NRA vs. Giffords' husband at Senate gun control hearing

At left, National Rifle Association Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, and at right, Mark Kelly, husband of former U.S. Rep. Gabrielle Giffords / Getty Images/CBS News

Updated 9:15 a.m. ET

Today, the debate over gun control gets its first congressional hearing since President Obama proposed sweeping reforms to help tackle escalating gun violence in the United States.

Play Video

Obama: "Every day we wait" to act on guns, number of victims "will keep growing"

National Rifle Association CEO Wayne LaPierre and Mark Kelly, the husband of former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Ariz., who survived a shot to the head two years ago during an assassination attempt that left six people dead, are among those slated to testify in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. One congressional source tells CBS News that Giffords herself is expected to attend the hearing; she is expected to accompany her husband and address the committee, although she's not expected to take questions.

Judiciary Committee chairman Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., "wants to move legislation, and he wants to do it quickly," his spokeswoman Jessica Brady told CBSNews.com. Today's hearing will offer a platform for a "respectful and productive conversation" about "where there is potential for success in passing legislation this year."

Momentum for stricter gun laws has been building since a gunman last month used an AR-15 semi-automatic "assault" rifle and multiple high-ammunition caps to kill 20 children and six adults at a Newtown, Conn., elementary school. But in prepared testimony released Tuesday by the NRA, LaPierre made the case that efforts should be focused strengthening school security and mental health resources, and predicted Mr. Obama's proposals to introduce a universal background check and reinstate the assault weapons ban "will fail."

• NRA: Gun control proposals "will fail"
• Obama: Gun control supporters must listen more
• Feinstein: Assault weapons ban "an uphill climb"

"Law-abiding gun owners will not accept blame for the acts of violent or deranged criminals, nor do we believe the government should dictate what we can lawfully own and use to protect our families," LaPierre will say. "We need to be honest about what works and what does not work. Proposals that would only serve to burden the law-abiding have failed in the past and will fail in the future."

The committee's top Republican, Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, too, will be looking at what witnesses "say about other issues besides guns," his spokeswoman Beth Levine told CBSNews.com. "Mental health issues, video games, those types of things - what they have to say about how they fit into the equation."

Meantime, Brady, Leahy's spokeswoman, said Leahy is "looking forward" to seeing what LaPierre's testimony yields.

"We're talking about the person who is the head of the most powerful gun lobby," Brady said. "They're going to have something to say about it, and they wield a lot of influence, as people have pointed out. To have him come and see what he says - we think that's valuable."

• no previous page
• next

1/2

[outback_jackson]

Sen. Marco Rubio, the Tea Party favorite from Florida, has become the face of comprehensive immigration reform, embarking on a frenetic media tour in recent days to sell a bipartisan plan to skeptical conservatives. Rubio has gone into the dragon's lair of right-wing radio three times in the past week -- meeting with Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Mark Levin -- and emerged largely unscathed, fueling hopes that Congress could pass a plan that would offer a pathway to citizenship for the 11 million undocumented workers living in the United States.

[Type_Z]

Biden has new wording for gun control, it's "gun safety".

[Type_Z]

Everybody is fighting the wrong fight.

[TimeToEvolve]

Has anyone seen the KKK the NRA and the John Birchers in the same room? I wonder what happened to the KKK and the Birchers when the NRA started up? Hmmmm...

[1988JAck]

Black and hispanics are not the problem. These violent mass killings of innocents have mainly been you white males. Something is wrong with our gun culture and it's time to grow up and admit it.

[1988JAck]

LaPierre should not be allowed to have a gun. He is clearly off his rocker.

[st247]

lmao
Actually, I think LaPierre is bad for gun owners. At the very least, a very heavy percentage of gunowners want iniversal background checks to HELP keep bad guys from getting into our ranks.

[USSAmerikan]

Humm... Magazine capacity ban sounds brilliant if you don't know anything about weapons, so basically your politicians are doing what they do best, which is lie. Anyone out there care to guess how much a 30-round AK-47 mag will run you in Mexico, Guatemala or El Salvador? How about how much it costs Norinco to manufacture one in China? Fifty cents each, landed cost, is my guess. So let's see, a $.50 device that sells for up to $30 each now, before the ban and we're hoping outlaws won't buy them in the black market? This may be the next hot item to smuggle into the U.S.! As far as enforcing the ban, well, these things can be made of plastic, where the only metal is the spring and they weigh nothing... Let's see how many of them we catch coming in...

[1988JAck]

Anything that limits the number of guns we have now is worthwhile, but the only real avenue to less gun violence is for our culture to become less violent. Can't see that happening with the right wing nuts we have now.

[cleric77]

Mr. Obama's using mere symbolizing (new gun control laws) over substance enforcing the present laws about murder/killing/violence to deal with criminals via max prison sentencing/captial punishment to protect our law-abiding citizens. But remember he is an amoral liberal socialist.

[signseeker1717]

Those "new laws" are sensible proposals for closing loopholes in existing law, reinstating an expired ban on assault weapons, extending background checks to ALL gun purchases, creating shared databases, etc.

BTW, it's pretty tough for the ATF to ENFORCE certain "present laws" when there are only 2500 agents for the entire country, and when GOP NRA lapdogs have gutted and hamstrung the agency.

We ALREADY have the world's largest prison population BECAUSE of both maximum and mandatory sentencing (e.g. "three strikes and you're out") in multiple states; one in ten Americans are now incarcerated. Would you feel any better "protected" if it were one in FIVE Americans?

Proposing ideas for national DISCUSSION is entirely appropriate for Presidential leadership.

If it that also makes one an "amoral liberal socialist", count me in.

[newyorkview]

Before one gets a lethal injection they swab the arm with alcohol. Why is that?

[newyorkview]

Why should law abiding gun owners give up their rights for some nuts?

Also, I'm married. We have no children. Why should we give up our rights for everybody else's brats?

[cliffndort]

I also am a law abiding gun owner but I don't need an assault type weapon to protect myself, and I am not giving up my weapons, nor is the government asking me to do so. And, if they did ask me to give them up they would have to do so by force.

If my registered 22 caliber handgun (10 bullet clip) and my double barreled shotgun isn't enough to protect me in my own home, then nothing is. I feel no need to purchase and own assault rapid fire weapons.

By limiting and banning certain types of weapons in no way infringes upon my rights to own a gun. I am not giving up any rights, only asking for reasonable control of guns like banning the manufacture and importation of assault type weapons, complete worldwide background, health (including mental) background checks, longer waiting periods to obtain your weapon. If we are "law abiding" and mentally healthy, why should we object?