July 26, 2009 8:53 PM

Heated Debate Over Assault Weapons

By
CBSNews
(CBS)  Governor Ed Rendell (D-Penn.) and the executive vice president of the National Rifle Association Wayne LaPierre engaged in a heated debate over the assault weapons ban on this morning's Face The Nation.

Yet the two almost - almost - came to a shared agreement on gun violence.

Rendell said that he "absolutely" agrees that the assault weapons ban that expired in 2004 should be reinstated.

Rendell pointed to last week's shooting in Pittsburgh in which three police officers responding to a domestic disturbance were killed by a man armed with an assault weapon - a weapon apparently purchased legally. He said more officers may have been killed if the gunman's weapon had not jammed.

Rendell said he agrees with the president's decision to hold off on the issue while focusing on the economy - "This is not the time to bring this issue up" - but he assured host Harry Smith that virtually every police organization supports banning assault weapons.

"You know, we all pay homage to beliefs," Rendell said. "May 15th is the day to remember the policemen who have died in the line of duty. We all give homage to the police, and yet we don't listen to them on this basic issue.

"Since the assault ban has been lifted, Harry, 40 American police officers have either been killed or seriously wounded with assault weapons."

The NRA's LaPierre, however, said that the assault weapons ban is "a totally phony issue. And that's why Congress doesn't want to deal with it again. He instead blamed a "revolving door criminal justice system" that lets violent criminals back on the street, and a failure to fully enforce already-existing gun laws.

Speaking to the original ban on the sale of AK-47s, Uzis and TEC-9s signed by President Clinton in 1994 and which Congress did not renew after 10 years, LaPierre said, "It was enacted … on the basis of saying these were machine guns. That's a lie. They were rapid fire. That's a lie. They made bigger holes. That's a lie. They were more powerful. That's a lie. It was lie after lie after lie.

"Congress found it out. That's why they let it expire, and lies that are found out don't get reenacted."

(CBS)
LaPierre (left) also charged that the assault weapons ban reauthorization (which died in the last Congress) would have extended the ban to all guns, saying that "there is no functional difference at all between any of these so-called assault weapons the media talks about.

"Assault weapons are machine guns; they're fully automatic, they spray fire, they're rapid fire. That's what our soldiers use. These guns we're talking about, that the governor wants to ban, are functionally no different than any other gun. The performance characteristics are exactly the same. There's no difference."

"That is unbelievably untrue," Rendell said. "The assault weapons that are used that are sold in sporting goods stores now because the ban has been lifted, they put out a tremendously high amount of fire. And remember, the ban not only banned these assault weapons - it banned large capacity ammunition clips.

"Now I'd like Wayne to explain to the American people why anybody should have the right to have an ammunition clip that has more than 10 bullets in it at one time? What use is that made for, Wayne? Who uses that?"

"Governor, you know there is absolutely no difference between two 10-round magazines and three of another," LaPierre replied.

"There's a big difference," Rendell shot back, saying a shooter would have to reload, indicating police would have a better chance to respond.

But LaPierre continued to argue about the legal language used to define "assault weapon" in the bill: "There's not a dime's worth of difference between the guns you want to ban and you don't want to ban. You're going to ban these semi-autos, and then it's going to be handguns, and then it's going to be pump shotguns."

"See, and that's the excuse all the time," Rendell said.

"And it's the truth, and you know it!" LaPierre continued.

Rendell offered that all constitutional amendments are recognized to have limits, such as the ability to shout "Fire" in a crowded theater.

While skirting a question by Smith as to whether the NRA's rank-and-file believed the president is interested in overturning the Second Amendment, LaPierre disputed recent claims that the U.S. has been the source of 90% of the weapons being used by Mexican drug cartels.

"You know what they're trying to do right now? They're trying to piggyback this whole phony issue … on the back of the tragedy in Mexico." He challenged President Obama and the U.S. media to prove that 90% of the cartel's guns are smuggled into Mexico from the North.

"It may not be 90 percent, that certainly has been put in question," said Smith "But there's certainly plenty of these guns that are coming across the border."

