In tonight's Rewrite, Lawrence brought you an exclusive investigative report from The TODAY Show's National Investigative Correspondent Jeff Rossen showing just how easy it is to buy guns in this country without a background check.
The video above is a longer version of Jeff's report as it aired this morning on NBC's TODAY Show.
A few extra details about the report - all the sales you see are perfectly legal, even without any background checks. Many Americans support private gun sales without background checks. Often those individuals will say it's not about making money or profit, it's about individual rights. As for the eight guns purchased by NBC News, they were turned over to the Phoenix police department and will be destroyed.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been leading a coalition of fellow mayors to try and decrease gun violence in some of the nation's biggest urban areas (you may have seen the Super Bowl ad he did with Boston Mayor Tom Menino). According to the CDC, more than 12,000 Americans are killed every year by firearm homicides. The figures show that it's the second leading cause of death for those aged 10-24, second only to traffic accidents.
Leave a Comment:
Lawrence, I have been a big fan ever since your first show. This is probably more a comment for the show's producers than for you, but I'll plunge in....
I am shocked at the addition of this piece to your show. It was a cheap piece to add that belonged on the usual drivel offered on the weekend. Your show attracts an educated group who don't need a voice-over (Jeff Rosen) who is shouting, and easily audible interviews with huge lettering, and music in the background. It comes across as a TV version of the National Inquirer. Finally, I muted the whole thing until it was over. But that didn't satisfy my anger or my dismay. I believe I have more of a brain than to sit through this. You see, I already receive regular e-mails from Mayors Against Illegal Guns. This I didn't need, so SHAME on MSNBC. And I will add, much of this footage was not new. I know that I saw some of these same shots at least a year ago after the shooting in Tuscon.
And as for the crap that MSNBC airs over the weekend: Get over the schizophrenia, already. Finally you are airing some quality with UP with Chris Hayes, and I am looking forward to Melissa Harris-Perry's show. I hope this is a trend. The less Lockup and Caught on Camera I see, the happier I will be. Meanwhile, I will watch CNN, PBS, College Football (in season), Skating, and old movies on TCM. Come to think of it, maybe I don't care what MSNBC airs on the weekend! There are always drives to the country, dinners with friends, a day at the beach, and outings with my dog, Tino. Please, More Chris Hayes and less Lockup (i.e. NO Lockup). Can I say this strongly enough????
Let me just say: That was BY far, the most pathetic attempt to make LEGAL GUN SALES... sound ILLEGAL!! Wow. Lawrence, come on now... You know better than that. Here's a tip: Look at Utah's gun laws and the # number of people who own guns... then take a look at the crime rate. Now take a look at DC, LA, NY, or Ill... How's that Chicago Gun Ban working out?? You know it as well as I... there's NO denying the facts...Right?
Is there no REAL news to report on? If guns are the problem MSNBC seems to think they are, what about reporting on the Fast and Furious scandal? That problem is a big as Watergate was, yet the mainstream media is all but silent. I suppose that if a private person sells a gun to another private person without a background check, that is worth reporting and reporting and reporting ad nauseum. But when our government does it, then allows the guns to cross the border of another country, and can document at least one federal agent's death, that is not newsworthy. Really? Thanks, but I will not be watching MSNBC for news. Nor will I support your advertisers.
Perhaps it is time to find some real news to report on. A majority of Americans support gun ownership. You enjoy the freedom of the first amendment, allow us to enjoy the second amendment.
This has got to be some of the worst libtard "reporting" ever.
Its full of misinformation, lies, n so much crap.
Cant forget about those Buzzwords, like tactical assault rifle, semi-automatic assault rifle, police grade pistol.
This "article" is all about creating fear in the minds of kool-aid drinking, ignorant liberals.
"tactical assault rifle modified to use bullets for an AK-47"
wrong, its an sks, that was made before the AK, but yes they both use the same ammo.
"hollow-point bullets, made to inflict serious internal damage"
ilmao! scare tactics much! Hollow points are most used for self defense.
