” beyond self-protection in order to obtain a concealed-carry permit.

RELATED: Court tosses California's concealed weapons rules due to 2nd Amendment

C.D. Michel, the lawyer for the National Rifle and Pistol Foundation, argued that “The right to self defense doesn’t end at your threshold.” The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2008 that citizens have the right to keep a handgun in their home for protection, but has not ruled on carrying weapons in public.

Should Californians have the right to carry concealed guns? How will the state regulate these weapons? How might this issue fare before the Supreme Court?

Guests: 

Chuck Michel, Attorney, Michel & Associates, lead attorney in the concealed carry case and lawyer for the National Rifle Association; author of "California Gun Laws: A guide to state and federal firearm regulations"

Adam Winkler, Constitutional law professor at UCLA; author of Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America (2011); writer for The Huffington Post & Daily Beast

Interview Highlights:

Did you think you had a good chance to prevail in this?
Chuck Michel: "Well, you never know, that's like trying to predict what a jury's going to do when they come back in, there's so many intangibles, but we were obviously hopeful. We made all the arguments that the court accepted, a lot of the court's opinion adopted all the claims that we made in our brief, so it's a great ruling."

How soon will sheriffs in urban counties have to provide concealed carry permits?
CM: "We're a ways from this becoming an order. This is the court of appeals decision. The court of appeals reversed the district court, the trial court's, ruling that said that it wasn't a Second Amendment violation and sent it back down to the trial court. But before it goes back down to the trial court the county will have an opportunity to ask the Ninth Circuit to review the decision, and potentially to ask the Supreme Court to review the decision of the Ninth Circuit here, so, before this case goes back down to the trial court and the trial court issues an order, it has some other steps to go along the way.

That order would only apply in San Diego for now, but obviously this case establishes a precedent. We have a case in Orange County right now that makes the same claims. It's been stayed pending this opinion, so any city that has a similar requirement that you establish some special need to get a license, something beyond just the need for self defense is going to be vulnerable, but not automatically struck down by virtue of this opinion."

Does the ruling surprise you?
Adam Winkler: "It's surprising in one way. There are three other federal courts of appeals that have gone the other way, that have held that state or cities restrict concealed permits to only those who show good cause are Constitutionally permissible, so it's surprising in that way. It's not surprising in another way. A couple years ago in 2011, California passed a law banning people from carrying openly unloaded weapons. That law, when that was passed, my self included, warned that that would lead to today's ruling.

As the court said today, we need to give some people some opportunity to have a gun in public for self-defense under the Second Amendment. Because California took, I think a foolish step two years ago by banning open unloaded carry, it's going to make it a lot easier for people to get concealed carry permits and we're going to have a lot more guns on the streets of Los Angeles and San Diego than we would have ever had under open carry rules."

Do you think at some point that it's likely that sheriffs and police chiefs are just going to start issuing these routinely if they see the legal handwriting on the wall?
AW: "I think that may happen in some circumstances, but my sense is that most sheriffs, especially in places like Los Angeles and San Diego and San Francisco are going to really fight this to the very end. In fact, I think there's a good chance that this case tees up the question of concealed carry permits for the United States  Supreme Court.

The court has ruled on two major Second Amendment cases in recent years, in both time suggesting that the right to bear arms protects the right to have a gun in your home. But not making it clear whether the Second Amendment applies outside of the home. I think the Supreme Court is likely to step in and sheriffs are going  to try to pursue these cases until they get a Supreme Court ruling requiring them to give up those permits."

If there is an en banc review of a larger panel of the Ninth Circuit, do you think it would likely go to the Supreme Court after that regardless of what the larger panel decided:
AW: "I think it would be far more likely to go to the Supreme Court if the larger panel of affirms today's ruling and says that people have a right to get a concealed carry permit, even if they don't have good cause to get such a permit. If the larger court does not rule in that way, then you have the Ninth Circuit ended up being very consistent with the other circuits who have ruled on this...and that makes it less likely that the Supreme Court steps in."

Do you agree with this legal analysis?
CM: "Essentially, there is definitely a circuit split now between the Second, Third and Fourth circuits and the Ninth and Seventh circuits because we did have the Shepard and Moore cases out of the Seventh Circuit, which struck down Illinois ban on carrying firearms in public, and they've recently set up a licensing scheme for folks to be able to get the permits to carry in public. It's definitely going to be addressed by the Supreme Court sooner or later..."

