Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Obama Speaks on Gun Control; Killings Spark Action Overseas; Mass Killers Want Revenge & Glory

Aired December 19, 2012 - 12:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

BARACK OBAMA, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: And, you know, I'm not alone in this. You know, the -- if you go to Wall Street, including talking to a whole bunch of folks who spent a whole lot of money trying to beat me, they would say it would be disastrous for us to use the debt ceiling as a cudgel to try to win political points on Capitol Hill. So, we're not going to do that.

And -- which is why, I think, that part of what I hope over the next couple days we see is a recognition that there is a way to go ahead and get what it is that you've been fighting for.

These guys have been fighting for spending cuts. They can get some very meaningful spending cuts. This would amount to $2 trillion -- $2 trillion -- in spending cuts over the last couple of years.

And, in exchange, they're getting a little over a trillion dollars in revenue and that meets the pledge that I made during the campaign, which was, you know, $2.00 to $2.50 of spending cuts for every revenue increase.

And that's an approach that I think most Americans think is appropriate, but I will not negotiate around the debt ceiling. We're not doing that again.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE).

OBAMA: Yes? I've got David Jackson.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Thank you, Mr. President. Getting back to the gun issue, you alluded to the fact that Washington commissions don't have the greatest reputations in the world. What makes you think this one's going to be any different, given the passage of time and the political power of gun rights groups like the National Rifle Association?

OBAMA: Well, this is not going to be a commission. Joe is going to gather up some key cabinet members who have an interest in this issue. We're going to reach out to a bunch of stakeholders. We're going to be reaching out to members of Congress who have an interest in this issue.

It's not as if we have to start from scratch. There are a whole bunch of proposals that have been fought about and debated, but hopefully also some new ideas in terms of how we deal with this issue. But their task is going to be to sift through every good idea that's out there and even take a look at some bad ideas before disposing of them and come up with a concrete set of recommendations in about a month.

And I would hope that our memories aren't so short that what we saw in Newtown isn't lingering with us, that we don't remain passionate about it only a month later.

And, as soon as we get those recommendations, I will be putting forward very specific proposals. I will be talking about them in my State of the Union and we will be working with interested members of Congress to try to get something done.

You know, the idea that we would say this is terrible, this is a tragedy, never again, and we don't have the sustained attention span to be able it to get this done over the next several months doesn't make sense.

I have more confidence in the American people than that. I have more confidence in the parents, the mothers and fathers that I've been meeting over the last several days all across the country from all political persuasions, including a lot of gun owners who say, you know what? This time we've got to do things differently.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: What about the NRA?

OBAMA: Well, the NRA is an organization that has members who are mothers and fathers and I would expect that they've been impacted by this, as well, and hopefully they'll do some self-reflection.

And here's what we know, that any single gun law can't solve all these problems. We're going to have to look at mental health issues. We're going to have to look at schools. There are going to be a whole range of things that Joe's group looks at.

We know that issues of gun safety will be an element of it. And, you know, what we've seen over the last 20 years, 15 years is this sense that anything related to guns is somehow an encroachment on the Second Amendment.

What we're looking for is here a thoughtful approach that says we can preserve our Second Amendment, we can make sure that responsible gun owners are able to carry out their activities, but that we're going to actually be serious about the safety side of this, that we're going to be serious about making sure that something like Newtown or Aurora doesn't happen again.

There is a big chunk of space between what, you know, the Second Amendment means and having no rules at all. And that space is what Joe's going to be working on to try to identify where we can find some common ground.

So, I've got -- I'm going to take one last question. Go ahead, Jake.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It seems to a lot of observers that you made the political calculation in 2008 in your first term and 2012 not to talk about gun violence.

You had your position on renewing the ban on semi-automatic rifles that then-Senator Biden put into place, but you didn't do much about it.

This is not the first issue -- the first incident of horrific gun violence of your four years. Where have you been?

OBAMA: Well, here's where I've been, Jake. I've been President of the United States dealing with the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, an auto industry on the verge of collapse, two wars.

