that's it for us here in washington. thanks for watching. guns under fire continues tomorrow. about 90% of americans say they want them. why isn't congress getting the message? that plus part two of our interview with gabby giffords. "piers morgan live" starts now. piers? we have much more coming up on gabby giffords with one of her closest friends, florida congresswoman debbie wassermann schultz. i want to welcome my studio audience and you at home, taking your questions and comments. we begin with the breaking news on north korea. pyongyang could launch a missile any minute now with absolutely no warning. i talked to a woman who knows just how dangerous and

unpredictable the regime could be. she was held prisoner for 140 days, only got out when bill clinton intervened. euna lee is here along with cnn was chief international correspondent, christiane amanpour. i want to go to kyung lah in seoul. what is the latest? i believe it's now tomorrow as far as we're concerned where you are, which means this could be the day that a missile is unleashed. is that your belief it will happen today? >> reporter: that's the belief of the south korean presidential office. they believe that because april 10th is the date that's been cited by pyongyang in a couple of other bulletins, they really believe that it is going to happen on april 10th. if you look at the pattern of when north korea has done these previous launches, they have always been in the morning time so the indication from the government is that they believe now is the highest probability of a potential missile launch. something i should mention, though, piers, is that normally the south korean oceans and

fisheries department is notified prior to any sort of launch. this time around, they weren't notified. you can read this two ways, either they're not going to do the launch right away or they're going to do it without any notification, which really tells us a little bit more about the unpredictability of kim jong-un. >> i've got a question for an audience member here which is relevant i think for you, because you're over in seoul at the moment. what is your question? >> i'm a south korean citizen. we have been living with numerous threats from north korea for over the past 50 years. so is the current threat different or is it even different from the ones in the past? >> that's a good point, isn't it? there have been so many of these saber-rattling threats. there is a feeling, dick cheney apparently briefed republicans today, he felt his quote, we could be in deep doo-doo in this situation because of the unpredictability of a new young leader in north korea.

what's the sense of the people you're getting in seoul? >> reporter: it's two-fold. one is that you're right, people who live in south korea, they're used to being told that they're going to be burnt down into a sea of fire. that's something that's normally said out of north korea. they're numb to it. so there isn't any sort of panic or extreme alarm from people of south korea. here's what is different. what is different is that the threats from pyongyang are now coming from that young unpredictable leader, he is untested. we simply don't know him. the rules are very different. we have a president in south korea who is a woman, also untested. the first woman to lead a country that has been traditionally very male oriented. so the players are different. but also, the threats are different. they have been rapid-fire, day after day after day. there's been a racheting up. there has been a rapid-fire progression of them. back now what appears to be the good old days of kim jong-il, they were a little more spaced out so it's a bit more

unpredictable. put all those factors together and the fact that they're speaking now more directly to the united states, this is a bit of a different game. even though south koreans, piers, may feel more numb to it than the international community. >> thank you very much indeed. christiane amanpour, you've covered this for a long time. how serious do you think it is? is it any different or do you detect it may be different? >> i think for all the reasons that kyung says, it's different mostly because nobody quite knows how kim jong-un is going to react, and unlike his father and his grandfather, when one of these provocations is racheted up, they seemed, according to the u.s., to know how to get off -- how to get on the off ramp. they're not sure whether this young leader does. that's the unpredictability. there's been a lot of fear about his nuclear threats. there's not a single official anywhere, south korea, the united states, japan, anybody who i've spoken to, with a shred of credibility who believes there's any chance of any nuclear device being launched any way, anyhow.

but the question is what will they do with their missile test. now it's sort of taken as a given, kind of that it's going to happen, they don't know when, will it be today, the 10th, will it be the 15th of april, which is the founder of north korea's birthday, when will it be. and what will happen. will it be a missile fired as a test, in an open area, in water, in some where that's unpopulated that doesn't create any harm or anything, in which case the united states today in testimony on capitol hill, the pacific command admiral said that he would recommend not shooting such a missile down. things change. if the missile is directed in anger at an ally, south korea, japan, guam, and then they would have to shoot that down. >> you have a unique perspective on this. obviously you've been held in north korea. what is your take on the current crisis? >> well, as christiane said, this is a new leader and we really don't know if he is the