Some listeners think this will increase gun violence on the streets. How do you respond to that?
CM: "Licensed carry of firearms in public is not the problem, in fact in the 40-odd states now that require the issuance of a license to carry a gun in public for self defense, the violent crime rate actually goes down, because the bad guys don't know who might have a gun and usually about 5 percent of the people in any given state actually get a license, less than 5 percent actually carry a gun because it's actually kind of a pain, literally...Interestingly sometimes property crimes go up because there's no human victim there that might shoot back. It's not the licensed firearms in public that are the problem, it's the unlicensed guns that are in the hands of criminals that are the problem."

In those must-issue states, do you see an increase in tensions and gun violence?
AW: "It doesn't happen very often. What we've seen is in states that allow concealed carry permits, there is some evidence that maybe some of the violent crime goes down. There have been some conflicting studies on this and studies supported by the gun control community, even those studies show that if there's any effect it's negligible, but more importantly, it's pretty clear that it doesn't lead to spikes in violence...We may see some incidents here and there, but overall its not going to make a big difference. I think Chuck is right, the people who are law abiding, licensed concealed carry holders are not really the people we need to worry about in terms of committing violence." 

Full court ruling:

LINK

People show their smartphones on December 25, 2013 in Dinan, northwestern France. ; Credit: PHILIPPE HUGUEN/AFP/Getty Images

A new study from the Pew Research Center on technology usage of American couples finds that over a quarter of internet users in a marriage or committed relationship share an email account with each other, and that more than half of them have shared the password to one or more of their online accounts.

The report also finds that technology both creates tension and offers support in a relationship. Nine percent of respondents say that they have resolved an argument with their partner online or by text message, and 25% of people say they have felt that their spouse or partner was distracted by their smart phones when they were together.

Call in and share how technology impacts your relationship.

And Happy Valentine’s Day - if that’s your thing.

Guest:

Jessica Carbino, PhD. candidate in sociology at UCLA whose research focuses on online dating and she hosts and produces a weekly radio show on UCLA Radio called "Hook up With Dr. Jess"

Two-liter bottles of regular and diet soda are seen for sale at a Manhattan store on May 31, 2012 in New York City.; Credit: Mario Tama/Getty Images

Medical experts and a state lawmaker proposed a bill this Thursday that would require soft drinks and other sugary beverages sold in California to carry a warning label similar to those placed on cigarette cartons. The proposal cites studies linking soda to obesity and other health risks, including diabetes and tooth decay.

The labels would be placed on bottles and cans of drinks with added sugar or with more than 75 calories per 12 ounces. In restaurants, warnings might be placed on menus, counters, or drink dispensers, and would read: "STATE OF CALIFORNIA SAFETY WARNING: Drinking beverages with added sugar(s) contributes to obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay."

The bill’s proponents, including the California Medical Association, argue that the label would give Californians valuable, crucial information about their health.

Critics, like CalBev, the state’s chapter of the American Beverage Association, say that the legislation unfairly singles out one type of product. If passed, the bill, SB 1000, would take effect in July 2015.

Should sugary drinks have warning labels attached? Do Californians need explicit warnings, or do they already understand the risks associated with soft drinks? Is this bill unfair to beverage groups -- should all sugary or unhealthy foods carry warnings? If passed, could SB 1000 be a model for the rest of the country?

Guest: 

Sen. Bill Monning (D-Carmel), State senator representing district 17 which stretches from Santa Cruz to San Luis Obispo.

Bob Achermann, executive director of the California/ Nevada Soft Drink Association

Actor Joel Kinnaman arrives at the Los Angeles premiere of 'Robocop' at TCL Chinese Theatre, February 10, 2014 in Hollywood, California.; Credit: ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty Images

Larry and KPCC film critics Alynda Wheat and Lael Loewenstein review this week’s releases, including RoboCop, About Last Night, Endless Love and more. TGI-Filmweek!

RoboCop

About Last Night

Endless Love

Guests:

Alynda Wheat, film critic for KPCC and People

Lael Loewenstein, film critic for KPCC

Christopher Leonard's new book “The Meat Racket: The Secret Takeover of America’s Food Business” (Simon & Schuster, 2014),

In a new book about the takeover of the American meat industry by a few large companies, investigative journalist and New America Foundation fellow Christopher Leonard hones in on Tyson Foods.