I don't think I've been on vacation and, so, you know, I think all of us have to do some reflection on how we prioritize what we do here in Washington.

And, as I said on Sunday, you know, this should be a wake-up call for all of us to say that, if we are not getting right the need to keep our children safe, then nothing else matters and it's my commitment to make sure that we do everything we can to keep our children safe.

A lot of things going are involved in that, Jake, so making sure they've got decent health care and making sure they've got a good education, making sure that their parents have jobs, those are all relevant, as well.

Those aren't just sort of side issues. But there's no doubt that this has to be a central issue and that's exactly why I'm confident that Joe is going to take this so seriously over the next couple months.

All right, thank you, everybody.

(END LIVE FEED)

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: President Obama at the White House making a statement announcing a new agency, but at the same time, turned into a full-blown press conference there in the pressroom.

I want to bring on my colleagues here, Wolf Blitzer, as well as chief political correspondent Candy Crowley and our senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin.

And, Wolf, I want to start off with you. It seems as if the President in one sentence really tied together the two most important story, of course, the negotiations over the fiscal cliff and then also this massacre, this school shooting.

And he said this. He says, "If the past week has done anything, it has given us perspective on what is important here."

Tell us a little bit about the details. What struck you about what specifically he wants to do when it comes to gun policy?

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST, "THE SITUATION ROOM": Well, I was impressed that he said that Joe Biden has a month, basically, by January, by the end of January -- I assume that's what he meant -- to come up with a plan.

This is not a long commission that's going to spend six months or a year going through some sort of -- all these witnesses coming forward, studying it and then coming up with ideas that nobody pays attention to.

The President made it clear he doesn't want that kind commission. There have been so many of them in Washington over the years, Suzanne, as you and I well know.

Biden, now, the Vice President, has a month to come up with a plan to deal with these kinds of issues, to deal with assault weapons, to deal with mental health-related problems, to deal with these high-capacity ammunition clips that the President is talking about.

They're not starting from scratch. You remember Joe Biden is a former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He's very familiar with these gun-related issues. He's got a lot of expertise and a lot of experience. So, they're going to come up with specific ideas right now.

And you're absolutely right. When the President said, given what the country has gone through over these past few days, you know, he did make the connection between the guns and the fiscal cliff. You know what? We've got a lot of problems in the country right now. We've got to deal with them. We've got to keep it in perspective.

And I was also struck by that one line he said, Suzanne. He said for some of these Republicans, he said, it is very hard for them to say yes to me. He says, I understand that. He says, take me out of it. Just do what's right for the country.

So, there's a lot of politics here, but there's a lot of substance, the guns, the fiscal cliff.

This is a critical moment in U.S. history right now. Let's see if it goes forward in the right or the wrong way.

MALVEAUX: Candy, I want to bring you into the discussion because that struck me, as well, the fact he almost was really, if you will, suggesting that Republicans are playing politics with all of this with the fiscal cliff and that it really is all about him, taking him out of the equation.

It's not common that you have the President there holding a full-blown press conference 13 days outside of this deadline here. It seems like there definitely was a political tactic, if you will, on his part to come out and take questions and to lay his case, make his case before the American people directly.

CANDY CROWLEY, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Sure. I mean, you know, the interesting thing here, of course, is one man's policy is another person's politics.

And, so, I can assure you you will hear Republicans going, wait a second. We're trying to do what's best for the country, too, in terms of the fiscal cliff.

And, you know, obviously, as President, you command that bully pulpit on both the issue of guns as well as the fiscal cliff. So this is -- it is really hard to kind of squeeze the politics out of policy as the President and the Republicans well know.

I thought what was interesting, Suzanne, about this gun commission -- although he doesn't want it to call it a commission -- this panel that's going to come up with ideas within a month -- is that it is a really tall order.

The one thing that really perked up my ears was the President saying it really should be, you know, at least as easy to get access to mental health care as it is to get access to guns.

That is a huge order. It's music to the ears of the families that just bang their heads against doors trying to get in to get a loved one some help. Also, that's a long way from happening.

So, I think this panel is, you know, so many people want this holistic approach, but I think this is something that's going to be years in the making.