main power or who is the power behind him. if you understand korean history, korea, 5,000 of korean history, they deal with invasion after invasion and they really do not like to deal with or controlled by a stronger or bigger country. it is important for north korea to portray themselves that it is independently strong country that can protect its citizens. >> and they are, by all accounts, by u.s. official accounts as well, desperate about their survival. they really do worry about their survival. they see regimes being toppled left and right all over the world. they know they're just in an armistice, not in a full peace with the united states and south korea, they thso they are worri. the question is how do you achieve some kind of resolution to this. the united states is relying a great deal on china. kerry will be there.

>> can china do enough, do you think? >> apparently the u.s. says no, not enough yet. it has regretted publicly what north korea's doing. there's a huge move in the chinese public media and public sphere saying gosh, you know, really, is it worth us sticking to this wayward ally. but the chinese army is quite committed to it so the new leader of china, according to u.s. officials, has to be persuaded that it's in china's interest as well as the whole region's interest to bring north korea into line. >> final question for you. when you were on the north side, what is your experience of the north koreans by comparison to the south koreans? >> if i recall my detention, i thought north korea -- in the evening news, they start the evening news with a comment from their allies how great their leader is. it was very important for them to show saving face and then

respect from other countries to its citizens. >> well, certainly a tense time. we shall see how it unfolds. thank you very much for coming today. i want to turn to the stabbing rampage on a texas college campus today. 14 people were injured. two of them are in critical condition tonight. joining me, two students at the lone star college, brothers jonathan and john paul clayton. they could have prevented the bloodshed with a hand gun. on the phone is student michael charlton, also texas state senator dan patrick, who is also in favor of concealed firearms on campuses. welcome to you all. let me start, if i may, with michael, because you actually witnessed what happened today. what did you see? >> well, i saw a male running toward me when a guy by the name of steven media, if i got that correct, tackled him to the ground and while others helped out and police also helped out as well. so basically, simultaneously they all came and wrestled him

to the ground with really no i would say no hesitation from him. >> did you see the weapon he was using? >> no. i did not see it. i was about 20 or 30 feet away, so i didn't see a clear view of it. but i do remember them wrestling him to the ground. he didn't struggle a lot. he just kind of gave up. >> let me turn to you, jonathan and john paul. although you didn't see the incident, you have quite strong views about how you think you should be empowered to deal with this kind of thing. tell me what you think should happen. >> well, sir, i think that you know that we as students, we are adults and the government does not permit us to have -- carry weapons even if you have the certificates and certification to carry a hand gun. i think that law should be changed for protection. >> so you basically both think -- >> i agree. >> right. you both think you should be allowed to carry guns at school?

>> yes, sir. if you're properly trained and have the certifications and all the legal papers, because 99.9% of all gun owners are legal, abiding citizens. >> you do have armed security guards there, right? >> correct. >> yes, sir, we do. we have our own police officers here. >> where were they? >> they are all throughout the campus, sir, but since there's about i'm guessing around eight of them, if i remember correctly, sir, and there's a couple hundred or thousand students on campus at one time, during this, so eight officers can't guard and protect everyone on campus. >> my argument would be that far from, with respect, allowing all the students to carry guns, which i think would descend the school into total wild west madness, isn't there an argument that this could have been a lot worse if the person carrying the knife had had a gun? they would all be dead, these students.

so although it's been used as an argument by people like yourselves in favor of more guns, i would argue it's a compelling situation where if there had been more guns, more people would have been dead. >> well, i can respect your argument, mr. piers. really, this is the only places we cannot legally carry a gun if you have the proper permits is college campuses, post offices and airports and now airports, you can legally carry knives and stuff, but then you can't even carry a knife legally on a college campus. and this particular incident didn't even involve a gun, but would allow us to protect ourselves just like we can anywhere else. so the law -- >> let me ask you both, don't you think -- how old are you both? >> i'm 22, sir. >> i'm 20 years old. >> i'm 26 years old. >> okay. do you not think if all the students are armed, that the kind of day-to-day conflict

