she said are you supposed to wear that in shirt? i said, i don t know why i shouldn t. i never thought it would go this far because there shouldn t be a problem with this. have an issue with a hunting rifle and nra put on the front of a t-shirt, especially when policy doesn t forbid it. jenna: can t get over his hair, that s the other part, right? lis wiehl as well as doug burns. doug, it s not the t-shirt that could land him in jail. no, and it s very easy to mistake this for a first amendment situation. that s not what happened. what happened was the police officer is saying that he disobeyed an order of the officer. i myself have jenna: excessive talking, is the allegation. excessive talking lands you jenna: the background betweened was that the police officer was called to school because after he came back from suspension, he cake came back with the t-shirt on again, one thing led to another. exactly. i can t do that here because this kid, eighth grade kid, former eig
Transcripts for CNN CNN Newsroom 20130410 15:34:15
archive.org - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from archive.org Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.
necessarily that done deal, dana. what it mean is even if it were to pass the senate, if they had the 60 votes to break the expected republican led filibuster, let s say on the senate floor. let s say they get more than 60 votes to break that filibuster, they have an up and down vote, they get 51 votes in favor and then goes to the house of representatives where i don t know what s going to happen if the nra comes out and adamantly opposes this compromise to expand background checks. that s right. and i think so much of it is going to be determined by how big the vote is in the senate. if it is overwhelming, the l be very hard for republicans who run the house to stop it. one thing that we can report is our deidra walsh learned there s a companion bill in the house. peter king the republican from new york is on it and virtually, she s told is the same as the manchin/toomey bill. that is a start for them to try to move this in the house. because they would need at least one republican
probably tomorrow, maybe as soon as today. but one thing that could make it hard is the nra just put out a press release, a statement knocking this down. not a surprise, but out there in black and white. expanding background checks at gun shows will not prevent the next shooting, will not solve violent crime, and will not keep our kids safe in schools. it goes on to make the point that the shootings in aurora, tucson and in newtown would not have been stopped with a background check. that the background check not having a background check was not an issue in any of those situations. so that is certainly what they re going to be up against. but, look, you heard both of these men who are historically not people who run towards curbing gun use say that this is absolutely necessary in order to at least take a baby step towards making sure that people who are criminals or mentally ill don t have guns. what i say, it s not
american people favor tougher new background checks. 14% oppose it. so you never get the american people to agree. yeah, there was a poll that had 98%. all these polls are very consistent. that s right. and i think what you see in this compromise from these two men, both of whom are rated well by the nra is a response to this kind of public opinion saying, yes, we can do something. i mean, curbing sales at gun shows and the internet is far short of universal background checks, but it s more than congress has done in over a decade. let s take a look at something else our poll shows. we asked the question, should the federal government use background checks to create a list of gun owners? and you see that, wolf, the majority says absolutely not. and that is why you heard senator toomey come out and say there s not going to be any
vimarsana © 2020. All Rights Reserved.