The liberal, pro-gun control governor of Connecticut came under very little scrutiny, Friday, in an interview for CBS This Morning. Democrat Daniel Malloy has signed an executive order that would ban anyone on the federal no-fly watch list from purchasing a gun in his state. Instead of offering constitutional or due process questions, co-host Charlie Rose touted, “Connecticut's governor vows this morning to do what the U.S. Senate would not when it comes to gun control.”
Teeing up Malloy to offer talking points, Rose offered this softball: “Tell us why you decided to do this.” Co-host Gayle King’s idea of tough questions was to quote from Malloy’s statement: “In your statement, governor, you said, ‘The public shouldn't be fooled into thinking we are powerless. All we need to do is use common sense. If Congress is not going to act, I will.’” She then wondered if Malloy has “reached out to other states.”
A telling moment about the practicality came when guest co-host Christine Johnson neutrally offered:
CHRISTINE JOHNSON: Will federal officials give you access to these lists? Have they said they will do that?
MALLOY: We are having discussions and I believe that — I'm hopeful that it will lead to allowing us to use these lists.
King asked about “the concern that some people say the list is flawed.” However, she didn’t point out that there are 700,000 people on the list and 40 percent have no connections to terrorism, according to the Daytona Beach News-Journal:
That list, which contained 47,000 names at the end of George W. Bush’s presidency, has grown to nearly 700,000 people on President Obama’s watch. The fact that they are names, not identities, has led to misidentifications and confusion, ensnaring many innocent people. But surely those names are there for good reason, right?
Not really. According to the technology website TechDirt.com, 40 percent of those on the FBI’s watch list — 280,000 people — are considered to have no affiliation with recognized terrorist groups. All it takes is for the government to declare is has “reasonable suspicion” that someone could be a terrorist.
For example, Fox News contributor Stephen Hayes, who is not an actual terrorist, was placed on the watch list.
The show’s hosts also avoided any mention of due process or constitutionality.
A transcript of the CBS This Morning segment is below:
12/11/15
8:04CHARLIE ROSE: Monday marks three years since the Newtown school shootings. Connecticut’s governor vows this morning to do what the U.S. Senate would not when it comes to gun control. Daniel Malloy announced, Thursday, he would sign an executive order. Those appearing on federal watch lists would be banned from buying guns in his state. Governor Malloy is with us now from Hartford for an interview you will only see on CBS This Morning. Good morning, governor.
CONNECTICUT GOVERNOR DANIEL MALLOY: Good morning.
ROSE: Tell us why you decided to do this.
MALLOY: Well, there is a whole bunch of reasons. Not the least of which is to make us safer. Several days before the attack in California, I read this report about how many times people on the terrorism watch list had been allowed to legally buy guns in America that was actually 2,043 times. It doesn't make any sense. It doesn't make people safer. I think it makes it a much more dangerous situation. It's come to our attention and it's time to do something about it. And yeah, there was an attempt to do something about it and the NRA beat that back and it's time for, you know, right-thinking people to stand up and say if somebody has done something has them on the terrorism watch list, perhaps we should, you know, temporarily delay them from buying a gun or permanently ban them from buying a gun in a state like Connecticut. That is what we want to do.
ROSE: People make a couple of points. One is that people who committed the acts in San Bernardino did not appear on any no-fly list. Number one. Number two, they ask what list will you use? And number three, they ask suppose this is true in Connecticut, will they not go to another state and what is necessary is federal legislation.
MALLOY: Of course, federal legislation is necessary. There should be no gun sales that are not subject to a background check. Overwhelmingly, Americans agree with that. Overwhelmingly, members of the NRA agree there should be background checks. Of course, that’s part of the debate and I’m more than happy to move it further along. When the NRA can stop the Congress of the United States from passing common sense legislation, we are in trouble as a democracy.
Overwhelmingly, people want to see some level of background checks on a universal basis. Someone should not be able to buy a gun over the internet without a background check. Someone should not be able to go into a gun show and buy a gun without a background check. It doesn't make any sense. Let's make America safer. You know, you just led with a statistic about 79 percent of Americans are fearful that there will be a terrorism attack. But 30,000 people in America will die from gun violence and some of that will be with guns that would not be in the hands they are in if they had been universal background checks.
GAYLE KING: In your statement, governor, you said “the public shouldn't be fooled into thinking we are powerless. All we need to do is use common sense. If Congress is not going to act, I will and I encourage other states to do the same.” So, if other states reached out to you and said, “Hey, governor, we are with you” and have you reached out to other states?
MALLOY: Other states have reached out to our office. We are sharing our information. We are discussing this with federal authorities. I think we are going to have an agreement to make these lists available for background check purposes only. That is all we are asking. When we do a background check in Connecticut, we should be able to deny someone the ability to purchase a gun, subject to an appeal, obviously, if they are on that list. It's just common sense. What American doesn't think that that is the right thing to do?
KING: What about the concern that some people say the list is flawed?
MALLOY: Well, the argument there is things aren't perfect, therefore, we should do nothing. What I'm — I want to be very clear. We deny people the right to buy a gun in Connecticut. It's subject to appeal. Many of those appeals are granted because there was a mistake in the paper work or some other thing had happened. I'm not saying that we unilaterally and permanently prevent someone from purchasing a gun. But we should be able to stop it if they are on that list. If we are not letting them on a plane, why are we selling them a gun?
ROSE: Governor, what list are you talking about? What is the specific list that you will be using in Connecticut from the federal government?
MALLOY: Well, there is a terrorism watch list and think that that is, A-number one. There was a study that showed that people on that list were able to purchase guns 2,043 times in a ten-year period in the United States. Let me just remind you that 400,000 people have died by gun violence in America since 9/11. 3,800 Americans have died worldwide as a result of terrorism. What I'm saying is let's make sure that we make our country, our state as safe as possible. When you know there is a threat, when you know is there a threat, we should be able to take action and, by the way, this is a much better — I'm sorry.
CHRISTINE JOHNSON: Will federal officials — I was going to ask, will federal officials give you access to these lists? Have they said they will do that?
MALLOY: We are having discussions and I believe that — I'm hopeful that it will lead to allowing us to use these lists. That's why I said I will sign an executive order as soon as that agreement is reached. We are in discussion. There's a lot of support in Washington for doing this. There is an understanding that this makes citizenry safer and I think, ultimately, what we are also trying to do is let's have this as a national discussion out in the open so that people really understand that there are senators and congressmen who would deny this protection to people the very same congressmen and senators who don't want to let refuges who go through up to 24-month screening process into our country, or candidates who don't want to let people of certain faiths come into our country. Let’s have a sane debate about the things we could do right now to make ourselves safer.
