April 7th, 2013
10:16 AM ET
10 years ago

Malloy: NRA’s LaPierre acts like a circus clown

(CNN) - Responding to criticism from the National Rifle Association over Connecticut's new gun laws, Gov. Dan Malloy argued the pro-gun group's executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre, is simply blowing smoke.

"Wayne reminds me of the clowns at the circus - they get the most attention. That's what he's paid to do," Malloy said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union."

[twitter-follow screen_name='politicalticker'] [twitter-follow screen_name='KilloughCNN']

The Democratic governor on Thursday signed into law some of the nation's strictest gun regulations, following the state's devastating school shooting in December in Newtown, which left 20 children and six adults dead.

The new Connecticut laws include the addition of more than 100 weapons to the state’s list of banned assault weapons - including the semiautomatic Bushmaster rifle, one of the firearms used in the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre. The law also bans the sale of magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, as well as armor-piercing bullets. Buyers will need a certificate to buy ammunition.

It also requires background checks for all gun purchases.

LaPierre said this week that the only people who will follow the new regulations are law-abiding gun owners, not criminals.

"I think the problem with what Connecticut did is the criminals, the drug dealers, the people that are going to do horror and terror, they aren't going to cooperate," LaPierre said on Fox News. "I mean, all you're doing is making the lawbooks bigger for the law-abiding people."

Asked who will be most affected by the new laws, Malloy said they'll be "probably a little tougher on everybody."

"This guy is so out of whack, it's unbelievable," Malloy told CNN's chief political correspondent, Candy Crowley, referring to LaPierre.

Connecticut became the third state to pass tough measures since the December rampage in Newtown. New York and Colorado passed gun control legislation limiting magazine capacity, among other provisions.

Malloy pointed to the fact that the overwhelming majority of Americans favor the idea of more background checks, a proposal found in legislation currently sitting before the U.S. Senate. The NRA, however, opposes that bill.

"I can't get on a plane, as the governor of the state of Connecticut, without somebody running a background check on me. Why should you be able to buy a gun? Or buy armor-piercing munitions? It doesn't make any sense. He doesn't make any sense," he said.

Another controversial measure in the Connecticut law is the requirement to register pre-existing magazines that hold more rounds than the new limit. Malloy said the registry was needed so that there are no new high-capacity magazines in Connecticut, and so law enforcement can tell the difference between the ones that already existed in the state and the new ones.

“If you bring a magazine that you purchased in another state into our state, it's illegal. Period,” he said.

The NRA last week released detailed recommendations for its proposal to train and arm adults to keep watch in schools as a way to protect kids from shooters. It also had proposals for mental health programs.

Asked if there was anything in the NRA plan that he agreed with, Malloy said "precious little," adding that schools need tougher protection barriers from intruders - but not necessarily armed guards.

"What this is about is the ability of the gun industry to sell as many guns to as many people as possible - even if they're deranged, mentally ill, a criminal background, they don't care. They want to sell guns," Malloy argued.

Watch State of the Union with Candy Crowley Sundays at 9am ET. For the latest from State of the Union click here.

soundoff (349 Responses)
  1. NRA rational

    How on Earth will that magazine registry work? There is no way to enforce it! Magazines have no serial numbers or date of manufacture on them. Say I register the ones that I have with the Police–well, any new ones I bring into the state will look exactly like the ones I had previously registered. I'm all for sensible gun control, but the magazine ban of more than ten rounds is un-Constitutional. A Federal Court would throw out this law.

    April 7, 2013 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm |
  2. observer

    have anyone notice the states who passed new legislation already had tough gun laws? i only see california trying to do better as they always boasted of having the toughest gun laws, colorado was not a highly pro gun state either before their new legislation as they were in the bottom 25 before that. you only have probaly ten states with high brady ratings

    April 7, 2013 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm |
  3. ron vonderohe

    Malloy cited what he sees are facts but are not. The gun used in the Sandy Hook killings was not legally purchased it was stolen from the person that legally purchased it, new laws will not stop that.

    April 7, 2013 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm |
  4. Fedup1962

    Malloy is a typical politiican who plays to the media, not the people. Resort to name calling when you disagree with someone or their ideology. Malloy doesn't care who what invasive laws do to the law abiding people, as long as he receives his Michael Bloomberg dollars promised to him for signing this pathetic legislation, authored by Bloomberg. These new laws will not reduce violence.