It's one thing to pass a bill to ban assault weapons again and they may well do that. It's another thing -- I mean, he talked about culture. He talked about mental health. So, there's a lot of things out there that are really going to take years.

MALVEAUX: And, Jeff, I want you to weigh in on this because I thought -- I was kind of surprised how specific the President was when he talked about some of the things that he is pushing forward -- the assault weapons ban, also a limit on high-capacity ammunitions and a background check for all gun purchases.

What kind of position is he in to push this forward? I mean, there has been so little political will on either side to do any of that.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I was struck how he said, you know, Joe Biden is the perfect person to do this because Biden was the person who led the assault weapons ban fight in Congress in 1994 and that's certainly true.

It is also true that that crime bill and, particularly, the assault weapons ban was considered a political disaster for the Democratic Party, especially for the Democrats in the South and in the West who were really wiped out in the 1994 mid-term elections.

So, yes, it is true Biden has the expertise, but he also knows what a political risk it is for Democrats like, for example, Kay Hagan, who will be running for re-election in North Carolina. Let's see what she thinks about this. It is going to be a very tough vote for her.

And the Republican House of Representatives, whether they can be brought along on issues that they are well-established -- they have well-established positions where they disagree completely with this philosophy of gun control at all. That strikes me as a very difficult political challenge, even in a post-Newtown environment.

MALVEAUX: All right. Jeffrey Toobin, Wolf Blitzer, Candy Crowley, thank you very much. Appreciate it as always.

The entire nation is trying to come to terms with what happened in Newtown. We want to look at how other countries are dealing with gun control.

Our Christiane Amanpour is going to weigh in on that next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

OBAMA: I am also betting that the majority, the vast majority of responsible, law abiding gun owners would be some of the first to say that we should be able to keep an irresponsible, law-breaking few from buying a weapon of war. I'm willing to bet that they don't think that using a gun and using common sense are incompatible ideas. That an unbalanced man shouldn't be able to get his hands on a military-style assault rifle so easily.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN ANCHOR: Want to welcome our viewers from around the world here. Here in the United States, we are not the only ones, of course, who have dealt with the heartbreak of senseless gun violence. You remember last year in Norway, a gunman killed 69 people at a summer camp. Most of them teenagers. Back in 1996, in Scotland, a man shot to death 16 kindergartners and their teacher. We've seen gun massacres at schools in Australia, Germany, Canada and Brazil.

I want to bring in our own Christiane Amanpour to talk a little bit about this.

Give us a sense, or a perspective here, in terms of, how does the United States, how do we hold up? How do we compare to some of the violent acts -- the level of violence we have here and around the world?

CHRISTIANE AMANPOUR, CNN CHIEF INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Suzanne, you know, the world has been looking on in real shock and grief and horror at what happened. And it is instructive, I think, despite the difference of various culture and despite the difference of, you know, second amendment rights and things like that, to see how the rest of the world has actually tackled these incidents.

You mentioned Dunblane in Scotland in 1996. Children of the same age who were mowed down in Sandy Hook Elementary were killed then. And within a year and a half, the government banned the private use and ownership of handguns. And there was stiff penalties. And there were even jail sentences if these bans and if the law was breached. They had a strict buy-back and amnesty plan. And do you know what? It worked. It didn't work immediately, but between 2003 and 2011, the number of gun-related crimes in Great Britain dropped off 44 percent.

And then you look at what happened in Australia that same year. There was a massacre in Australia. So many people were killed there, and the government sprang into action. And it banned the possession, the import, the sale of semi-automatic weapons. And it also made it, what, obviously illegal to have them. But then again, the crimes dropped off. Really plummeted. And the study by Harvard shows that before that there was some 13 massacres in Australia and after that law, none.

And so there is cause and effect when you put in these laws and punitive measures.