Tyson is the biggest of the U.S.’s meat giants, bringing in $28 billion in annual sales and $780 million in profits. The company’s model of vertical integration and farmer control helped it take over the chicken and hog industries and now threatens the cattle business, even as independent farmers hold onto their independence.

How has the “chickenization” of American farming changed the industry? Are Tyson’s cost-cutting methods helpful to consumers, or harmful to the meat business? What does the future hold for meat?  

Guest: 

Christopher Leonard, author of “The Meat Racket: The Secret Takeover of America’s Food Business” (Simon & Schuster, 2014), and former national agribusiness reporter for the Associated Press

A logo is displayed on the front grill of a brand new Volkswagen car at a Volkswagen dealership on March 28, 2011 in San Rafael, California.; Credit: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

The United Auto Workers suffered a major defeat on Friday when employees of a Volkswagen plant in Tennessee rejected plans to unionize the European-owned factory. The UAW was defeated in a tense 712-626 vote Friday night.

Breaking into the VW plant was a key part of the UAW's long term goal of expanding into foreign-owned businesses in the region. Volkswagen's management cooperated with the UAW because the company wanted its employees to form a 'work council', which coordinates and negotiates with management, and are intended to foster the idea that employees are not adversaries, but rather valued participants.

Now that the vote has failed, the UAW may face even stronger opposition in the South. The union claims the vote was unfairly influenced by threats from the state's political leadership including Sen. Bob Corker and Gov. Bill Haslam.The union may try to void the results of the election by filing a challenge with the National Labor Relations Board, which oversees union elections.

Is this the end of the road for the UAW's plans to expand into foreign-owned plants? Do unions, particularly in the South's growing auto industry, still maintain any political clout? Why did the vote fail, particularly when management remained neutral?

Guests: 

Fred Wszolek, spokesman for the Workforce Fairness Institute, an organization that advocates on behalf of business owners and opposes unionization.

Nelson Lichtenstein, History Professor and Director of the Center for the Study of Work Labor and Democracy at the  University of California, Santa Barbara

A University of Georgia student pours a beer into a funnel during spring break March 12, 2008 on South Beach in Miami Beach, Florida.; Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images

A case before the California Supreme Court will soon decide whether party hosts can be held responsible in alcohol suits. The case follows the death of an inebriated 19-year-old student,  who was hit and killed by a drunk driver after a house party.

The host, then-20-year-old Jessica Manosa, threw the party at her parents rental home without their permission -- the victim’s parents are now suing the Manosa’s via their homeowners insurance for liability in their son’s death.

California law has long protected party hosts in alcohol related suits. Social hosts are exempt from liability, but people who sell alcohol can be held responsible in a lawsuit. In the Manosa case, the determining factor may be the money paid by partygoers.

A trial and appeals court both decided that because Manosa did not intend to profit from alcohol sales and was only attempting to defray the costs of alcohol she could not be held legally liable. 

Guests:

James Mosher, Senior Project Director at The CDM Group Inc., a consulting firm whose research includes alcohol policy and laws in all 50 states

Gary Watt, Appellate attorney with Archer Norris - a law firm with offices throughout California

Jessica Peng, left, and Lauren Sit talk about proposed college admissions guidelines affecting Asian students at Lowell High School in San Francisco, Thursday, April 23, 2009. ; Credit: AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez

Studies suggest that Asian-American students at highly selective universities have mean SAT scores considerably higher than their classmates yet are rejected at a disproportionate rate.

Enrollment at the Ivies remains stagnant as the number of Asian students in the US has more than doubled in that period. Is there a benign explanation for these numbers? Rumors of discriminatory quotas abound -- what’s really happening?

Audio from the audience Q&A portion of this live event will be available shortly. 

Guests:

Richard H. Sander, Professor of Law, UCLA School of Law

Richard Sander has taught at UCLA Law School since 1989. He has studied affirmative action and its impact since 2004 and is the author (along with Stuart Taylor, Jr.) of the recent book, Mismatch: How Affirmative Action Hurts Students It's Intended to Help, and Why Universities Won't Admit It. He recently won a significant case before the California Supreme Court involving law school admissions.

Nancy Leong, Professor of Law, Sturm College of Law, University of Denver

Professor Leong graduated magna cum laude from Northwestern University before attending Stanford Law School, where she graduated with distinction and was a member of the Stanford Law Review. Her scholarship and teaching interests include constitutional rights and remedies. She recently published an extensive article in the Harvard Law Review on the topic of Racial Capitalism. In the fall of 2013 she was a visiting professor at the School of Law at UCLA.

