Guests: Ed Schultz, Gloria Waddill, Sen. Barbara Boxer, Rep. Robert Brady, Terrance
Gainer, Howard Dean
LAWRENCE O‘DONNELL, HOST: Good evening, Rachel. Thank you.
MADDOW: Sure.
O‘DONNELL: Remember when President Bush and the Congress allowed the assault weapons ban to expire in 2004? No?
Well, no one put up much of a fight, but if Congress cared as much about controlling bullets as it cares about controlling tax rates and it had extended the assault weapons ban, Jared Loughner would have need to reload after firing half as many bullets as he did—half. Imagine the amount of grief that could have been saved if 15 of those bullets were never fired.
When the investigation reveals the exact order of the 31 shots fired, we will be able to do the grim accounting and tell you exactly—exactly who would be alive today if the Republican House, the Republican Senate and the Republican president had the basic human decency to do the right thing in 2004.
(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
(MUSIC)
JOE SCARBOROUGH, MSNBC HOST: I think we are at a turning point in American political culture.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You know, it‘s raised questions, too, about gun control laws in this country.
ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC HOST: There‘s no reason why anybody needs more than 10 round per pistol.
O‘DONNELL: Three days after the Tucson massacre, attention finally turns to guns.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What happened was not because of the guns. This was about hate.
SCARBOROUGH: For some voters in some districts, the gun issue drives their vote more than anything else.
MADDOW: The gun lobby‘s so completely dominates the debate.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The most effective lobby in the last 20 years is the NRA.
O‘DONNELL: Too many guns, too many bullets.
CHUCK TODD, NBC NEWS: At least 31 rounds before emptying the magazine.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He was just standing there just shooting them one right after the other.
SAVANNAH GUTHRIE, NBC NEWS: And several members of Congress are now drafting legislation.
LUKE RUSSERT, NBC NEWS: They‘re trying to get rid of those clips and make it so you can only have 15.
CHRIS MATTHEWS, MSNBC HOST: Why don‘t we have reasonable gun control laws in this country?
O‘DONNELL: And too easy for very sick people to buy weapons capable of shooting dozens in a matter of seconds.
KEITH OLBERMANN, “COUNTDOWN” HOST: Breaking news about too far more grim—
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Suspected gunman Jared Loughner.
OLBERMANN: The fourth note had been found.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Crazy people shouldn‘t get any kind of gun.
O‘DONNELL: And what is Congress doing?
DYLAN RATIGAN, MSNBC HOST: Won‘t it seem as if some in D.C. are asking for gun control for them but no gun control for you.
ANDREA MITCHELL, NBC NEWS: The possibility of stepped-up security measures.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I‘ll be interested in the Republican-led Congress on the House side when it comes to mental health funds.
O‘DONNELL: But before the politics comes the memorial to the victims.
MITCHELL: The community will hold its first mass tonight to mourn the victims of the shooting.
GUTHRIE: The president coming here I think means a lot to many members of this community.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: There are, of course, other victims here recovering, and, of course, the congresswoman is still in critical condition.
UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: She gave a thumbs up for her doctors and reached for her breathing tune.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: For the president to go to Arizona and focus not necessarily on guns or mental health but the empty seat in that classroom, the empty chair at breakfast, that has impact.
(END VIDEOTAPE)
O‘DONNELL: Good evening from Los Angeles.
Tonight, Congresswoman Gabriel Giffords remains in critical condition but is now able to breathe on her own. She‘s responding to simple commands and the doctor who performed her surgery put the good news this way. She, quote, “has no right to look this good and she does.”
We‘ve also just gotten the first pictures of the congresswoman inside the hospital. Her family releasing these two photos: this one of her husband sitting at her bedside. And another one, a picture of him holding her hand.
But tonight, there are more details about the accused assassin, Jared Loughner, and his parents who issued this statement this afternoon. “This is a very difficult time for us. We ask the media to respect our privacy. There are no words that can possibly express how we feel. We wish that there were, so we could make you feel better. We don‘t understand why this happened.
It may not make any difference, but we wish that we could change the heinous events of Saturday. We care very deeply about the victims and their families. We are so very sorry for their loss. Thank you.”