which goes on on all schools and college campuses could very quickly escalate into much more dangerous situations if everybody had a gun? >> well, we're not saying everybody should have a gun. >> you're not saying everyone -- how many should have guns? >> anyone that's permitted and goes through the right training, sir, i think should be able to carry a gun. long as they go through the proper government safety laws, sir. >> and get the training. get the certifications that all gun owners are required to have to have a concealed hand gun permit on their person. >> on their person. >> dan patrick, let me come to you. do you agree with this? >> yes. in fact, i thought you were going to have a new issue tonight, piers. i thought you would want banning of knives all over america because you have wanted to ban guns and let's in a very serious mode, piers -- >> why would you start the conversation by being so completely facetious? >> because actually, the way you've been thinking about the

whole gun issue, i found just totally out of touch with reality. >> i know. it's crazy, isn't it. it's crazy that i think 100,000 americans being shot a year is out of control. crazy, i think the 30,000 americans who kill themselves every year or shoot others with guns is out of control. call me crazy. i think it's absolutely shameful. so i want to try and reduce the gun violence, not increase it. >> you don't reduce, you don't reduce gun violence or any violence by taking guns away from law-abiding citizens. >> you actually do. you actually do. >> you should have figured that out by now. secondly -- >> if you go to japan or britain or australia or a number of other countries i could name where they have very strict gun control laws, it is so difficult to get your hands on guns, you don't have the gun violence. it is a proven fact. >> yeah. well, this is america and our constitution gives us the right to bear arms. this is not tokyo. this is not finland. this is not whatever other country you want to talk about,

piers. this is the united states of america. and in america, where law-abiding citizens have guns, crime is down, like in texas. >> i've got a lot of americans in this audience who are all shaking their heads on what you're saying. how do you equate that? >> they're probably northeast liberals who don't understand that in texas, in texas -- >> actually, we are half an hour, as you know, half an hour from newtown. we are half an hour from newtown. >> that's fine. in texas, in texas, we believe in defending our families and our properties with guns and crime is down. in chicago, where you have some of the toughest laws against guns, crime is up and i wouldn't want to be out on the streets in chicago. i'll be out on the streets in houston or dallas and san antonio and feel safe. secondly, piers, thank god this young man did not have a gun today. think about the massacre that could have been stopped if another student had had a gun. and my guess is if this student with the knife had known that

people with the chl, law-abiding citizens had a gun, he wouldn't have stabbed 12 or 14 people today. we just had a gun class this past weekend in dallas offered to school teachers. it was free. 700 school teachers came out to take advantage of this course. piers, chl holders are responsible gun owners. all the things you're saying about it being the wild west, that's what they said back in the '90s when texas passed this law. there will be road rage, there will be barroom fights, there will be neighbors shooting each other over a noisy dog. none of that, piers, has ever happened. it hasn't happened. my heart breaks for what has happened in america, whether at college or an elementary or high school campus. it could happen anywhere. but in texas we believe we have a right to defend our life, our property and the lives of a third party if we can help them. >> okay. got to leave it there. thank you all very much. very quickly, christiane amanpour, i can see you reacting to that debate. what is your view?

because you've traveled all over the world. >> look, this debate has been going on for a long time. the fact of the matter is that in states inside the united states where there are tougher gun laws, there is lower gun crime. and i think you are right in saying that in these other countries which have had their own massacres which then took these measures, there has been very little if not any gun crime. so i think that is a real fact and i'm watching it on my own program, we know that thursday is going to be the real showdown day in the u.s. capitol to see how the congress reacts, newtown families are there. they have been talking about it. and they're very committed to sensible gun control. not taking away people's rights to have the guns that they're allowed to have. but look, even the columbine massacre they say wouldn't have happened had there been these background checks, so the third person would not have been able to buy the guns. >> the idea won't come down just

to that to me is offensive to the families at newtown. let's take a break. coming up, harry reid. filibuster or no filibuster? i will talk to various people about that and also gabby giffords. a remarkable interview she conducted earlier. we'll have a lot more on guns after the break. did you know, your eyes can lose vital nutrients as you age?