Albert Giang,  Attorney with Caldwell, Leslie and Proctor law firm in L.A.

Albert Giang is an attorney in private practice who has litigated numerous cases involving affirmative action in university admissions. He filed an amicus brief in the United States Supreme Court on behalf of 70 Asian American organizations defending the use of affirmative action. He has been named one of the leading “under 40” Asian American attorneys in the country.

Kevin Newman, Assistant Head of School at the Windward School – a college preparatory school in Los Angeles.

Newman has been involved in the college admissions process for over fifteen years. He earned an M.B.A. from UCLA’s Anderson School and an Educational Doctorate Degree from UCLA.  His dissertation research focused on creating a positive, multi-cultural environment in independent schools.

Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck (L) and retiring Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca march in the 29th annual Kingdom Day Parade on January 20, 2014 in Los Angeles, California.; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

Larry asks about officer-involved shootings, California's concealed carry gun laws and more in AirTalk's monthly check-in with Chief Charlie Beck of the Los Angeles Police Department.

Guest:

Charlie Beck, Chief of Los Angeles Police Department

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-WI) (C) debates as ranking member Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) (R) and Rep. Tom Price (R-GA) listens during a hearing in the Cannon House Office Building on Capitol Hill February 5, 2014 in Washington, DC. ; Credit: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

A new report from the Congressional Budget Office says that increasing the national minimum wage to $10.10 would cause the loss of 500,000 jobs but would raise earnings for about 16.5 million low-wage workers. 

The report also states that 900,000 fewer people would live below the poverty line. President Obama and many Congressional Democrats argue that raising the minimum wage from $7.25/hour would reduce income inequality.

Critics say that the consequences of increasing the minimum wage, including unemployment, outweigh the benefits, and argue that focusing on creating jobs should be the top priority.

In its report, the CBO laid out two plans for raising the minimum wage, including a lower-impact solution that would bring hourly wages to $9 and hour. The President and Democrats support the $10.10/hour wage.

Does a higher minimum wage put an undue burden on job creators and business owners? How might workers be impacted by higher wages? How will consumers fare? 

Guests: 

David Neumark, Chancellor's Professor of Economics and Director, Center for Economics & Public Policy, Department of Economics, UC Irvine

David Cooper, Economic Analyst and minimum wage expert at the Economic Policy Institute (EPI)

State Sen. Ricardo Lara (D-Long Beach) introducing SB 1005 at a news conference outside Clinica Oscar Romero in Boyle Heights.; Credit: Adrian Florida/KPCC

California State Senator Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens) has introduced a bill to give undocumented immigrants in the state access to free or subsidized healthcare.

Undocumented Californians currently do not qualified for Medi-Cal, or health insurance coverage under Covered California, the state-run health exchanged launched under the Affordable Care Act.

Senate Bill 1005, or the Health For All Act, would set up a separate health marketplace under Covered California to sell insurance plans to undocumented immigrants who don’t qualify for Medi-Cal. The bill would also expand Medi-Cal so that undocumented immigrants who make under 138 percent of the poverty level -- about $32,000 a year for a family of four -- could receive that benefit.

There are an estimated 2 to 2.5 million undocumented immigrants in California, an estimated 1 million of them are uninsured. No word yet on how the bill would be funded; Lara said his office is working to come up with how much the proposal would cost taxpayers. Proponents of the proposal say the bill would save the state on healthcare costs in the long run.

Guests: 

Ricardo Lara, California State Senator (D-Bell Gardens) representing the 33rd District, which includes South Gate, Huntington Park, Vernon and Long Beach. He introduced Senate Bill 1005

Michael Cannon, director of health policy studies at the Cato Institute. He is a former domestic policy analyst for the U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee, where he advised the Senate leadership on health, education, labor and other issues

Nadereh Pourat, Director of Research Planning at the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research and a health policy professor at the school. She has done studies on the health care utilization rate of the undocumented population in California

Venezuelan maestro Gustavo Dudamel conducts the Simon Bolivar National Youth Orchestra during a concert at Berkeley University in San Francisco, California, on November 30, 2012 during a US tour.; Credit: AFP/AFP/Getty Images

The Venezuelan-born musical director of the LA Philharmonic has stepped back into LA amid criticism of a concert he held in the capital Caracas only blocks away from where a student was killed during violent protests.