Tonight, the “Associated Press” is reporting on what has been found in the Loughner home, including a note that said, “Die bitch.” Investigators believe the handwritten message was a reference to Congresswoman Giffords. It was found in a safe alongside other notes. One said, “I planned ahead.”
Another said, “My assassination,” and included the name Giffords.
The “Associated Press” is also reporting that on the morning of the shooting, Jared Loughner‘s father saw him take a black bag out of the car trunk and, when he approached his 22-year-old son, he mumbled something and took off running. The “Associated Press,” quoting authorities, says the father got in his truck and chased his son as his son ran away.
Joining me now, a neighbor of the Loughner family, Gloria Waddill.
Gloria, did you see any of that activity Saturday morning that I just described, the father chasing the son?
GLORIA WADDILL, NEIGHBOR OF ACCUSED ATTACKER: No, I did not see that.
Nothing like that at all.
O‘DONNELL: But in living nearby, you did have some strange experiences with Jared, didn‘t you? Could you tell us about those?
WADDILL: Yes, I did. I had a couple experiences where he would come over and he came and would be standing there in my driveway, standing by my white Chevy truck, and I had just come home from work. I got off at midnight. And I would come home.
And I would notice that he was just standing there. And I would ask him what—I don‘t think you want to know what I was asking him—but I was asking him a four-letter word as to why he was standing in my driveway. I wanted him to get away from there, and he would not leave my property.
He stood there for a little while and then he‘d leave.
O‘DONNELL: Were you afraid of him, Gloria?
WADDILL: I wasn‘t afraid of him because normally I‘m already armed when I come home.
O‘DONNELL: And when you heard the news that Jared was involved in this shooting, what did you feel? How much surprise did you feel about that?
WADDILL: It did surprise me. It surprised me that somebody could go and do something like this to so many innocent people. And right now, the whole community is hurting. We‘re all hurting for what he did.
O‘DONNELL: And do you know his parents?
WADDILL: I don‘t know his parents, but I went by there today to see if I could buy some groceries for ‘em. I understand they haven‘t been able to leave the house because they‘re surrounded by the media. And I just felt bad for them because they had nothing to do with this.
O‘DONNELL: Did you have any communication with them? Were you able to buy groceries for them today?
WADDILL: No, I was not. I went to the neighbor, the one that‘s been in the news lately with Wayne Smith and his wife and I spoke to them. And I did tell them that I was there to try to see if I couldn‘t get some groceries for them. That I felt bad for them, you know, this wasn‘t their fault, the parents‘ fault, and to see if I couldn‘t help them out somehow.
And me along with another person that works for the post office, Roland Molina, we both went over there and asked if we could help, but nobody came to the door.
O‘DONNELL: Knowing Jared as you do, do you think there might have been any political influence in his action? Or what would be your guess about what made him go out there and do that on Saturday?
WADDILL: I have no idea what made him do what he did. He‘s just a strange person. Most of the time that I saw him was after midnight. And that‘s the times that I would see him.
I encountered him around 2:00 in the morning, 1:00 in the morning. I found him across the street twirling a little fluorescent purple light item out there that was making noises. And I happened to look up, and I put my flashlight to him because that was just me getting off of work and I would put my flashlight up to him. And I asked him who he was, what was he doing in the neighborhood.
And he didn‘t respond. He just kept doing what he was doing. I went back inside.
The next morning, I found silly string that had been put inside my mailbox that just covered in silly string.
O‘DONNELL: Gloria Waddill, thank you very much for joining us tonight. And I think you probably feel lucky that his rage was never turned on you. And we‘re glad that it wasn‘t. Thank you very much for joining us tonight.
WADDILL: Thank you.
O‘DONNELL: Earlier today, Senator Barbara Boxer called for sensible gun laws like the ones they have in California that prevent the sale of guns to criminals, people with serious mental illnesses and domestic abuser. She also called to reinstate the assault weapons ban that would prohibit the sale of ammunition clips with more than 10 rounds.
Joining me now is Senator Barbara Boxer of California.
Senator, what do you think is possible legislatively on gun control now? It feels to me like your party has given up on this. Is there a way to revive in it the wake of this tragedy?
SEN. BARBARA BOXER (D), CALIFORNIA: In the wake of this tragedy, Lawrence, we‘ve got to revive a lot of things. We have to look at the way we talk to one another. We have to think about the images that we use. We have to think about the way our language and the way we impact other people.