[ male announcer ] that's why there's ocuvite to help replenish key eye nutrients. ocuvite has a unique formula not found in your multivitamin to help protect your eye health. ocuvite. help protect your eye health. redesigned site has this new score planner tool with these cool sliders. what's this one do? i dunno. ♪every rose has it's thorn score planner is free to everyone. free score applies with enrollment in freecreditscore.com bret michaels slider still in beta.

stay top of mind with customers? from deals that bring them in with an offer... to social media promotions that turn fans into customers... to events that engage and create buzz... to e-mails that keep loyal customers coming back, our easy-to-use tools will keep you in front of your customers. see what's right for you at constantcontact.com/try.

she's improving every day but gabby giffords' life will never be the same after being shot in the head in arizona two years ago. she and her husband mark kelly are front and center in the battle for gun control. in a moving interview with cnn's dana bash, why trying to pass a new law is so difficult.

>> it's tough. >> it can be a tough issue. that's because of the influence. >> yes. >> of the nra. you know, the gun lobby. >> reporter: and what do you think about the nra's argument that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun? >> it doesn't work. it doesn't work. >> joining me now is congresswoman debbie wassermann schultz, good friend of gabby giffords and chair of the democratic national committee. welcome back to you. it was a very, very moving interview and fascinating in many ways because you have this scene of mark kelly firing a very similar glock gun to the one that obviously was used to shoot gabby, and she slightly jumps when he does it but they both say they are gun owners and they like guns. this is not what their campaign is about. tell me more about their philosophy on this. >> sure. gabby and mark have been strong supporters of the second amendment and active gun owners for many, many years, but they have balanced that, particularly

with her experience of having been shot in tucson, with common sense support for making sure that people who shouldn't be able to get a gun can't get one. so they support closing all the loopholes and making sure we have universal background checks. they support making sure that assault weapon like an ar-15 can't be accessed and doesn't need to be accessed in order to make sure that you have a right under the second amendment to own a gun. they support making sure that we limit high capacity magazines and not allow somebody to have any more than ten rounds in a magazine. so that we can reduce the likelihood. we know we'll never totally eliminate it, but these are 90/10 issues in america for a reason because like when i drove my three beautiful children to school this morning and dropped them off at the bus stop and at the carpool line, moms and dads across america want to know that the bad people who shouldn't have guns can't get them and

that the law prohibits them and will work to make sure they can't get them. >> i mean, i totally agree with everything you just said, as does the president of the united states, as do a lot of reasonable people in this country. but it looks to me like very little of what you would like to happen, i would like to happen is actually going to happen. the assault weapons ban has already disappeared. the high capacity magazines has disappeared. we're left now with a squabble over background checks which will end up being diluted. i mean, really in the end, where have we gone? the promises made to the families in newtown seem to me to have fallen on spectacularly deaf ears. >> you know, piers, i know that you in your heart have angst about that and i do, too, but having served 20 years as a legislator, i have learned over time that you can't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. and in the legislative process, sometimes we have to embrace the fact that we can get something significant done even if it's not everything we want. so i can tell you two years ago,

after -- i can't tell you how badly my heart was broken after gabby was shot, but i can tell you then that i was not at all sure, in fact, was convinced that we wouldn't be able to get anything done, particularly not background checks or anything that looked like restrictions on gun ownership and making sure we could prevent people who shouldn't have them, couldn't get guns. and now we have background checks within our grasp. we just need a few republican senators to use their head to embrace common sense and to embrace the 90% of americans and moms and dads across the country who drop their kids off at school every morning so that they can know comfortably that it is much less likely in america that a bad person can't get a gun. not that we're putting more guns in the hands of people who shouldn't have them. >> finally, very quickly, if you don't mind, this filibuster nonsense, i use that word very

deliberately, the idea that 14 republican senators are basically signed up to refusing to even allow a vote on gun control, it makes me puke, to be perfectly honest with you. what is your reaction to it? >> it's disgusting. it's unconscionable and it shows how cowardly they are. because the reason they won't give gabby giffords a vote, the folks in aurora a vote, the people of columbine and newtown a vote, is because they're afraid, because they don't want to face the 90% of americans who support making sure we can close those loopholes and prevent bad people from getting guns. they don't want to stand up to the nra. they don't have the nerve and they only care about their own ability to get re-elected and their political power. they don't care about protecting people in america from people who would do them harm with a gun. >> it is utter political and moral cowardice. thank you very much for joining me. next, connecticut senators on their push for gun control

and some smart people here in my studio with very different views on guns in america. you can tweet your questions and comments to us. [ male announcer] surprise -- you're having triplets. [ babies crying ] surprise -- your house was built on an ancient burial ground.

