Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) walked Monday into the far-left lair of CBS Mornings that unfortunately came on the heels of the country’s latest mass shooting, this time at a mall in Allen, Texas. Sure enough, Cassidy found himself repeatedly under fire from the three leftist co-hosts demanding he “do something” to work with Democrats to end gun violence. As for what, they couldn’t say.
Co-host Nate Burleson teased the stacked deck of a segment: “Still ahead, Republican Senator Bill Cassidy will talk with us about the latest mass shooting in America. Does he believe there is anything Congress should do about this?”
Socialist co-host Tony Dokoupil started the interview by remarking the shooting has “renew[ed] a lot of questions including a big one, what can be done to end this cycle of gun violence in America,” which led to Cassidy explaining that the bipartisan bill in response to the Uvalde attack “has yet to be fully implemented.”
He further accused the Biden administration of dragging its feet in doing so to address the three most-often “motivation[s]” of a mass shooting: “domestic violence, criminal gang activity, or someone who is mentally ill.”
Dokoupil cast that aside and argued for the ever-esoteric demands for more background checks. Sure enough, Cassidy calmly pushed back and explained how, prior to the post-Uvalde bill, those with an underage record were sealed, keeping a lid on any potential red flags from that period of their life (click “expand”):
DOKOUPIL: [W]e were looking at a Fox News poll earlier this morning that shows 80 percent plus support or almost 80 percent support for things like criminal background checks, moving the age of gun purchases up to 21, even almost 80 percent support for a 30-day waiting period. Of those issues, this is Republicans — this is Republicans with support at that level. Would you support any of those actions?
CASSIDY: Let’s look at what we already have. I would support it if it makes a difference, perhaps. Let me phrase this. In the Uvalde response bill, we increase the time period for the background check to occur. Does it have to be 30 days? No. It has to be long enough to be effective, and for those who are considered higher risk, we gave a longer period of time for authorities to be able to do a background check and it is predicted that if this had been the case, you can look at the shooting in Charlotte — in South Carolina, I’m sorry, the one where the man walks into the African-American church, that would have given them time to prevent that. So, it is not the length of time, it’s the adequacy. I think in that bill, we increase the adequacy.
DOKOUPIL: I mean, there’s definitely evidence, though, that criminal background checks, if universal, would make a difference. In the states where they have them, they have a lower homicide rate. We’ve had people under the age of 21 buy guns illegally, do terrible things with them, so raising the age could help. I mean —
CASSIDY: But can I respond to that last word?
DOKOUPIL: — yeah. Sure.
CASSIDY: So again, in the Uvalde response bill, a lot of the people who have bought weapons when they were younger had a record when they were an adolescent, that would have been a red flag. They turn 18, those records are sealed. They go out and buy a weapon, because the reason to not let them buy is now sealed. Under the Uvalde response bill, we allow a judge to say wait a second, you’re going to unseal those. You can look at those, pull them out and see whether or not this person should or should not have a weapon. So I would argue that we address the situation that you brought up, but it has to be completely implemented.
Co-host, Democratic donor, and Obama family friend Gayle King entered the part of the conversation where she showed her shallow grasp of policy and politics, demanding to know “what can be done right now” as “it’s no longer a matter of if it can happen to you, it almost seems like a matter of when” and “guns are still the leading cause of death for children.”
Cassidy again had a retort, noting “most of those deaths among children are accidental” and he’s “sponsored legislation that would give a tax credit, that would allow parents to lock up their gun.”
Dokoupil countered that it should be required, but Cassidy promptly schooled him by noting that would make gun ownership something only the wealthy could afford (given the price of safes):
Tony, what if you’re poor? What if you’re buying the weapon because you’re thinking, in your inner city neighborhood, somebody is going to break in? That’s increasingly common that such people are buying weapons. And all of a sudden you’re poor, but now you’ve got to buy something else? I think you have to step into people’s lives, and when you step into their lives, it is a little bit more complex than a wonderful show like this where we say, well, what about this solution? What about that solution?
King remained flustered and even admitted something has to be done to make guns harder to own because “this has gotten out of control” even though “I don’t even know what you need to do.”
Cassidy gave another example of the administration’s failure to implement laws on the books in that a Louisiana superintendent told him he couldn’t obtain money to improve school security because it hadn’t been subject to a recent threat (and thus kept from being proactive on gun violence).
Burleson closed with an irrelevant point bout how one of the Allen, Texas victims was allegedly found “without a face,” which would be the case with any gun if they’re shot point blank or enough times. As for Cassidy, he ventured down the track of gun confiscation, but none of the co-hosts wanted to entertain what the liberal media really want to do (click “expand”):
BURLESON: Senator, we understand that there are complexities to this, and I want to maintain a certain level of sensitivity, as I ask this question, because we do have victims that are dealing and still healing. But one bystander who was treating one of the victims said he found one victim without a face. And this points to the issue of the types of firearms that people are walking into these malls with, walking into our schools, our churches and it seems like these assault rifles are being used more and more. What are we doing about giving these weapons of war to people who shouldn’t have them?
(....)
CASSIDY [TO BURLESON]: But if you had a weapon, I would have no problem with it. What we did is if somebody has got a criminal background, and they obtained whatever weapon it is, AR-15 or not and they obtain it illegally, we attempt to go after the person who bought it for that criminal, who allowed that criminal to obtain it illegally. We have to recognize that we can ban these weapons, but there’s millions already out there and somebody who decides to obtain one illegally probably can. So we need to stop that illegal transaction. We can say let’s ban them. They are already out there by the millions, so what do we do? Go out and confiscate —
KING: Do you believe —
BURLESON: But we have to do something.
KING: Yes, do you believe, Senator, you’re doing all you can do? Do you believe that?
CASSIDY: Oh, yeah, as I was mentioning, I had a conversation with Secretary Cardona. We have these dollars out there to harden schools. This was after Nashville.
KING: Mmhmm.
CASSIDY: And at the time, they weren’t going to release them unless there was a previous history of threat at a school. Wait, we’re trying to be ahead of a threat, not react.
CBS’s pro-gun confiscation screed and cries to do something on guns (despite only offering esoteric proposals) were made possible thanks to the backing of advertisers such as Dr. Scholl’s and Progressive. Follow the links to see their contact information at the MRC’s Conservatives Fight Back page.
To see the relevant transcript from May 8, click here.