And, yes, we have to look again at how to keep guns away from people like Mr. Loughner, killers like Mr. Loughner. And it shouldn‘t be about partisanship. My goodness. It should be about how we can work together to prevent this from happening.
In my lifetime, I have seen too many political assassinations and attempted political assassinations. And every time, it just tears our hearts out. And this one is tearing our hearts out. To see a 40-year-old congresswoman who we pray is going to come back with all of that fervor and strength that she has, but cut down like this. It shouldn‘t happen.
O‘DONNELL: Senator, I am struck by the lack of memory in this country. There‘s a report in the “Huffington Post” today saying that there‘s a new limited edition line of assault rifle components that are engraved with the words “You lie” in honor of Congressman Joe Wilson‘s outburst during President Obama‘s 2009 health care speech.
Now, what other message could we take from having “You lie” on a weapon, a statement that was thrown at President Obama—what other message is there that this weapon is being designed in effect to be, what, aimed at the president of the United States, a country where we have film of John Kennedy‘s head being blown off with a rifle? How can people in this country even think of putting something like that on a weapon?
BOXER: Well, it‘s unthinkable that somebody could do that. And you know, there‘s another image, I have one here. I don‘t know if you can see it. And I don‘t know whether you‘ve had it on your show.
But this is another one, OK, where you can buy this. It‘s a sticker. It says, “Liberal hunting license.” It shows a donkey with five bullet holes. And it says, “No bag limit.” And this son a site called—I‘ll tell you in a minute, patriotshop.us.
And they put under, Lawrence, under their humor section. Now, they may think it‘s funny, and they have every right to think it‘s funny. But the thing that I was taken with—and it might have been with someone on your show or someone‘s show on MSNBC, an expert in mental illness who said that people who are severely mentally ill, like we think this gentleman was who committed this heinous crime, they live in their own world.
But the background culture enters into it. And no one is saying it caused him to do this or anything else, but we do this kind of an image or what you refer to as a gun that says “You lie” and we all know that incident and we praise that and put those words on a gun. This may enter the background noise. And it makes violence OK. People who do it think it‘s funny, think it‘s a joke.
That‘s why I‘m saying, this is another moment. Unfortunately, we‘ve had too many where we need to pause and think about it, all of us.
O‘DONNELL: Yes. The background noise of the Reagan—the shooting of President Reagan was a movie made by Martin Scorsese where you couldn‘t have imagined any crazy person taking that as a stimuli for going out and shooting the president. But this stuff is very directly provocative to that idea. We‘ve never seen material like this around to be in the background noise of what people like Jared Loughner may or may not be consuming in the course of the day.
Senator Barbara Boxer, thank you very much for joining us tonight. Thank you very much for joining Senator Lautenberg and Carolyn McCarthy‘s sensible response to this situation. Thank you very much.
BOXER: Well, it‘s an honor to work with them.
O‘DONNELL: Thank you, Senator.
What more can be done to protect members of Congress? As Capitol Hill tries to slash budgets, should more money be put into security?
And the gun used in Saturday‘s massacre, it‘s already lethal design made all the more so with an ammunition clip that doubled the amount of bullets it could hold. We‘ll show you this weapon in action ahead on THE LAST WORD.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: As some members of Congress say they‘ll now carry a concealed weapon on them, the man in charge of their security says that is not the answer. Another congressman proposes cracking down on violent language and images directed at government officials. We‘ll discuss those proposals next.
And later, Howard Dean.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: In the aftermath of Saturday‘s deadly shooting in Tucson, lawmakers on Capitol Hill are weighing the possibility of extra security. Some members of Congress don‘t want to change the way they operate because of the actions of one crazed gunman. But others say these changes are long overdue.
Among the proposals being floated: undoing the 5 percent cut to congressional office budgets and adding an additional 10 percent to pay for security. A Republican proposal to enclose the House gallery in plexi-glass to keep explosives from being thrown on the House floor. And an A to Z review of the Capitol police and its security processes.
There is bipartisan support that would formalize relationships between the Capitol police force and local police departments, getting both sides more involved in security at different political levels. Some members even say they plan to carry guns, including North Carolina Democrat Heath Shuler, Utah Republican Jason Chaffetz says he‘s always had a concealed weapons permit and now plans to carry much more often, adding that it makes him feel more secure and comfortable.