" a 50-caliber sniper rifle, bullet range 5 miles"
not possible
"50-caliber weapon, so powerful, it could take down a helicopter"
has this ever happened in the US, NO. stop believing everything in movies
there is nothing wrong with an AK,it is a perfectly good hunting rifle.
the only thing different with so called "assault" rifles vs your typical "hunting" rifle is the way it looks. There are many other "hunting rifles that use the same bullet (7.62x39mm) as the AK
I'm a liberal, I don't drink kool-aid, and I'm far from ignorant. Many statments you make are not the way every state law reads. Don't make blanket statments. And, maybe not in the US, but a 50 cal can easily take down a helicopter.
Which of my statements are wrong?
David it seems you missed the point of the segment, The probiem being gun sales to people who, due to criminal ties,mental stability, can purchase a gun without a backround check.Allyour so-called Buzzwords means you don't really have a valid response as to why this is something you disagree with. Laws that require certain things to be done to own a weapon should be embraced by everyone. If you haven't had your right taken away due to your criminal actions, laws that prohibit internet sales shouldn't effect you. If you had then that is your own fault,not the governments,mine or anyone elses.
I am a liberal and my husband and I own 7 guns. bought legally. I went through the 3 day waitihg period,along with the backround check. It wasn't like medicine that you would need right away,so the laws, in my opinion are the way all gun owners should embrace.
Love the show Lawrence
Deefl63: I am a liberal and my husband and I own 7 guns.
Just out of curiosity, what do you need 7 guns for? Are you hunters? Do you lock the guns away safely when they are not in use? Do you store the ammunition separately?
Dorothea from Germany, 7 guns is nothing, I have around 150 guns. There is nothing wrong with having lots of guns.
I have around 150 guns.
Well, then I am glad that there's a giant ocean between us.
There is nothing wrong with having lots of guns.
It's totally insane.
there is nothing wrong with owning many guns. as long as you are a responsible individual. believe it or not shooting is a sport enjoyed by many people, guns themselves are not bad just the people operating them. i love to shoot it is very stress reliving and quite honestly relaxing. maybe you should try it! wait Hitler dose'nt allow his people to have firearms.
i am very happy i came across this article because it reminded me that i need a new Glock. i think im going to buy it online since it is so easy and worry free. just found one im going to go pick it up now along with 2000 hollow points, its going to be a good day at the range!
im grateful to be a gun nut in the US of A
see you during armageddon unlike you ill be prepared.
as long as you are a responsible individual
I would add a further condition: There is nothing wrong with owning a gun if you are a responsible individual and need the gun for your job (e.g. hunter, policeman).
shooting is a sport enjoyed by many people
If you are into shooting for the sake of targeting (as opposed to killing), then there are non-deadly weapons that you can use, e.g. play paintball or first-person shooter games. Deadly weapons are not necessary if you are not out for killing. Deadly weapons are too dangerous to play around with. Again, risk outweighs utility.
guns themselves are not bad just the people operating them
Right. And that's why you need to deny people access to guns.
i love to shoot it is very stress reliving and quite honestly relaxing. maybe you should try it!
No, thanks. My hands will never touch a gun. There are plenty of less dangerous ways to relieve stress.
wait Hitler dose'nt allow his people to have firearms.
How come that gun lovers have this morbid obsession with the Evil Austrian? I think that's kinda telling. Besides: Are you aware of the fact that this guy has been dead for over six decades now? Can you read a calendar?
i think im going to buy it online since it is so easy and worry free. just found one im going to go pick it up now along with 2000 hollow points, its going to be a good day at the range!
May I suggest that you also get yourself some more punctuation marks?
see you during armageddon unlike you ill be prepared.