LaPierre instead said that border agents themselves say they do not need more gun laws, merely better enforcement of current laws.

(CBS)
"First of all, number one, I agree with Wayne that we need to enforce existing laws better," Rendell (left) said. "But in Pennsylvania, in over a decade, we've increased our prison population on our state prisons by over 15,000 people. We are enforcing the laws; we're putting bad and difficult and dangerous people who use firearms to commit crimes in jail. When I was district attorney, we enacted the first mandatory minimum sentence for people who use guns to commit crimes. We just enacted, in Pennsylvania, a 20-year mandatory minimum sentence for anybody who fires a gun at a police officer.

"Let's go back to the original point. What blessed use is there for one of these assault weapons? What American needs an assault weapon to protect themselves?"

"It's not an assault weapon," Lapierre said. "It's no different than any other."

"It's an assault weapon!"

"You know what happened in Philadelphia, Governor? When the cameras went away, you went away," LaPierre said. "But I'll tell you what we ought to do this morning. Let's agree on this: Every American city, let's put Project Exile, every time a violent felon, drug dealer, gang member touches a gun, let's prosecute."

"I agree with that."

"And let's go to President Obama and say, 'Look, you've got 100 U.S. attorneys. Let's have them do 10 additional prosecutions a month, each one of them. No, better than that - let's do 20.'"

"Harry, let's make a deal right here. I agree with Wayne. I agree with Wayne!" Rendell laughed. "But, also, Wayne, let's you and I agree that the Congress can pass a law saying that individuals can only purchase one handgun a month. That's 12 a year. Who in their god's name needs more than 12 handguns a year?"

"You know, there you go again," LaPierre said. "Like criminals are standing around going, 'Only one, only one.' Don't you get it? They're criminals. They violate all your laws."

"Criminals get their guns from people who buy guns legally. Straw purchasing is the number one problem for crimes," Rendell said.

"And it's illegal, and let's enforce the law," LaPierre said.


More from Face The Nation (4.19.09):
  • Axelrod: Words And Handshakes Not Enough
  • W.H.: No Reason To Hide Torture Memos
  • Axelrod: Markets Can Handle The Truth
  • Read The Complete Transcript (pdf)
  • Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved.
    Add a Comment See all 332 Comments
    by gunownerandproud June 21, 2009 10:55 AM EDT
    Instead of banning any type of gun and calling it "gun control" why not use REAL gun control and teach people how to safely and correctly use guns, how to respect guns, and how to hit their targets. yes, some people will undoubtedly commit crimes with them, but it will happen a lot less if everybody is packing heat and knows how to defend themselves. it has been proven time and again that racking the slide of a pump action shotgun is a better deterrant for criminals than burglar alarms. if criminals are scared to commit crimes, then we are all safer. so instead of banning assault rifles and machine guns (there is a big defference between the two) i say we sell make them legal, sell them at walmart, but first teach the people gun safety. teach them the correct way to use a gun. ive been around guns since i could walk. im an avid hunter. my father taught me that guns are a tool, and that when used correctly guns are a good thing. correctly doesnt mean robbing stores, or shooting innocent people. instead it is going to ranges, practicing, target shooting, hunting and defense of family and home. if someone threatens my family or me, i will put two in their chest, and then call the police and turn myself over to them. i wont run, i wont fight them, and when they get there, my gun will be unloaded, open, and safed and handed to them grip first. as far as the guy killing two SWAT members through a door, i could do the same with my shotgun and double ought buck, or my pistol, or any one of my other guns. does that mean they are assault weapons to? no. most body armor cant stand up to a point blank shot. maybe instead of taking away guns, we should make better body armor. besides, more people are killed with drunk driving and we still sell alcohol and cars. more people are killed with motorcycle accidents and we still sell them. more people are killed with knives.... you see my point? if you start with one thing, such as assualt weapons, you cant stop until the only thing people have is the dirt around them. if somebody wants to kill someone bad enough, they will find a way to do so... even if they have to use their bare hands. i mean, even karate teaches someone how to kill a person, and that isnt outlawed. look, the first step in taking over a country is to get rid of guns. hitler did it. stalin did it. and bill clinton tried to start doing it with the assault weapons ban. we are a free nation, and the way to keep that freedom is to be armed. nobody would mess with 300 million armed people who know how to use guns. heck, nobody messes with Switzerland. the people there are armed and know how to use their weapons. why not do the same thing here?
    Reply to this comment
    by disabled-student April 25, 2009 2:38 AM EDT
    Law abiding citizen shouldn't need guns, that's why we employee law enforcement officers.