Joining me now, the man who oversees security in the Senate, Terrance Gainer, the Senate sergeant at arms, along with Congressman Robert Brady, who says he‘ll introduce a bill making it a federal crime to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a member of Congress.
Congressman Brady, how would you get a proposal like that past the First Amendment constitutional challenge?
REP. ROBERT BRADY (D), PENNSYLVANIA: Well, first of all, let the Supreme Court decide that. They‘re going to pay money (ph) to decide whether it‘s constitutional or not. It‘s constitutional now as pertains to the president and the vice president.
Why shouldn‘t it be constitutional as it pertains to members of Congress?
O‘DONNELL: Well, you know, I don‘t think you‘re going to get very far with that one, Robert.
Terrance Gainer, in the House now, they‘re talking about increasing possible security details for congressmen. If you provided—if you‘d tripled the Capitol police force and allowed one of them to travel with every member wherever they went, we‘d be dealing with maybe, you know, one tenth of 1 percent of the federal budget. This is not something that is unaffordable.
What is the resistance to expanding the security force and enabling a traveling security force to be out there in the field with people like Congressman Giffords when they‘re in a Safeway parking lot?
TERRANCE GAINER, SENATE SERGEANT-AT-ARMS: Well, Lawrence, number one, one person wouldn‘t do it. To do proper protection of an individual, you really need eight to 14 depending on the circumstances. So, I don‘t think putting more officers or more guns or more jail cells is the way to try to reduce violence.
That said, some people need to be locked up and they will be. But I think we need to slow down and take a very thoughtful look at what the best way is to increase security.
O‘DONNELL: But when you hear the stories about how this gunman was subdued on Saturday, Mr. Gainer, one person standing there with a gun could have done it. He went down pretty easily once people got to him. And when you‘re—the difference between one police officer beside the congresswoman with a gun and no one beside the congresswoman to protect her seems like a pretty big difference, doesn‘t it?
GAINER: Well, it is, but the whole incident unfolded in less than a minute. So, even on my best day in law enforcement, I don‘t think I could have quick draw. He came around ready to do some shooting.
I supposed if you‘re going to play the hypothetical and go back into time, it would have been better if someone had paid attention to him and put him in a mental institution, then no one would have got shot and no officer would have need to have been there.
O‘DONNELL: Absolutely. And I agree with you. I‘m not saying that it would have prevented things, but, you know, 19 people shot, six of them killed. Maybe with one officer there, those numbers would have been much lower.
Congressman Brady, what do you feel you need in terms of personal security now after this experience when you go out into your district in a situation like Congresswoman Giffords was in?
BRADY: I don‘t want any. I don‘t want any extra security. I don‘t need extra security.
I don‘t know why you think I won‘t get far with my legislation. The president of the United States and the vice president are just like members of Congress as far as human beings that deserve to have the same exact protection from these people out there than we do. Not to have their entourage of police officers around them but not to put a bull‘s-eye on the president of the United States.
You can‘t put a crosshair on the White House. You should not be able to put a bull‘s eye on a member of Congress or crosshairs where they live. So, I think I have a good chance to get my legislation passed.
And I don‘t want any more protection. I want to come and go as I please in my district. And I‘ll continue to do that.
O‘DONNELL: Congressman Brady, will you join Congressman McCarthy‘s effort to limit the size of the magazines usable in these automatic weapons?
BRADY: I‘m the original co-sponsor to that bill. Carolyn McCarthy is the person that we wanted to put that bill forward. She had a personal experience with her husband. Her son is still feeling the effects of a terrible tragedy that happened. And we thought and we know that she‘s the right person to articulate that bill. And I am original co-sponsor of that.
O‘DONNELL: That‘s good to hear.
Congressman, what do you think the prospects of it are? Everybody talks about this so far as if there‘s no real momentum behind it, there‘s nowhere for it to go. But do you think that, coming of this experience, you‘ll be able to change the dynamics of this politically in the Congress?
BRADY: Unfortunately, tragedy like this gets people more aware. And I hope that we do have the votes to get this passed.
