Skip to comments.NBC's Todd Whines Over Lack of 'Rational Policy Debate' About Gun Control
Posted on 07/25/2012 4:48:11 PM PDT by Kaslin
While discussing gun control on Wednesday's The Daily Rundown on MSNBC, correspondent Mike Viqueira lamented: "...the anti-gun control, pro-gun rights crowd has won the argument at this point....they've succeeded in framing the issue as one of essential American national values." In response, host and chief White House correspondent Chuck Todd ranted: "...nobody has sort of a rational policy debate about it." [Listen to the audio or watch the video after the jump]
Todd began the segment by whining over the lack of gun regulation:
NBC's Todd Whines Over Lack of 'Rational Policy Debate' About Gun Control
I wanted to look at sort of guns versus cars in the state of Colorado and the amount of paperwork you have to do to register a car versus the amount of paperwork you have to do to register a gun....There's actually no registration requirement in guns. It's actually against the law to register guns. They passed a law to do that....These are not the same level of paperwork, if you will...with cars, you have to, you know, you have to do a lot more things every year to sort of prove it.
The panel of liberal journalists including Viqueira, Chicago Tribune columnist Clarence Page, and Associated Press National Political Editor Liz Sidoti all agreed with Todd's slanted assessment of the issue.
Page complained about Democratic politicians who "want to reach those the guys out there, especially white male voters, in particular, who are part of that core group [of gun owners]." Sidoti observed: "...car registration is not politicized, gun registration is. And that's because, you know, the freedom to drive a car is not enshrined in the Constitution, the freedom to bear arms is."
Here is a full transcript of the July 25 segment:
CHUCK TODD: Democrats are divided over calls for stricter gun laws after Friday's tragedy in Colorado, where 12 people lost their lives. Democratic lawmakers are pushing for new measures, despite Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid urging patience. New York Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy, who lost her husband in a train shooting in 1993, responded to criticism from New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who accused politicians of grandstanding.
CAROLYN MCCARTHY: I own that right to speak here. I have the right to try to reduce gun violence in this country, because I've been through it. And as long as I have a voice, I will continue to fight to reduce gun violence in this country.
TODD: Let's bring back the panel, Clarence Page, Liz Sidoti, Mike Viqueira. Guys, we've done the politics of this up and down, we know what's going on here. Harry Reid, from a gun state in Nevada. We know exactly what's up there. New York is always almost splits more regionally.
But you know, we did a little experiment here. I wanted to look at sort of guns versus cars in the state of Colorado and the amount of paperwork you have to do to register a car versus the amount of paperwork you have to do to register a gun. So let me show you some things that we've put up here. There's actually no registration requirement in guns. It's actually against the law to register guns. They passed a law to do that. Concealed weapons permit only needs to be renewed every five years. It requires a photo ID, fingerprints, proof of registry residency, and handgun competency. There is a background check.
Let's look at background checks, guns versus cars. For cars, you need to have a proof of insurance, a bill of sale, the title. There's a vin verification, your vehicle ID number. There's a photo ID, there's an emissions test, there's a proof of insurance, there's a license that's renewed every five years. These are not the same level of paperwork, if you will.
CLARENCE PAGE [COLUMNIST, CHICAGO TRIBUNE]: Not at all.
TODD: You know, Mike Viqueira, when you look at it, with cars, you have to, you know, you have to do a lot more things every year to sort of prove it.
MIKE VIQUEIRA: Well, I mean, look-
TODD: And it could be a deadly weapon if misused.
TODD: A gun, obviously, becomes a deadly weapon, arguably sometimes if you use it correctly, it's a deadly weapon, but if you, certainly if you use it incorrectly, it gets in the wrong hands. It's sort of this line of, is there what about more regulation of gun ownership rather than restricting gun ownership?