[ ghosts moaning ] surprise -- your car needs a new transmission. [ coyote howls ] how about no more surprises? now you can get all the online trading tools you need without any surprise fees. ♪ it's not rocket science. it's just common sense. from td ameritrade. it's just common sense. google's backyard for the wbing it on challenge.. [fight bell: ding, ding] what's your preferred search engine? search engine, uhh, probably google. if we do a side by side blind test comparison, and you end up choosing google, you get an xbox. i'll bet you the xbox, you bet me your son. well let's look up what you need. okay, i would do the left. yeah? what?! i am a daddy! bing wins it! bing won. bing did win. people prefer bing over google for the web's top searches. don't believe it? go to bingiton.com and see what you're missing.

join us at projectluna.com ♪ male narrator: there's something positive being generated in california. when ordinary energy is put in the hands of extraordinary people, amazing things happen. the kind of things that drive us to do more, to go further, to be better. we're dedicated to being a company you can count on, because you've always been customers we believe in. your energy plus ours. together, there's no limit to what we can achieve.

sometimes people in a fit of passion purchase a hand gun to do bad things with it. mr. president, even as my dad did, kill themselves. waiting a few days helps. requiring a simple background check every time a gun is sold

is common sense. >> an emotional and personal appeal from senate majority leader harry reid on universal background checks. here with me now, connecticut's two senators who say if their colleagues won't take a stand on gun control, it will be nothing short of insulting and outrageous to the memory of the victims of newtown. joining me are senators richard blumenthal and chris murphy. i think we should read out the names of the senators who signed up for the filibuster. mitch mcconnell, rand paul, cruz, rubio, inhofe, moran, burr, johnson, enzi, crapo and senator roberts. shame on all of you. i find it completely outrageous that over something as important as this, these characters would sign up to basically refuse to allow a vote. what is your reaction as to this letter? >> my reaction is the american

people are going to be very aghast and deeply angry if a handful, small group of united states senators block a vote. the president has said that the newtown victims as well as the victims of aurora and of virginia tech and columbine deserve a vote. and so do the american people. and i'm confident that if there is a vote, we will be on the right side of history. obviously the ban on illegal trafficking, strengthening school safety as well as a national criminal background check are essential, and senator murphy and i are going to be championing a ban on high capacity magazines and joining and supporting a ban on assault weapons. so we have the core of a very, very viable package that the american people will welcome and that will make us safer as a nation. >> senator murphy, how is any of this going to happen? it can happen in individual states like connecticut, and i applaud guys for doing what

you've been doing there. but how is this going to happen nationally when there's absolutely zero interest in making this happen from a bunch of cowardly politicians who want to protect their own backyards? >> well, listen, there's zero interest amongst 14 members of the senate, but 14 members of the senate can't stop this debate from proceeding. today we had about an equal number of republicans come out and say that they were going to oppose the filibuster. so we're confident that we're going to be able to win the votes to proceed to a debate. but frankly, it's a debate on a bill that's not really a debate out there in the public. 90% of americans want universal background checks. the only place where this is controversial is here in the united states senate. we're hoping to get an agreement in the next day or so on universal background checks so we can proceed to a conversation about a ban on these high capacity clips that the newtown families are here pushing for. i think we're going to get to this debate next week but it can't just be a debate on universal background checks. we need to start talking about some of the root causes of the tragedy in newtown. >> senators, i applaud for the

work you're doing. it's incredibly important. poli please keep joining me, thanks for joining me. >> welcome to you all. steve latourette, where do you sit with all this? >> tonight i sit in chicago and i'm a little nervous based on what the guy in texas said, to tell you the truth. i hope i have the opportunity to see safe streets. i tell you, we've talked about this before. it was interesting to listen to debbie wasserman schultz. she talks about the perfect not being the enemy of the good. then we have this overheated rhetoric. the thing to do is to do these universal background checks. it's recognized by the supreme court as a reasonable restriction on the second amendment, people would go for