    April 7, 2013 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  5. angryoldguy

    The gun people want their guns so that they can kill. No? Watch "Doomsday Preppers". All of these idiots waiting for the Apocalypse so they can start getting rid of all the "others" they don't like. I personally know people who can't wait for civilization to collapse so they can begin the "ethnic cleansing". Look no further than the Balkans, the middle east, Asia and yes, America, too. We are all just waiting to start killing each other off! So, lock and load you lunatics! Your time for Free-for-all mass killing and mass extinction is at hand. We are doomed by what we are. Killers.

    April 7, 2013 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  6. Manuel J.

    How convenient... I don't see any new requirements for reporting the mentally disturbed. I guess they don't want to interfere with anyone's privacy (sarcasm)

    April 7, 2013 12:09 pm at 12:09 pm |
  7. Futureman1

    Kudos to Malloy.. I am a gun owner and I support a national background check and a zero tolerance policy on private unregistered gun sales. And also this is addressed to Loren who once against quotes from the archaic second amendment. You left out the first part " in order to maintain a militia" if you or anyone you know belongs to a militia Ill put out my front teeth, move into a trailor and join your side!

    April 7, 2013 12:10 pm at 12:10 pm |
  8. Proud Independent !

    Thank you Gov. Dan Malloy for saying what we were all thinking ! Wayne LaPierre is a clown !

    April 7, 2013 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  9. Bobby Yarush

    Seriously... does anyone really think criminals will subject themselves to background checks?? I just cant get over such ignorant rhetoric from the NRA. The laws are not ment for criminals to abide by... its ment as a mechinism to eliminate avenues for criminals to exploit. Close the loophole... you eliminate one method of criminals getting weapons. You still have done nothing to impede the law abiding citizen from obtaining anything. I am so sick of hearing from the NRA that criminals will not follow the laws.... Duuuuhhhhh.

    April 7, 2013 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  10. ray galasso

    The only clowns I hear are the Governors who talk like children without basic descriptive knowledge and operation of firearms! At least when the NRA speaks about firearms they know what they’re talking about! Politian’s should be banned from gun control discussions until they can talk intelligently about them and how illegals acquire them! The stupidest thing I see today is NO Gun ZONES! How many bank robberies stopped from robbing a bank because there was a sign on the door “NO WEAPONS ALLOWED”? Only fools believe this!!!

    April 7, 2013 12:11 pm at 12:11 pm |
  11. aby smith

    I am curious as to why the government is opposed to having armed guards in schools. We guard the banks with guns and our politicians with guns even our celebrities with guns... but not our kids! Shows where Americas leaders have their priorities.

    April 7, 2013 12:13 pm at 12:13 pm |
  12. Millerbarber

    The Governor is part of the marketing to make people feel they did something. All they did was pass a law. It will not save any lives. What a shame a Governor calls a person itch an opposing view a clown.

    April 7, 2013 12:14 pm at 12:14 pm |
  13. H. Lauritsen

    I agree with Gov. Malloy. People with guns kill people. I think the GOP should, in 2016, run LaPierre for president with Michel Macaulken for vice president. They are the perfect pair for the "Red States".

    April 7, 2013 12:15 pm at 12:15 pm |
  14. Citizen

    Now watch what happens, 1. Crime will go up.. 2. Good people will move out of the state. How about going after the criminals.

    April 7, 2013 12:16 pm at 12:16 pm |
  15. Patrick

    ok if what LaPierre says is true, then we have no option other then to abolish all guns from everyone- forever! Stop making them, stop making bullets, outlaw them completely. Secondly, don't tell me it cant be done, we ended slavery, we can end guns.

    April 7, 2013 12:17 pm at 12:17 pm |
  16. bart

    So why is it that we do not guard our kids with guns? We guard our banks, politicians and even celebrities with guns... but not our kids. What does that say about the governments priorities?

    April 7, 2013 12:19 pm at 12:19 pm |
  17. cheryl

    Hey, I once tried to buy a vaporizer, Nyquil and Vicks at a Target in Colorado and was asked for my driver's license in order to purchase. I couldn't find it and gave them my BD and they still wouldn't sell to me. (I"m a senior citizen and can legally purchase cold medicine......). It was not an issue of my method of payment. These were on-the-shelf items not behind a counter or even regulated. Finally got the manager who was rude and snarled, "You don't have identification? I shoved my debit card with photo at her and I was finally allowed to purchase. We are also regularly carded at restaurants here in Idaho when we try to purchase wine and no I don't take it as a compliment. I'm insulted..
    So when some guns right people balk at having a background check to buy an assault rifle and magazines or any lethal weapon, I have to wonder who's paying them. Of course it's not a right to privacy....it's the gun lobby who don't want their lucrative sales to be impeded.
    My point is "Should it be easier for a senior citizen to get a gun than a drink?"
    The only "real" answer I've heard this guy give is that these guns may be needed to defend against the US government forces........hummmmm. In that case, THEY may need a drink.