The situation in Venezuela has since escalated and opposition leader Leopoldo Lopez turned himself into authorities on Tuesday.

Dudamel defended his appearance,  where he led a government-funded youth ensemble in a commemorative concert, as representing "the values of Peace, Love and Unity."

Dudamel has not explicitly supported Venezuela's embattled leader Nicolas Maduro but critics argue that he should be using his high profile status to speak out against the president. Venezuelan-American pianist Gabriela Montero spoke out against Dudamel's decision to not speak out against Maduro in a public letter she posted this week on Facebook. 

Should Dudamel have used his high profile status to speak out against the government? Do artists have a duty to weigh in on political matters? Is this incident different from other high profile musicians who have performed for questionable world leaders?\

Guest: 

Juan Forero, South America bureau chief for the Wall Street Journal

Gabriela Montero, Venezuelan-American pianist

Image showing the proposal to split California into six states. ; Credit: LAO

Silicon Valley venture capitalist Tim Draper certainly thinks so — his plan to divide California into six new states gathered new momentum this week after Draper received permission from California Secretary of State Debra Bowen to begin collecting petition signatures for his measure.

Draper has 150 days to collect signatures from 807,615 registered voters in order to qualify the six-state initiative for the ballot. The new Californias would be broken up by region -- Santa Barbara, Los Angeles, and Long Beach would be West California and Silicon Valley would be its own state.

The new divisions would make for an interesting breakdown of resources and wealth. Central California would be home to almost all of the food, prisons, and the lowest-income households. Silicon Valley would become the richest state in the country, as well as a major water importer.

Could splitting California into six states be a viable plan? How would it work? Could each state reasonably function as an independent entity? Can’t we all just get along?

LINK

KPCC's online polls are not scientific surveys of local or national opinion. Rather, they are designed as a way for our audience members to engage with each other and share their views. Let us know what you think on our Facebook page, facebook.com/kpcc, or in the comments below.

Guest: 

Tim Draper, Founding Partner of Draper Fisher Jurvetson, a venture capital firm based in Silicon Valley.  He is behind the 'Six Californias' ballot measure 

Greg Baumann, Editor in Chief of the Silicon Valley Business Journal

Joe Moore, Editor, Valley Public Radio in Fresno

Katie Orr, State Government Reporter for Capital Public Radio in Sacramento

Bianca Barragan, Associate Editor of Curbed LA

Official Proposal:

LINK

Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck (L) and retiring Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca march in the 29th annual Kingdom Day Parade on January 20, 2014 in Los Angeles, California.; Credit: David McNew/Getty Images

Los Angeles Police Department Chief Charlie Beck joined Larry Mantle Wednesday in-studio for AirTalk's monthly check-in.

Chief Beck spoke on potential changes to concealed weapon laws. He also touched on training required for officer-involved shootings and the enforcement of Los Angeles' marijuana ordinance.

Find excerpts from the interview below. The full discussion can be downloaded on the left. 

LARRY MANTLE: A three-judge panel, Ninth Circuit of Appeals ruled California's rules on concealed carry fire arms violates the constitution. If this decision holds, do you think that will be OK? 

CHIEF BECK: Well I am not a proponent of having more guns on the street. I have seen far too much gun violence in my lifetime to think that more guns is a solution. So I think it is a bad law. I am supporting the city and the county's appeal. I think that this is a decision that should be made at the local level by local chiefs and local sheriffs who in their jurisdiction can carry a concealed weapon. You have to have rules, which we do. You know, it's not that we never approve a concealed carry permit; it's that we approve very, very few. 

LM: For a law abiding citizen who wants to use a gun for self defense, what is the harm?

CB: I think that first of all, people have to acknowledge the absolute fact that a gun is more likely to be used against you than you use a gun in self-defense. I see very, very few instances where people successfully use weapons as a means of self-defense. States that have very liberal gun laws — states like Texas — have levels of violence that I think would be unacceptable here. Houston is a good example — biggest city in Texas, 2.1 million people, about half the size of Los Angeles — they suffered 231 murders last year and we did 251. 

LM: How many of those were committed by people who had a license to carry? 

CB: I have no idea BUT — what I'm talking about is gun violence. These are both gun violence driven statistics. 

LM: But you're conflating the two.