O‘DONNELL: Mr. Gainer, in terms of extra costs that would be necessary to increase the security levels, assuming that there are some smart and executable ideas that come up—do you think that in the current political climate where the House just last week, Republican House, was making a big thing about cutting the staff budgets as if that‘s some sort of significant cut—do you think in that environment it would be possible to get money to increase spending on security for members of Congress and the House—and the Senate?
GAINER: I‘m not sure it would be, but even if it was, I don‘t think it‘s a good use of money. I‘ve done some cost estimates because we have individuals who have 24-hour protection. I‘ve talked to the Secret Service. If you did 24-hour, 7-day a week security for all members—and like Congressman Brady, they don‘t want that—it would cost in excess of $2 billion, with a B, dollars.
I think if we‘re going to spend $2 billion, we ought to spread it across the country and get more law enforcement for every one of our cities where there‘s a whole lot of violence going on.
O‘DONNELL: What about this idea, Mr. Gainer of more cooperation between the Capitol police and then local police in the districts where the congressman is going? I know there are—there are a lot of uses of that, for example, NYPD is very generous about providing security coverage for visiting senators who feel that they need it when they come to New York City.
Do you think there are some possibilities there that should be explored?
GAINER: You bet I do. I think that‘s one of—we‘re going to re-emphasize with the members and the staff tomorrow when they need them. The Capitol police has been doing that, like the Secret Service does. No one has enough to do this by themselves.
So, if we re-emphasize to the staff that when they get threats or weird people or anything that makes the hair on the back of the neck come up, let us know about that. Then we can work with the local jurisdictions to figure out who‘s in the best position to provide law enforcement services if any is needed. A lot of these small events, you won‘t need that. It‘s just not required.
O‘DONNELL: Mr. Gainer, do you have any advice for Congressman Brady and other members about how they should organize these events now? Is it a bad idea to do it out in the open in a Safeway parking lot? Is it smarter to be in an enclosed space? Are there any points you would make to them about how to organize these events?
GAINER: Well, listen, Mr. Brady is a great friend of law enforcement, knows Philadelphia very well. And we understand—it‘s an example that we understand that the members and their staffs understand their cities and jurisdictions very well. So, I wouldn‘t tell—I would tell them have that event where you want to have it.
But when it‘s being planned, the same way you would say, where it‘s going to be or how many people indoor, outdoor, whether you‘re going to serve coffee, let‘s take a look from a law enforcement perspective and see if maybe a local beat car needs to ride by or if something more is needed. It‘s going to depend on the time, the size, the where and what the issue is.
O‘DONNELL: Congressman Brady, are you going to think about those issues anymore, or are you going to continue to organize your events the way you always have?
BRADY: I‘m going to continue to organize my events the way I always have. The police commissioner talked—contacted me. The mayor has contacted me and said if I need any or I thought I need any more protection to come to an event that I‘m having, that all I have to do—they cooperate with me and all the members of the city of Philadelphia, and if I need any protection, that all I would need to do was ask them and they would provide that for me.
GAINER: That‘s perfect.
O‘DONNELL: Congressman Robert Brady, Democrat of Pennsylvania, be safe out there.
And Terrance Gainer, the Senate sergeant-at-arms, thank you both for being with us tonight.
BRADY: Thank you for having me.
GAINER: Thank you.
O‘DONNELL: Next, I‘ll talk with former Governor Howard Dean about what Congress can do about guns.
And the National Rifle Association wants everyone to stay focused on praying for the victims. In tonight‘s “Rewrite,” the real motivation behind the NRA‘s prayers.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: Ahead on THE LAST WORD, the ammunition clip used in Saturday‘s shooting used to be banned. We‘ll show you why, when THE LAST WORD continues.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: In tonight‘s Spotlight, the political aftermath of Saturday‘s massacre. Tomorrow‘s first order of business for the House will be a resolution honoring the victims. Tomorrow night, President Obama will be joined by two of his cabinet members and Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy at a memorial service at the University of Arizona.
But in the days ahead, the issue that has been ignored since the last century, gun control, will come back up. On this program last night, Democrat Carolyn McCarthy told us how she plans to restrict so-called high capacity ammunition. Republican Peter King wants to ban people from carrying a firearm within a thousand feet of government officials.
My next guest is one of the few in politics who understands both sides of the gun control argument.
Joining me now, former DNC chair and former Governor of Vermont Howard Dean. Thanks for joining me tonight, governor.