    April 7, 2013 12:20 pm at 12:20 pm |
  18. McBob79

    Probably true but the real circus is government tat believes banning certain types of weapons will stop slaughters like Newtown.

    April 7, 2013 12:20 pm at 12:20 pm |
  19. Patrish

    Gun lovers always use the excuse that criminals don't care, but the mass shooting are NOT DONE BY CRIMINALS. They are be done by unbalances people which could be your neighbors. So get over NRA. States are starting to take action. You have more background check when getting a driver's license, a job than when buying a gun. Come down hard on guns shops and shows to do the background checks.

    April 7, 2013 12:20 pm at 12:20 pm |
  20. dd

    Now the violence and murder will really pick up in Connecticut! Only the Drug Gangs will be armed and innocent people will be defenseless. This is just like Chicago. Tough gun laws; drug gangs have their guns and get guns from over the border just like drugs; drug gangs murder; drug gang members get picked up gun violation; drug gang member gets out of jail by liberal judge or Jesse Jackson tandrum; more innocent children get murdered; Chicago Democrats get reelected; murders continue.

    April 7, 2013 12:24 pm at 12:24 pm |
  21. Jay Cry

    I see the Republicans are proposing there first JOBS bill after 4 years, Armed Guards in School. And some say they don't care about Jobs.

    April 7, 2013 12:24 pm at 12:24 pm |
  22. Just Me

    “But I will accept any rules that you feel necessary to your freedom. I am free, no matter what rules surround me. If I find them tolerable, I tolerate them; if I find them too obnoxious, I break them. I am free because I know that I alone am morally responsible for everything I do.”

    “The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress” by Robert Heinlein

    April 7, 2013 12:25 pm at 12:25 pm |
  23. GAK

    It was LaPierre himself who said back in the late 90's the "No one" should be allowed to buy a gun without having a background check. Now he is saying there should be NO back ground checks???, which begs the question,Did he lie to us then or is he now? Why does any law abiding citizen need armor piercing bullets?? Who does LaPierre represent the members of the NRA or the gun industry? How many members of the NRA actually oppose back ground checks? How may are in favor?? I would like to see the NRA release the numbers on how many of their members oppose and DON"T oppose back ground checks..But we will never see those as it might make LaPierre look bad..

    April 7, 2013 12:27 pm at 12:27 pm |
  24. Va Shooter

    The posters 'Patrick in Wisconsin' and 'SMc' are two examples of why gun rights supporters often consider dialog with anti-gunners to be pointless. They too often display a willful ignorance of facts, and repeat the same fallacies after every authoritative source possible has proved it wrong.

    Historians, expert linguists, and Supreme Court legal scholars have established beyond any reasonable doubt or opportunity for further debate what the intent and meaning of the 2nd Amendment is. II refers to an individual, private right to possess and wield (when necessary) firearms. This is fact. This is law. Supreme Law in the United States. Not opinion. So stop making yourselves look like clowns by questioning it the meaning.

    " Well Regulated" means well trained and competant in the language of the day when it was written. The militia were all able bodied men. There are many other examples of the phrase "well regulated" being used in that context, but NONE whatsoever showing the term being used to refer to laws or 'regulations' as in Federal Regulations.The term was not even used in that context back then. See GunCite(dot)org for references of "well-regulated" in use in other sources at that time.

    April 7, 2013 12:28 pm at 12:28 pm |
  25. dc

    The only one making outrageous allegations here is Malloy. No one is or has advocated selling weapons to criminals or the mentally ill-both are and have been prohibited under federal law from owning firearms. So now in Conn. if you want to go buy a box of shotgun shells for duck hunting, you have to first apply for a permit to do so? We're going to create a new government office to decide whom is issued these permits? What criteria is used to approve or deny them? Are records going to be kept for every purchase of a box of .22 shells? The only thing "clownish" here is that someone actually thinks this is a good idea.....wow.

    April 7, 2013 12:29 pm at 12:29 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14