Yeah, right! If the world comes to an end, your guns will totes help you to survive. Keep on dreaming.
half of my comment was sarcasm which you know.
i do agree that not every one should have a gun. but a gun is not dangerous unless some one makes it dangerous it is made of the same materials that you will find in your car. your going to comment and say that guns are made to kill which they are but i choose to kill trees ( i dont mean real trees i mean targets ) and steel drums rather than people
people bring up Hitler because he is just one of the infamous dictators who took away the peoples guns so there could not be an uprising some of the other dictators are Stalin, Castro, Pol Pot, etc. in America we will never have a dictator because we simply wont allow it.
If you don't want to kill real living beings, then you don't need real guns. Risk outweighs utility. Period.
people bring up Hitler because he is just one of the infamous dictators who took away the peoples guns so there could not be an uprising
I am not familiar with the gun laws that existed during the Third Reich. These former laws are irrelevant, because nowadays we have a democracy. And in a democracy, there is no reason for people to own guns, because the state is not an enemy but a protector.
in America we will never have a dictator because we simply wont allow it.
That doesn't make any sense. Dictators are called dictators precisely because they neither ask nor have the people's permission to reign.
Besides, the USA might not have a dictator, but the USA was or is a dictator itself in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan.
what i meant by "we wont allow it" is that people would take up their arms and start an uprising. this makes perfect sense Americans will not line up like dogs with their tale between their legs and hand over their guns it will just not happen. i will not be surprised if the British people start slowly but surely losing their rights.
i do not agree totally with what my country has done or is doing in the middle east. last i heard we were starting to pull out and the taliban are taking it back over.
im not trying to judge you but have you ever had a first person encounter with a firearm, fired one, etc. or are you just going on the false statistics the brady campaign gives you and things that you have read on the internet?
try shooting a plate from a 1,000 yards away with a paintball gun.
people would take up their arms and start an uprising.
This is much easier said than done. Dictators don't reveal themselves as such from the beginning. Therefore, your guns wouldn't help you, unless you want to preemptively kill all politicians.
By the way, why didn't US citizens start an uprising to prevent their country from going to war in Iraq and to prevent their military from killing 150,000 innocent Iraqis?
Americans will not line up like dogs with their tale between their legs and hand over their guns
The difference is that most Germans do not want to own guns. So, we wouldn't have much to hand over.
i will not be surprised if the British people start slowly but surely losing their rights.
Americans love conspiracy theories.
have you ever had a first person encounter with a firearm, fired one, etc.
As I stated in a previous post, my hands will never touch a gun. Also, I don't need to have fired a gun to know that guns are dangerous, deadly weapons.
try shooting a plate from a 1,000 yards away with a paintball gun.
Shoot at something closer to you.
Thank you for doing this segment. It is important to call out the stupidity that abounds when it comes to guns. Like everything else in today's society, there appears to be no middle ground. It's all or nothing, and any attempt to use common sense is immediately met with outrage.
What's wrong with requiring a background check? What's bad about having a cooling off period, when one can't take possession of the weapon for a few days? What doesn't make sense about requiring reporting on those who buy 20 assault rifles in one day and declare they're all for personal use? (This is not an exaggeration. It happened in Arizona.)
And the final hypocrisy? The same group who screams the loudest about any attempt at common sense are the same group horrified at the Fast and Furious operation. While I think Fast and Furious was utterly stupid, I fail to see why that idiocy doesn't fit with the rest of the moronic behavior when it comes to guns. After all, guns don't kill people, do they? People kill people, right?
Let's just require that everyone in the US seven years of age and older has to own at least one gun, and no questions can be asked. That should make us all safe. (s/o)
These shockingly loose gun laws are one of the main reasons why I'll never set foot in the USA. It's truly creepy. How can people feel safe(r) when there are deadly weapons around? How can more deadly weapons lead to fewer dead people? That doesn't make any sense.
Loose gun laws create an atmosphere of intimidation. When every idiot is allowed to own a means with which he can kill you within a second from afar, then your life is entirely in the hands of other people. Your very existence is at the mercy of strangers. Nobody should have this much power over someone else.