    Even if we do buy a gun for self defense, it won't be an assault rifle. If you needed an assault rifle for protection then you really need to be talking with law enforcement, not taking it into your on hands.
    Reply to this comment
    by darknessesedge April 23, 2009 1:21 AM EDT
    "Now I'd like Wayne to explain to the American people why anybody should have the right to have an ammunition clip that has more than 10 bullets in it at one time? What use is that made for, Wayne? Who uses that?"

    Can you tough guys answer that?
    Posted by sandy19731 at 9:45 AM : Apr 21, 2009

    sandy sandy sandy..
    I hope you dont vote...
    Reply to this comment
    by darknessesedge April 23, 2009 1:19 AM EDT
    gun control laws only punish law abiding citizens while criminals purchase what they want.

    See prohibition circa 1930's
    and todays illegal drugs laws.
    Reply to this comment
    by gunownerdan April 21, 2009 1:47 PM EDT
    "Now I'd like Wayne to explain to the American people why anybody should have the right to have an ammunition clip that has more than 10 bullets in it at one time? What use is that made for, Wayne? Who uses that?"

    Can you tough guys answer that?
    Posted by sandy19731

    High capacity magazines are great because you don't need to reload as often.
    It's a lot more fun to be shooting rather than have to reload all the time.
    Also, just ask your local police officer why they need high capacity magazines.
    If I was being attacked by some violent criminals I would want as many bullets in my gun as possible. Also, if you like to fire fully automatic weapons then you will need large capacity magazines because it's not much fun having to reload after every 2 seconds of shooting.
    Reply to this comment
    by sandy19731 April 21, 2009 12:45 PM EDT
    "Now I'd like Wayne to explain to the American people why anybody should have the right to have an ammunition clip that has more than 10 bullets in it at one time? What use is that made for, Wayne? Who uses that?"

    Can you tough guys answer that?
    Reply to this comment
    by TroubledPatriot April 21, 2009 12:42 PM EDT
    I believe the entire piece was severely biased, Rendell was given plenty of air time to pontificate, yet LaPierre did not receive the same opportunity. On top of that the commentator interrupted LaPierre to have him answer a question, aka, "change the subject". He did not interrupt Rendell though, he had plenty of time to monologue.

    This is not debate, it is a farce.

    As Wayne said "Provide proof of your so-called 90% figure." Let's start there.
    Reply to this comment
    by armegeddon April 21, 2009 12:13 AM EDT
    One more thing: Why didn't fast Eddie mention the guy that had all the people in California mention the tremendous support for the cop killer that gunned down the four officers. All we saw was that the poor killer was goaded into a gun fight and, that the officers that killed him should be punished. Where was Eddie on that issue?
    Reply to this comment
    by armegeddon April 21, 2009 12:05 AM EDT
    We currently have a government that can fire more than any ak-47. It can fire 3.6 trillion in less than about 10 hours. Talk about firepower. You want even have a chance to see them! You can kill people with pencils, if you wanted to. Lay a gun on the table and watch it fire all by itself. NOT!!
    Reply to this comment
    by erasmus111 April 20, 2009 6:40 PM EDT
    ...our founding fathers never could have imagined we would have computers and be typing over 50 words in one minute

    Posted by gunownerdan at 1:51 PM : Apr 20, 2009

    Make that 60 words a minute.
    Reply to this comment
    See all 332 Comments
    .
    Scroll Left
    Scroll Right More »
    CBS News on Facebook