VIQUEIRA: You know, I hate to speak in esoteric terms, but it, I mean, clearly the anti-gun control, pro-gun rights crowd has won the argument at this point. Because this is a they've succeeded in framing the issue as one of essential American national values. It's almost a-
TODD: It's a values issue, it's not a nobody has sort of a rational policy debate about it.
VIQUEIRA: Right. So, I mean, it's become a complete political loser here in Washington and I know we've already gone over that. And it's been that way since 1994. Two cities that have known their share of handgun violence, Chicago and Washington, have had their handgun bans thrown out, the assault weapons ban has expired. You've seen everybody from Harry Reid on down. I've seen Carolyn McCarthy give a lot of moving speeches on the-
TODD: I know, I've seen her give that speech I've seen her give that speech, you know, a couple times a year and it goes nowhere.
VIQUEIRA: And even she knows it's going nowhere. And the NRA's reached almost this mythical status in Washington.
TODD: But you know, the NRA argument always is, in Chicago, the criminals will break the law to get guns.
PAGE: I'll be even more blatant that, Democrats have made a decision after Gore's loss in 2000 that the gun issue is a loser, they want to expand their tent and they want to reach those the guys out there, especially white male voters, in particular, who are part of that core group-
TODD: In Ohio and Pennsylvania and Michigan.
PAGE: Right, in those swing states. And I'm a native Ohioan from John Boehner's district, so I know what I'm talking about. And the fact is that this is a cultural thing. But I did a column this morning comparing Colorado with New York, which has one of the toughest, but fair, gun registration policies. And there this shooter in Colorado probably would not have gotten his permit, because they interview not just the person applying, but also references that you provide. And they would have found out about-
TODD: They basically you have more paperwork to fill out to get a gun in New York than you do to get a car.
PAGE: Right. And state trooper's interview you...
TODD: That's sort of the point, in Colorado
PAGE: ...but you can't get the permit.
TODD: That's right. In Colorado, nobody is restricting you, saying you can't buy a gun, they're just saying, you've got to fill out a lot of paperwork.
LIZ SIDOTI [NATIONAL POLITICAL EDITOR, ASSOCIATED PRESS]: There's something else adding to the politics of all of this. I mean, no, car registration is not politicized, gun registration is. And that's because, you know, the freedom to drive a car is not enshrined in the Constitution, the freedom to bear arms is. And so, so there is-
TODD: And that's ultimately the issue, but nobody is saying you can't add regulation. You just can't restrict-
SIDOTI: Right. But I agree with Clarence, the Democrats recognize it is a loser.
VIQUEIRA: John Hickenlooper on the Sunday shows in the aftermath of the tragedy is sort of giving very ambiguous answers about gun control. You know, the Democratic governor of Colorado. I mean, it just bolsters the case.
TODD: It is. I'll tell you, the ammunition thing, though, I do think that if there's any momentum, the idea that you can buy all that ammunition on the internet, that's one of those you wonder, maybe everybody rallies around that, because you get the sense, maybe something should be-
PAGE: Except for gun owners who do buy bullets in bulk, but it does sound shocking to people who don't have guns in the house.
It’s cut and dried.
No debate on anything needed. 2A trumps and guarantees all.
>> “they’ve succeeded in framing the issue as one of essential American national values”
Yeah, the truth usually wins in the court of public opinion, given enough time.
It’s simply not possible to have a “’Rational Policy Debate’ About Gun Control” for the simple reason that the gun-grabbers like yourself are irrational when it comes to guns.
The anti-gunners generally rely on emotional arguments when it comes to gun control, and consequently those who espouse those arguments tent to react like religious cult members when one makes reasoned responses to their arguments, or presents evidence contrary to their beliefs.
nobody has sort of a rational policy debate about it.
Yea, right. Like the ratinal policy debate the left wants to have over restrictions on abortion (which is only a "right" because some liberal justices found it in the penumbra of the Constitution - while the RTKABA is an enumerated right).
Meanwhile another 50,000 viewers abandoned the network, for Fox News Channel.