CB: I don't agree with that if you let me answer. The presence of guns ... which is what this is about, leads to a much more likely solution to things that normally would not and so places like Houston ... suffer much more gun violence than us we do because there are more guns.

LM: But how do we make that logical leap that simply having more guns is the cause of that?

CB: I think that especially in places like Texas where there are very few restrictions on carrying a weapon in your car or on your person, you can clearly draw the much ... higher presence of fire arms and the higher presence of fire arms and just by extrapolation leads to more use of fire arms and that's what's happened. 

LM: But let's look at Utah where you have higher per capita ownership of fire arms than say Los Angeles and you have a lower violent crime rate so if that's the measure you are going to use, wouldn't it have to hold up outside of places like Texas? 

CB: No, you have to use urban communities.  You can't use rural populations. You have to compare apples to apples. So if you want to compare Los Angeles to small towns in Utah, there's no comparison. There's just no way to compare what goes on here. Now, if you want to compare a bigger city like Chicago or like Houston or New York City — something that has a more comparable population — then we can have a discussion. If you're just going to compare the whole state of Utah, it doesn't have the crime issues that the state of Los Angeles does nor the population. 

You talk about Chicago, that place has historically has had among the toughest anti-gun laws in terms of major American cities and has the highest per capita gun crime rate. 

They do and I think if you were to talk to Gary McCarthy — which I have — on this exact topic, he he will tell you that their gun laws are not strong enough and that their gun laws are not as strong as the gun laws in California. 

LM: The L.A. Police Commission voted to formalize the use of holistic review of officer involve shootings, not just what happened when the firing actually took place. Is this going to make a substantive difference in how officer involved shootings are reviewed? 

CB: No, not really Larry. We've always looked at the tactics involved in a shooting; we've always looked at the dry and exhibiting of a fire arm shooting and we've also looked at the actual instances of shooting. This just combines a portion of two of the categories and in the past, both of those categories have had policy findings and those policy findings could lead to discipline or termination of an employee so this really doesn't change that. What it does do, is that it allows the commission to do what it has done on ... several prior occasions and to use bad tactics to find a shooting policy. This is very rare. This is maybe less than half of 1 percent of officer involved shootings. 
 

LM: You had the review of the eight officers during the Dorner man hunt that fired on the newspaper delivers. There, the officers can return to their job. What type of training will they be getting. What kind of errors in training led to the serious injuries one of the two women suffered?

CB: First of all, I have to be very general about this. It is absolutely against the law for me to talk about specific discipline for a police officer relative to a use of force so I'm not going to talk specifically to what's going to happen to any of these officers. 

... What I will say is that in every instance where an officer uses force, we specify training. And that training is very specific to the instances of the officer's use of force and any use of force that is judged to be out of policy and has training that attaches to it ... is going to be very extensive and require not only that the training be completed but that the testing occur along the way.... In a general discussion, that would have to happen before anyone went back to the field. 

LM: Will this incident have an impact on future training? 

CB: Well, we will certainly have a discussion on roles in policing that we normally don't have. You know the use of protection details is very rare in the reality of policing in Los Angeles. But it was very, very common during the incident that we were discussing. 

So we are going to have to have a general training overview of that so people understand what the purpose is. Normally and in any other circumstance, we use one of our specialized divisions to provide that kind of security for whoever may need it, including police officers. 

This was one of those incidents that was totally unforeseen where we had so many protectees that we couldn't possibly use a finite resource like specialized divisions to do that so we had to go into the greater workforce and so we are going to prepare our greater workforce to be able to accommodate that if it should every happen again. 

LM: Where do things stand with the enforcement of  the marijuana ordinance in the city? Is your department engaging in any enforcement actions against those dispensaries that are open? 

CB: Well we are working with the city attorney and the city council to review the applications for permanent status as marijuana collectives in the city of Los Angeles. There's about 120 people people that have applied for that permanent status; we are doing not only reviews of those, but we're also doing enforcement on some of the locations that are not in application. You know, the city attorney is being very thoughtful about his response to the legislation on this and we are moving forward at a very thoughtful pace. ... 

LM: Under what interpretation of the law is the city acting under for enforcement purposes? 

CB: We're still operating under the law, which is that collectives — which is a group of people that come to together to provide each other product — can do that if they do that in a specified manner, time and place. Our review of the ordinance supports that. 

LM: Let's talk about the size of the department. Los Angeles has historically been per capita under-policed. 