I was thrilled with this segment!! Finally someone on MSNBC- TV is taking on an ISSUE OF SUBSTANCE beyond the ridiculous details of the ridiculous Republican primaries!!!
I'm a frequent viewer of MSNBC-TV and I would like to see MORE ISSUES OF SUBSTANCE TAKEN UP BY ALL OF THE SHOW HOSTS!!! IT'S INCREDIBLY BORING WATCHING THE STUPID DETAILS OF THE STUPID REPUBLICAN PRIMARIES!!!
PLEASE - PLEASE - PLEASE - BRING US MORE ISSUES OF SUBSTANCE SUCH AS YOUR EXCELLENT - AND CHILLING! - PIECE ON THE EASE OF OBTAINING KILLER GUNS!!!!
THANK YOU, LAWRENCE!!!
(And - LOVE that you're from Boston - and such a bio! - I, too, am from Boston area - Newton - wonderful place to grow up!...)
Sloppy feature story. I can't even call it "reporting." Looks like it was produced by Bloomberg and his pet project "mayors against illegal guns," not a network news staff. It was all editorial commentary.
These were not illegal guns or illegal transactions. The feature was all bull.
The editorial spent not one second mentioning The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution. The Constitution clearly is not important to /NBC/MSNBC (except, maybe, the 1st Amendment) but it is still very important to most Americans.
Advocating for more unconstitutional laws is not the job of a news organization.
Poor news judgement. Bad call.
Hang your heads in shame.
Bloomberg also tried to tie the gun sales to the Mormon Church because the church owns a television station that has a website that offers classified ads.
Other than Steve Benson, the Pultizer Prize cartoonist for the Arizona Republic, I'm doubtful there are many more vociferous on-line critics of the LDS faith than myself. And my reaction to this one amounts to a conclusion that Mayor Bloomberg is proof having a lot of money is no cure for stupidity.
I could be wrong on that one, though. The mayor is now a Republican, and he may be playing a deep, Machiavellian game trying to energize the NRA crowd (who gave us Grover Norquist), and Lawrence has just been played for a tool.
Buying guns online still involves shipping to someone with a Federal Firearms License (FFL), which is not easy to get, and the FFL holder is legally required to make a phone call to the authorities to check your background before he/she can release the gun to you. Only lone private sellers can get away with violating this law, and they can and will get away with violating any other law that is passed. So, what's the point?
Register every gun and then hold the legal owner responsible for any crime that is committed with his gun. This provides the incentive for legal gun owners to not privately sell their guns without registering the transaction with the police. Also, legal gun owners would then make sure that their guns are safely locked away in a weapon cabinet in order to prevent accidents and unauthorised access.
Excellent story last night on internet gun sales being allowed without a background check. Thanks for bringing this to our attention & I urge you to mobilize your listeners to contact congress in support of Chuck Schumer's bill which would correct this flaw in the law. Hard to believe the NRA has so much power.
We don't need more gun regulation, we need more criminal regulation. You will never be able to stop criminals from getting guns if they want them. Background checks do nearly nothing to stop someone from getting a gun if they really want to get one. We need to make laws that add time to sentences in crimes where guns are used. I someone robs a liqueur store with a gun, add 10 years to the sentence up front so if they got say,10 years with parole in 5, add a gun enhancement of 10 years to make the sentence 20 years with parole in 15. Don't try to control the guns, that will never work, control the criminals.
We don't need more gun regulation, we need more criminal regulation. You will never be able to stop criminals from getting guns if they want them.
Illegal guns usually start out as legal guns. By some estimates, nearly 25% of all handguns initially sold legitimately in the USA end up being used in crime. You need strict gun regulations to prevent this.
We need to make laws that add time to sentences in crimes where guns are used.
The USA already has the highest incarceration rate in the world and not enough space in its prisons for all the criminals. More prison time wouldn't be feasible. Also, higher punishment doesn't necessarily serve as deterrent. The death penalty proves it. Most criminals don't expect to get caught and therefore don't bother about possible legal consequences.