HOWARD DEAN, FORMER GOVERNOR OF VERMONT: Lawrence, thanks for having me on.
O‘DONNELL: Governor, you were quoted in today‘s “Politico” saying the battle over gun control is over. Why have the Democrats given up on gun control?
DEAN: I don‘t think we‘ve so much given up on gun control. The question is what the Second Amendment says. And the Second Amendment as decided by the United States Supreme Court says—their interpretation is that individuals have a right to bear arms. So what I said—I don‘t know what the “Politico” quote was, but what I said to the person who was doing the reporting was we now have to call upon the people who won the battle, which is the gun people, to exercise some restraint, to show common sense.
For example, the New Hampshire legislature last week voted to allow guns in the statehouse. Now, that‘s nuts. I don‘t know anybody who needs protection in the statehouse. But they will now. I haven‘t seen a deer in the New Hampshire statehouse for quite some time. So I can‘t imagine why hunters need to go in there with firearms.
So now that we have the rulings by the Supreme Court, now start to use some common sense.
O‘DONNELL: Well, there‘s no question about the right to bear arms in the Constitution. But that has been regulated. And we did have a regulation that expired in 2004, the Assault Weapons Ban, that did not allow this kind of shooter that we saw this weekend to have all that extra ammunition loaded into the gun right away.
He doubled the amount of ammunition he could shoot in his first round. He had over 90 bullets with him in these extra large clips. Those clips used to be outlawed in this country, and under a perfectly constitutional restriction. And the states of New York, New Jersey, Hawaii, California still outlaw those clips.
So why not go back in to those kinds of details. Don‘t call it gun control, if that‘s the radioactive political phrase, if that‘s going to turn people off in certain states. But go back in to that kind of certain reasonable limitation on the use of these weapons.
DEAN: Well, the other thing that you—also we ought to be doing, Lawrence, is we have got to stop guns from getting into the hands of people like this person who did the shooting out in Arizona, or the one that did all the shooting at Virginia Tech a couple years ago. You know, criminals. These folks are getting guns. They don‘t seem to have any trouble doing it.
I don‘t think that the people who claim that they can control—cause gun safety by letting people have all the firearms they want, but keeping guns out of the hands of criminals—OK, so give us some help keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. If you could do that, then I think we‘d have some more sense.
Let‘s close the gun loophole. Let‘s be serious about instant checks and things like that.
O‘DONNELL: What about bullet control, which is really the piece of this that we don‘t pay any attention to at all?
DEAN: I agree with that, too, Lawrence.
O‘DONNELL: Go ahead.
DEAN: I agree with that.
O‘DONNELL: I can‘t go and buy 90 sleeping pills today. But I can go and buy 90 bullets today.
DEAN: You can buy dumb, dumb bullets, and those are the things, the cop killer bullets, so called. There‘s no reason for that either. I think what‘s happened is in the zeal to win the fight, the so-called pro gun lobby, which has won, has gone to a ridiculous extreme.
OK, they‘ve won. So now I say, let‘s sit down and see what we really can do that makes sense. We are not going to talk about the First Amendment anymore—I mean, the Second Amendment any more in this country. But let‘s sit down and see if there aren‘t some common grounds.
I was endorsed eight times in every statewide race I had by the NRA in Vermont. But the people who own guns and the NRA members are not wackos in Vermont. They‘re hunters. If that was the reason for not having gun control, that—I don‘t have a problem with that.
We don‘t have any gun laws to speak of in Vermont. We have a very high homicide rate. But when you start feeling that it‘s your right to have a bazooka, it‘s your right to have dumb, dumb bullets that can kill cops, it‘s your right to have a gun that can fire 90 rounds, it‘s your right, no matter how crazy are or how many convictions you have, to have a gun, or it‘s your right because nobody will do anything about it, I think that‘s an extreme position.
I bet 90 percent of gun owners in this that—I think agree with me that we ought to do something around the edges to make this a safer country.
O‘DONNELL: Governor Dean, you know gun owners better than most elected Democrats in terms of having a feel for them and what they think. Let‘s consider you‘re another former governor from a distant state, Alaska, Sarah Palin. We‘ve discussed on this show with David Frum, a Republican, what she should have said about this event.