CB: We're in the middle of our budget discussions with the city, Larry. ... Our goal is to maintain the size of the Los Angeles Police Department. We are about 100 officers below our authorized strength right now — that's sounds like a lot, but it's less than 1 percent of the force so it's a manageable number. We continue to hire. 
 

Guest:

Charlie Beck, Chief of Los Angeles Police Department

Family members play in the river at Shimanto city in Kochi prefecture on August 14, 2013. ; Credit: JIJI PRESS/AFP/Getty Images

A new study from professors at UPenn’s Wharton School and Dartmouth’s Tuck School of Business has found that as people age, ordinary experiences are more meaningful.

The study gave participants examples of ordinary and extraordinary experiences and asked them to rate their happiness after each. While both the young and the old seem to enjoy extraordinary experiences (like a tropical vacation, or watching a cat give birth to kittens), older participants were happier after ordinary experiences, like a good, long conversation, or a hot cup of coffee.

So are bucket lists for the young? Have ordinary experiences become more enjoyable to you as you age? What makes you happiest, and why?  

Guests:

Cassie Mogilner, Assistant Professor of Marketing at The Wharton School, UPenn

Amit Bhattacharjee, Visiting Assistant Professor at Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth College

A doctor makes an ultrasound to a patient on September 17, 2013 at the maternity of the Lens hospital, northern France.; Credit: PHILIPPE HUGUEN/AFP/Getty Images

Concerns over skyrocketing rates of cesarean sections across the country have prompted a new guidelines encouraging doctors and pregnant women to be more patient during labor. One in 3 American women now delivers via C-section, a rate more than 60 percent higher than just 15 years ago.

In response, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists and the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine released a new report on Thursday saying doctors should let low-risk women spend longer in the early part of labor before assuming that labor has stalled.

C-sections can be lifesaving in emergencies but there are concerns that the surgical procedure is being used too often on otherwise healthy women. A C-section requires major surgery and complications such as heavy bleeding and infection are far more likely than with natural deliveries. The maternal death rates for C-sections are three times higher than women who deliver vaginally with 13 deaths per 100,000 women.

There also can be health concerns for babies who are delivered surgically because the birth process helps squeeze extra fluid from the lungs that can cause breathing problems after birth. The labor and delivery process is often confusing and intimidating for women who might not feel comfortable questioning their doctors advice.

How can women be more encouraged to speak up during the birth process? What sort of non-surgical interventions can help women deliver naturally?

Guest: 

Jeanne A. Conry, MD, PhD, President, The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists

Luckman Center at Cal State University-Los Angeles; Credit: Credit: Steve Devol via Flickr Creative Commons

Cal State Los Angeles has been working to the revise its general education curriculum for the past few years. One of the stick points that have emerged recently is how to best teach students about diversity, and what that term means.

CSULA currently requires all students to complete two GE courses that are approved as diversity courses. That requirement would remain the same under a new proposal. But at issue is what exactly constitutes a diversity course? That question has divided the campus.

Right now, these are criteria for determining what qualifies as a diversity course:

1. Diversity courses should deal with both theoretical and practical issues of race, ethnicity, gender, and class and provide a comparative treatment of no fewer than two internationally, nationally or regionally significant cultures.

2. Diversity courses should provide for a consideration of special needs, sexual orientation, language, religion, and age when appropriate.

Under the newly proposed criteria, students who successfully complete diversity courses will be able to:

1.   Demonstrate understanding of theoretical and practical factors of race, ethnicity, gender, gender identity, socioeconomic class, disability, sexuality, religion or age.

2.   Demonstrate understanding of the intersectionality of these factors, with particular attention paid to race, ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic class.

3.   Demonstrate understanding of the diversity of intercultural and intracultural relationships.

4.   Demonstrate civic literacy and an awareness of social justice that would enable effective participation in a diverse society.

Ethnic studies supporters want the school to make one of two required diversity classes be in Asian/ Asian American studies, Chicano studies, Latin American studies or Pan-African studies. CSULA voted down that proposal earlier this week.

Should CSULA reconsider their vote? Is the vote tantamount to diluting the importance of ethnic studies, as opponents to the vote claim?

Guests:

Rita Ledesma, Chair of Child and Family Studies at CSULA and Vice Chair of the Academic Senate at Cal State Los Angeles

Melina Abdullah, Chair and Professor, Department of Pan-African Studies at Cal State Los Angeles.