Don't try to control the guns, that will never work, control the criminals.
It works in other countries. The stricter the general access to guns, the more difficult it is for evil-minded people to get a gun and use it for a crime. Also, a lot of crimes require a gun in order to happen at all. Or at least many crimes would be far more difficult to successfully commit without a gun. This means that stricter gun laws and fewer guns will lead to fewer crimes.
I'm still waiting to see where anyone has had guns taken away. Tell me where, no BS, where is it that you can't get a gun.
@ Dorothea from Germany: thank you for your comments. I quote your remarks, then make rebuttals.
"We don't need more gun regulation, we need more criminal regulation. You will never be able to stop criminals from getting guns if they want them."
Let's just look at the National Socialist Democratic Party as a start....
"We need to make laws that add time to sentences in crimes where guns are used."
As they should have done in the Nuremburg trials ???
"Don't try to control the guns, that will never work, control the criminals"
Great solace to the millions of Jews that were murdered in YOUR COUNTRY
"These shockingly loose gun laws are one of the main reasons why I'll never set foot in the USA.
It's truly creepy. How can people feel safe(r) when there are deadly weapons around?
How can more deadly weapons lead to fewer dead people? That doesn't make any sense.
Loose gun laws create an atmosphere of intimidation.
When every idiot is allowed to own a means with which he can kill you within a
second from afar, then your life is entirely in the hands of other people.
Your very existence is at the mercy of strangers. Nobody should have this much power over someone else."
wow, where do I start? Firstly, thank you for not coming to the US. One less libtard that I won't have to deal with.
I have deadly weapons all around, and I feel perfectly safe. Here are a list of some of my deadly weapons that I am
surrounded by: a stapler, a pencil, an electrical cord, a toilet tank lid, a hammer, a paper clip.
You're absolutely correct, we should ban office supplies and toilets so people don't get killed.
Intimidators create an atmosphere of intimidation. If someone ran at you swinging a frozen turkey, would you be intimidated?
You had better not go to a restaraunt then, the cook has your life in his hand and can kill you from afar.
Do you drive? Ever been on the autobahn? Your very existence is at the mercy of strangers. No one should be able to drive.
keep your left-wing, anti-freedom rhetoric to yourself and stay safe in Germany.
auf wiedersehen, swine hund.
Okay, where do I start? Oh yes, the first three statements you quoted were not made by me but by one of your fellow gun lovers. So, I guess you shot yourself in the foot. Pun intended.
Firstly, thank you for not coming to the US. One less libtard that I won't have to deal with.
You don't need to be afraid of us. Germans are pretty peaceful people. For your information, Germany hasn't started a war since 1939. Nowadays, it's the USA that starts wars and kills or tortures innocent people.
We should ban office supplies and toilets so people don't get killed. (...) If someone ran at you swinging a frozen turkey, would you be intimidated?
Office supplies and toilets are everyday objects with very useful, non-violent main purposes. Therefore, it's completely justified to have these things around. In such cases, utility outweighs risk. Try to kill 150,000 innocent Iraqis with a bunch of pencils. It won't work. And even if you used toilets or frozen turkeys, you would still find the killing much harder to do than with guns, because it takes inefficiently long and is very tiring... No, I didn't try it. That's common sense.
Guns, however, were invented and are made for the sole purpose of killing, injuring and destroying. In other words, guns do nothing but harm. That's why it is perfectly reasonable to deny the general public access to guns.
You had better not go to a restaraunt then, the cook has your life in his hand and can kill you from afar. Do you drive?
Again, the main purpose of working/dining in a restaurant or driving a car is not killing or being killed.
keep your left-wing, anti-freedom rhetoric to yourself
So, you call me anti-freedom while denying me freedom of speech? A paragon of republican logic!
libtard (...) swine hund
Resorting to name-calling. How very mature of you. I'm deeply impressed.
By the way, I hope you are aware of the fact that National Socialists were right-wingers like you, not left-wingers like me.