But what about what she should say about firearms? Here she is probably now the most prominent politician who has a very strong connection to gun owners and the gun community. Isn‘t this a good time for her in the coming weeks to talk about what she thinks responsible gun ownership involves, things like maybe don‘t stop—bullets and so forth. Go ahead.
DEAN: I wouldn‘t just pick on Sarah Palin. I think in general what I‘m asking is for the people who have the close relationships with the hunting community and the close relationship with the gun community, now let‘s use this occasion not to go re-litigate gun control. I think that argument we‘re over with that one.
But let us look and see what we can do together that makes some sense about restricting these kinds of bullets that only are made to kill police officers, or restricting the kinds of guns that are only made to do these terrible things, and restricting guns from people who have felonies or have mental illness problems.
Those are the kinds of things that I got to believe that a huge number of Americans degree on. I think we ought to go ahead and do those things. The leadership is going to come from the folks who have pushed very hard for freedom to own firearms and they won the fight. And now they have to be responsible.
O‘DONNELL: I think there‘s more fight to have on this, governor.
Governor, thank you very much for joining us tonight.
DEAN: Thanks very much, Lawrence.
O‘DONNELL: As the nation mourns, the National Rifle Association is encouraging everyone to do nothing but pray for the victims of the shootings. In tonight‘s Rewrite, why Congress would rather pray than work.
And later, we‘ll show you Saturday‘s murder weapon in action. Why are people flocking to buy the same gun? And who needs 30 bullets in a handgun?
MSNBC‘s Ed Schultz explains it all to me, ahead.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: Time for tonight‘s Rewrite, quote, “anything other than prayers for the victims and their families at this time would be inappropriate.” So says the soulless spokesman for the National Rifle Association, the most successful special interest lobby in the history of lobbying.
Success in lobbying is scored according to how difficult your case is. The NRA has a very difficult case to make, that there should be absolutely no restrictions on access to guns and bullets in this country, and that we must never allow our homicide rate to fall below any other country‘s homicide rate.
No—no one has a more difficult lobbying case to make than the NRA, but the NRA exercises virtually flawless mind control over Republicans and has left Democrats cowering in fear for decades. Democrats lost the congressional election that followed their last serious effort at gun control in 1994, so they have studiously avoided the subject since then.
In 2004, the most liberal of the viable candidates for the Democratic presidential nomination ran as a pro-gun Democrat. And the eventual nominee made sure he was photographed on the hunt with his shotgun.
In the last presidential election, the subject of guns never came up. And the Democratic party surrendered to the NRA was complete. Liberals have picked other fights, willing to go to the mat over a four percent difference in the top tax rate, after blithely allowing the gun control law they passed in 1994 to expire ten years later.
Since the massacre on Saturday, precious few Democrats have come forward with a relevant response. On this program last night, New York Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy announced she‘ll try to reinstate the 1994 ban on high capacity magazines that allowed Jared Loughner to fire 31 shots rather than the 15 the gun was limited to before 2004.
Her colleague New Jersey Senator Frank Lautenberg said he is planning to introduce similar legislation in the Senate. And tonight, you heard Barbara Boxer and Congressman Robert Brady tell me of their support for that legislation.
And all the smart talkers in Washington insist that kind of legislation has no chance and will probably never even come to a vote. No liberal groups have sprung into action to flood their vast e-mail lists to support Congresswoman McCarthy and Senator Lautenberg, as they have for so many other issues that have come up during the Obama presidency, from the public option to the top tax rate.
The collapse of conscience among professional politicians in Washington is not surprising. The silence of the grassroots organizations that are so quick to spring into action for other legislative items was not predictable. And it is dispiriting.
And so Congress will follow the NRA‘s orders. Anything other than prayers for the victims and their families at this time would be inappropriate. So instead of going to work tomorrow, members of Congress will hide behind religion, and the media will look on in wide-eyed awe at their piety.
Congress‘ prayers will not be heard by the next mad man out there in search of an automatic weapon to open fire at a college or a supermarket or a post office. And thanks to the NRA‘s and Congress‘ prayers, the next shooter will easily be able to get off at least 30 shots before he has to reload.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
O‘DONNELL: According to the latest Gallup Poll, 41 percent of Americans have a gun somewhere on their property, and 44 percent think we should have stricter gun laws; 42 percent think that current laws are all we need. And only 12 percent agree with the NRA and think gun laws should be less strict.