Perhaps instead of emoting like hysteric children, the fascist clown poss in the junk media can try to explain to us how taking guns away from law abiding citizens does anything to stop violent criminals
You said it, because there is no such thing
>>A rational debate on guns would involve hysteric emotion driven clowns like Todd to actually try THINKING about the issue for a change.<<
The national debate on guns took place between 1776 and 1784. The results of that debate was enshrined in the 2nd Amendment.
There should be nothing more to discuss.
She was actually safe at home the day that her husband - denied the right of self-defense - was murdered by a lunatic.
That hasn't stopped her from dining out on her husband's corpse for decades, however.
“NBC’s Todd Whines Over Lack of ‘Rational Policy Debate’ About Gun Control”
TRANSLATION: “We MSNBC Klux Klansters want to make GUN CONTROL an Election issue! Why does nobody want to talk about GUN CONTROL???”
What part of “shall not be infringed” is open to debate?
The term ‘correspondent’ used to be a synonym to reporter who’s job is to specify facts as opposed to commentator who’s stock-in-trade is opinion and analysis of the facts. On NBC there used to be the news and then someone like John Chancellor would comment upon a topic.
This is, I know, so 19th century, let alone 20th. It is a loss and these practitioners murder truth in favor of their self-defined social justice mantras. I cannot remember the last time that I watched an entire news program from one of the MSM alphabet networks and I believe that I am more fully informed than the majority of their staffers and correspondents. A shame of their own making!
DING!DING!DING!DING! WE HAVE A WINNER!
However, liberal/socialist/democrats hate it when they can't change the rules in the middle of a game so they're attempting a "do-over".
I don’t understand what Todd means by “rational policy debate”. We’ve had numerous policy debates on the issue and the answer to an irrational “I’m upset and so you have to give me whatever I want to feel better” is a perfectly rational “no”.
Repeal the Brady Background checks.
Repeal GCA 68
Fire Harry Reid, Feinstein and Pelosi
See? It's easy..
No madam, you do not own the right to speak. While we all understand your loss (and have our sympathy for that loss), your opinion on this issue weighs no more than anyone else.
The Constitution specifically says "shall not be infringed" with respect to firearms. Any law restricting the type and how many of a particular firarm I amy own is an infringement.
The only thing that you may have some legitimate purview over is the location, and possibly the manner in which those firearms may be discharged. Nothing else.
There is plenty of things to discuss on this issue. The discussion should center around how my rights have been trampled thus far, and how we should be looking to repeal much of what is considered gun control law.
As far as discussing how they would like to further erode my rights is not going to happen
“NBC’s Todd Whines Over Lack of ‘Rational Policy Debate’ About Gun Control”
That’s because gun control is an idiotic proposition to begin with. There is no logic in it- disarming law-abiding people only places weapons in the hands of evildoers, either criminals or a criminal government. Gun control is an irrational idea, and therefore, no debate should be necessary.
Of course, the left has trashed part of the first one too as far as religion goes, but they still cling to part of it because they've got skin in the game, and I don't think they would take as kindly towards having that sacred part gutted as they do the attempts to gut the second.
Then again they might go for it, as when talk radio is concerned they seem eager enough to see it restricted, perhaps because they believe that they are immune to ever having to suffer the loss of their own rights because so many have sacrificed and protected them for so long.
“...nobody has a rational policy debate about it...”
A rational policy debate to a Progressive is when
everone agrees that guns should be banned.
Just to clarify things. Is He saying that Holmes would have been interviewed when buying a gun? Cops interview for that? Or to conceal carry? I didnt’ hear whether Holmes had a CCW permit or not. If the latter, then the stricter laws wouldn’t even have worked b/c he still would have gotten the guns.
Just wanting some clarification.
>>There is plenty of things to discuss on this issue. <<
I said “should” be nothing to discuss.
Sadly, having rights and keeping them are 2 different things.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.