it but some people want to continue to have the issue. mike thompson, democrat from california, recently said you know, one of the reasons we're having trouble getting conservative democrats is because of the overheated rhetoric from the left. so this is not rocket science. you have to do the doable. what's doable this week in the senate and the house are universal background checks. >> okay. kelly ann, it seems to me imminently sensible. why wouldn't there just be unanimity on a universal background check? >> you're presuming there are background checks that will work. everybody wants universal background checks that will work. >> do you? >> of course. the ones we currently have in place have been woefully, painfully executed. in 2010, it's all government data, 76,000 people were denied a firearm purchase as a result of failing a background check. of the 76,000, 44 were arrested, 13 were actually prosecuted.

>> right. here's my point to that. i totally agree they should enforce the law better. i agree with that. but on the other hand, 70,000 odd people were barred from getting the weapon. that's a start. it's better than nothing, isn't it? >> it's a start but we don't want to do things that just make the us feel better. we want to do things that work and protect our children, including my four. let me just make a comment. i'm so happy, it's great to see you, congressman latourette. i'm so happy he said what he said because i was just astonished here at congresswoman wasserman schultz blaming the republicans who are worried about their re-election when i will gladly give this seat up next time you invite me to senator mark pryor of arkansas, to senator mary landrieu of louisiana, both who are democrats who fear their own re-election prospects this year and are absolutely -- >> i totally agree with you. >> they are cowards worried about the election. >> there are six or seven democratic senators who are utterly gutless, too, about this. because my definition of gutless is not that they don't agree with me or the president. it's that they're voting against

their conscience and everybody knows it. >> not doing what's right for the country. i actually disagree with you. i think that comes down to a number of politicians that are frankly more concerned about the re-election than they are about what is right for this country. it's really unfortunate. you look at mitch mcconnell. this is a guy running for re-election in kentucky, he could very well be challenged by someone further to the right than he is. that's his challenge. he's not concerned about what the country wants, 91% of the country wants. he's concerned about his constituency. >> that's really unfair to senator mcconnell. >> i agree. i don't think it's fair to mitch. >> why be fair to him? mitch mcconnell signed up on this letter and he's one of the people -- >> hold on, piers. that's not the point. he might actually believe it. i disagree with him profoundly but let's not assume everybody is operating in bad faith. if we want to have a real conversation, we can't assume everyone who disagrees with us -- >> to not even allow a vote on something like gun control after what happened at sandy hook? i'm sorry, that is shameful. >> he's not even allowing for a

conversation. if you're putting a filibuster you're not allowing the conversation to happen. >> harry reid runs the senate. harry reid couldn't get a vote by his democratically controlled senate last month on assault weapons. okay? let's just be honest about the facts and figures here. senator mcconnell is the minority leader in the united states senate. he does not have the majority. senator murphy is telling us the truth from connecticut. he just told you, piers, that this filibuster will fail because there will be enough votes, the cloture, to end the filibuster. it will go to a vote but people who filibuster like senator rand last month that captured everybody's imagination when he filibustered on drones, he got attorney general holder to answer the question. >> because he made a good point and most people agreed with him. on thissen one, 90% of the amern people want background checks. >> it doesn't matter, though. >> yes, it matters. >> here's why it doesn't matter, piers. >> hold your thought. hold your response. because i want you to think about it doesn't matter. 90% of americans agree with something and you don't.

we'll come back after the break with more on this, north korea and other hot issues and some questions from my lively audience tonight. everyone's retirement dream is different;

how we get there is not. we're americans. we work. we plan. ameriprise advisors can help you like they've helped millions of others. to help you retire your way, with confidence. ♪ that's what ameriprise financial does. that's what they can do with you.

let's get to work. ameriprise financial. more within reach. try e-mail marketing from constantcontact. it's the fastest, easiest way to create great-looking custom e-mails that bring customers through your door. sign up for your free trial today at constantcontact.com/try.

back with my live audience and very opinionated group.