Sales of handguns in Arizona jumped 60 percent on Monday, the second biggest jump in any state in the country. Ohio saw a 65 percent increase yesterday; 16 percent in California, 38 percent in Illinois, and 33 percent in New York.
The Glock 19 was the same handgun used in the Virginia Tech Massacre which left 32 people dead. Handgun sales went up after that shooting, too.
Joining me now, Ed Schultz, host of MSNBC‘s “THE ED SHOW.” Ed, thank you very much for joining me tonight.
ED SCHULTZ, MSNBC ANCHOR: Good to be with you, Lawrence.
O‘DONNELL: Ed, you got to explain these people to me. You‘re a gun owner. I‘ve never owned a gun. In Arizona since Saturday, there has been a run on this weapon, this Glock 19. They‘re selling more than ever. What is that? Can you—do you understand that reaction?
SCHULTZ: There‘s a couple of chains of thought here, Lawrence. Number one, when something like this happens, gun collectors like to have the firearm that was involved in the shooting, because they think that there‘s going to be some legislation against it. And it becomes possibly some day down the road a collector‘s item.
The other thing is there‘s this strange fascination with some gun owners. They just want to own the gun that was used. And then others will view it, you know, this really is a good firearm for safety. Maybe I ought to get one of these things because it was pretty effective.
So there‘s a wide range of reasons as to why people would lock on to get the Glock 19. But you‘re exactly right. In a number of different states, we‘ve seen a run on this firearm because of this tragedy in Tucson.
O‘DONNELL: Now, this 30-clip magazine that carries the extra bullets, it was illegal until 2004. Still illegal in New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Hawaii—California, Hawaii. That doubled the amount of shots that he could fire on Saturday. Why would anyone need to be able to do automatic fire of more than the 15 bullets that the thing comes with in the standard issue?
SCHULTZ: Well, you know, this is the question that gun owners and gun grabbers in this country who want, you know, some good legislation for safety—this is the question—this has been the political football. It doesn‘t take very long to get very heated.
The bottom line here is that when the assault weapons ban was put into place in ‘94 and it expired in 2004, the Democrats didn‘t make an issue of it in the political arena. So they let it expire. That, of course—the limit went from ten rounds up to multiple high capacity type clips, which in this case, there were 33 rounds in that one clip.
Now, why somebody needs that, that‘s a personal judgment. I‘m a gun owner, I‘m a sportsman. I‘ve never personally had an inclination to go buy a firearm, nor have any of my sons when it comes to a pistol. But there‘s such a heated discussion in the sportsman community across America. Once you make legislation, there‘s instant fear that it‘s never going to stop. There‘s instant fear that we better get this firearm while the law is what it is, because some party is going to come in—some politician is going to come in and limit it.
These high capacity clips are for one reason, one reason only, to carry more ammunition, to get more bullets out in a faster method. And what they‘re used for in this society other than maybe target practice is defense or perpetrating and carrying out what happened on Saturday.
Personally, I don‘t think somebody needs 30, 40, 50 rounds in a clip. But that‘s another thing, Lawrence. You know, if these laws are loosened up even more, the gun manufacturers are going to—they‘re going to see an open market. They‘re going to put even more clips and adjust the firearm as time goes on.
So I think we‘re at a crossroads. Just like those many people in this country thought that 9/11 changed everything, when is an incident like this going to change our thinking on what we have to do with firearms? I think it‘s time for some serious discussion.
O‘DONNELL: And that means tonight that Ed Schultz has just gotten LAST WORD on THE LAST WORD. Thank you very much for joining me tonight, Ed.
SCHULTZ: Good to be with you, Lawrence. Thank you.
O‘DONNELL: That‘s THE LAST WORD. A reminder, MSNBC will have live coverage of the memorial service scheduled for tomorrow night at 8:00 Eastern.
END
Copyright 2011 CQ-Roll Call, Inc. All materials herein are protected by
United States copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed,
transmitted, displayed, published or broadcast without the prior written
permission of CQ-Roll Call. You may not alter or remove any trademark,
copyright or other notice from copies of the content.>
PASTE THE TRANSCRIPT HERE, LEAVE THE LINK