Now, of course, I thought it was interesting that President Obama obviously is not talking about a total ban on guns and made very specific mention of the Second Amendment and also made specific mention of how the 4 million people, who belong to the NRA, are, by and large, responsible, law-abiding and don't want to see the same kind of, you know, irresponsible few having access, or the dangerous few having access to those -- the most dangerous weapons, which, frankly, Suzanne, I've seen operate on the battlefield and those kind of slaughters I've witnessed from Sarajevo and Somalia and are now going on in Syria and not the kind of weapons that should be on the streets or in the schools of any community.

MALVEAUX: The President certainly seems to be trying to suggest that it is a responsibility not only of the government, of lawmakers, but also a larger societal problem within American culture and within our communities, our homes as well.

Christiane, thank you very much for your perspective. Really appreciate it.

So, what is the difference between a mass killer like the Newtown gunman and a suicide bomber working for al Qaeda? My next guest says that there is very little difference. We're going to dive deeper into the mind of a killer.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

MALVEAUX: We know these young men as the perpetrators of the worst campus shootings in our country's history. At Columbine High School, Virginia Tech, and just last week at Sandy Hook Elementary. And then there are these men. They also committed mass violence on American soil, but in the name of Islamic extremism.

Well, this week in "The New York Times," Adam Lankford of the University of Alabama argues that these eight men are more alike than we might think. And he writes, and I'm quoting here, "for years the conventional wisdom has been that suicide terrorists are radical, political actors, while suicidal rampage shooters are mentally disturbed loners. But the two groups have far more in common than has been recognized."

Joining us is Adam Lankford.

And, Adam, thank you very much. A very provocative article. It has caused a lot of debate and discussion here. You essentially write that these killers share three key characteristics. What are they?

ADAM LANKFORD, ASST. PROF. OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, UNIV. OF ALABAMA: Well, the first one is mental illness. Despite major misconceptions to the contrary, suicide terrorists -- and I've looked at well over 130- plus cases -- suicide terrorist are, in fact, suicidal in the clinical sense. So they actually want to die. And they sometimes suffer from depression, schizophrenia, all sorts of other mental illnesses that make them want to die and take others with them.

The second factor is perceived victimization. On the one hand, you had the suicide terrorists who believe that they've been victimized and oppressed and persecuted by western infidels or by the Israeli government or Israeli soldiers. And on the other hand, you have the rampage shooters who believe they've been persecuted and oppressed by school bullies or by their parents. You have workplace shooters who believe the boss has been persecuting them. So there's a deep sense that their psychological pain is not their own fault.

MALVEAUX: So you mentioned this as well. You talk about the four school shooters that we had mentioned earlier and you say this. You say, "if they had been born in Gaza or the West Bank, shaped by terrorist organizations' hateful propaganda, would they have strapped bombs around their waists and blown themselves up?" You say, "I'm afraid the answer is yes."

Do you feel like there's nothing that you can do to stop a person from committing a horrible act of violence?

LANKFORD: Oh, there's absolutely things we can do to stop them. And, frankly, I'd break that down in three different major things you can do. You can stop them from getting weapons. You can stop them from having access to targets. Or you can identify them based on their intent.

MALVEAUX: And, Adam, how do you do this? I mean how do you take aware the desire? There's a great desire, you say, for fame and glory for a lot of folks who do this. And even the terrorists are celebrated as martyrs. So how do you draw attention? How do you have a public conversation about these kinds of people and these mass killings without glorifying or encouraging others who might shoot?

LANKFORD: Well, frankly, one of the problems is there's this kind of fascination with these killers that a lot of average, you know, good people have, but we need to be a little bit more disciplined than that. The parallel I would make in terms of changing how we operate is with the way the U.S. handles people who run on the field in a baseball game or football game. Television networks have made the decision that if that happens, they do not show that individual specifically because they know that individual wants attention. (AUDIO GAP) and say we're not going to give these people the fame and glory that they want.

MALVEAUX: All right. Adam, thank you. Appreciate it. Again, a very interesting article and kind of the assessment that you made of studies that you've had. Thank you. Appreciate it. Another major issue, of course, on the President's desk right now beyond gun violence is, of course, what to do about the tax hike that almost all Americans could face in less than two weeks if Washington and Congress and the President do not act.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)