we left the viewers on a cliffhanger there. >> tell me why you were wrong. >> you said it didn't matter that 90% of the american people want universal background checks. it's unimportant? >> yes, it's unimportant. let me preface this by saying i actually support universal background checks. i support reasonable gun control. i don't want to be positioned as the gun nut here. however, we don't want to win this argument by the wrong means. there was a time when 91% of people opposed gay marriage. there was a time when 91% of people opposed civil rights. just because americans want it doesn't mean it's right. after 9/11, 90% of people supported the patriot act. let's not put gun supporters in a box as crazy. >> isn't it just common sense gun proposals we're talking about? we're not talking about assault weapons or the size of magazines. >> what part is common sense? tell us specifically. >> someone who is criminal or mentally ill -- [ speaking simultaneously ] >> 40% of gun trades in america,

nobody has a clue who is selling to who. how can that be -- >> but obama keeps using that statistic, it was discredited by the professor who ran the poll. >> say 10%, it's still a bad number. >> regardless of the facts. the point is that i want to know if i held up the senate version of the bill to you right now, abby, what part of it deals with mental health, the kind of mental illness adam lanza had? >> it's not part of the conversation. >> it's not part of the legislation -- >> it is implicitly part of the legislation. >> implicitly? it's either in there or it's not. >> let me take a question from the audience. you have a powerful question but it needs to be asked. >> do you think it would have, if any, if a parent of a child who was killed in newtown, what impact if any do you think it would have on congress or america at large? >> it's a very interesting point. there has been a parallel on another issue recently when we had senator rob portman who did

a complete u-turn on gay marriage and gay rights because his son said dad, i'm gay. so when you have a personal connection or the american people will be exposed to the hideous photographs of those poor children, i think it would change things. >> yeah. i think having a personal connection obviously would make a difference. senator portman had a difficult set of circumstances, then he came out in my opinion on the right side of the equation. but i feel a little outgunned here. i know that's a bad expression. but i'm here in chicago, dangerous chicago, everybody's there with you. i will tell you that the 90% thing, you know, it's a republican form of democracy that protects us from running off and doing things that 50%, 60%, 80 p% of the american peop want us to do. i agree with that point. i want to go back, the very first time i appeared on your show, i said this is the solution and we need to find the solution. i'm glad you've now come to my point of view.

>> but steven, on the point raised by deb from the audience, would it make a difference, do you think, to public opinion in the way that we saw the civil rights debate change dramatically when victims of the klan were photographed and then you had the vietnam war debate change dramatically when you had the hideous pictures of american troops and so on. would it change things? >> i got to tell you, any senator or member of the house of representatives that isn't very familiar with what happened in newtown and columbine and aurora has been living in a cave some place. people get it. but what -- you have to find what chuck schumer calls the sweet spot. you have to do the doable. and the doable always was the universal background check and where i have to, although i have great respect for kelly ann, just because background check isn't perfect, it's a little like the e-verify argument that just because we catch a few people we aren't supposed to catch doesn't mean it isn't worth the effort. we're a smart enough country to get this right. >> let me ask on that point, kelly ann.

what i don't understand is this. why is it that americans are quite happy to have a full registry of car purchase and car ownership but not guns? what is the big deal? even if the universal background check did lead to some form of data base of who owns guns, what the hell's wrong with that? >> i'm just going to venture a couple guesses. one is that cars kill more people than guns by about three-fold, according to fbi statistics. >> the car's primary purpose is to get people from a to b. guns' only purpose is to kill things. >> which amendment to the united states constitution allows you to have protection to have a car? >> this doesn't infringe on our second amendment rights at all, though. >> the bill does that. >> there's an argument. >> all i hear, all i hear is second amendment rights, second amendment rights. what about the rights, what about the rights of those 6 and 7-year-old children not to be blown to pieces?

where do they come in? higher than people's second amendment rights to own a gun. >> that's 100% to 0%. >> let me go to david. i want to get your reaction. you raised a question. what do you think generally of this debate? >> i think that the gentleman that you were just speaking with, he said that people are -- they know what happened and they're in tune to what happened but i think the visual, i think you brought up a very good point about the civil rights era and all of that, that when you see -- it's one thing to sort of say okay, it happened. but it's a totally different thing to see a visual of that. i believe that if people in congress who are hesitating or doing those things in washington, if they were to see those 6 and 7 year olds and they were to see those bodies, i think they wouldn't hesitate. >> i can't get it out of my head. >> that's because you see a relationship between those poor dead children and really bad gun laws. it's not that the people in congress who support guns don't care about 7-year-old children.

they just don't think that an assault weapons ban is going to stop those children from dying. i think they're wrong. let me be clear. let's not characterize them as being who don't care about 7-year-old kids. >> let's come back, because interesting things going on tonight. a huge party happening at the white house. wonder how everyone feels about the white house partying away in sequester times. at tyco integrated security, we consider ourselves business optimizers. how?

by building custom security solutions that integrate video, access control, fire and intrusion protection. all backed up with world-class monitoring centers, thousands of qualified technicians, and a personal passion to help protect your business. when your business is optimized like that, there's no stopping you. we are tyco integrated security. and we are sharper. withyou'll find reviewsve time, on home repair to healthcareon.

written by people just like you. you want to be sure the money you're about to spend is money well spent. angie's list -- reviews you can trust. [ male announcer ] that's why there's ocuvite to help replenish key eye nutrients. ocuvite has a unique formula not found in your multivitamin to help protect your eye health. ocuvite. help protect your eye health. diarrhea, gas, bloating? yes! one phillips' colon health probiotic cap each day helps defend against these digestive issues with three strains of good bacteria. live the regular life. phillips'.

lito book this fabulous hotel. michael, tell us why you used priceline express deals well, you can see if the hotel is pet friendly before you book it. and i got a great deal without bidding. and where's your furry friend? oh, i don't have a cat. priceline savings without bidding.

it's party time tonight in the white house. sounds like it's party time here. president obama and the first lady are hosting a music celebration with big-name guests. the second place where the people's house close because of the budget cuts. so, in a week, there will be no more air shows in the navy's blue angels because of the sequester, which cost a hundred thousand dollars to the bases. we now have this great party going on at the white house. mark, is this just, the white house, again, misplaying things? >> i think it's much adieu about nothing. there's not been a presidential

administration in the last 30 years where there's been some budget issue where they say yeah, but they had a party, yeah, but they had a celebration, they spent money. it's a drop in the bucket. >> the lighthouse tours are $2 million a year. this is probably not that far off from that. >> if justin timberlake goes to the white house tour, anyone can go. >> and a lot of the sweet kids that everyone is trying to talk about. like the white house tours. i don't know if it was true of every administration. i think george w. bush was in the add min straigs at this time. >> it was paid for by the end of the administration. i would imagine the state is paying for all the squurt and everything educational. president obama makes the 5% off of his salary thing and he cuts the white house to the america public. at the same time, business as usual for all of the party goers. am i getting worked up for the wrong reason here? >> yeah, you're getting would recollected up for the wrong reason.

he's the president of the united states. and if he wants to have a party, he should have a party. my difficulty with the way the administration has handled sequestration, it's like a school levy. when a school levy fails, rather than addressing costs, they say we're going to whack the band or take out the football program or make your kid walk to school. so i think the president misstepped when he did the easter egg hunt. if he's a country music fan, god love him and i hope he has fun. >> tiffany, ask your question very quickly? >> sure, my question is what sort of message does it send when you have people like beyonce and jay-z traveling to e cuba? >> again, much adieu about nothing. you have to worry about a reasonable trade policy. beon say going on a culture tour is nothing. >> there are very prominent

figures in our country and i do think it sends a wrong message. you've got cuban american legislators in the u.s. congress and they're upset about this. not just because they're a republican and beon say and jay-z partied with the president. they have serious questions about how they got there. >> the treasury department is a go. >> you would think that his congressman would care a little bit more about getting our fiscal house in order than where beyonce and jay-z spend their time. on the other hand, they could be well ahead of their times. i think a few years down the road, that embargo will be lifted. this blockade has done nothing but make the people scared. >> the good news is, as a brit, i'm allowed to go to cuba. steven, final word to you on the

great beyonce, jay-z cuban scandal. >> you know, if they can score some cigars and bring them back, i'm all for it. >> okay. we'll be right back after the break. ♪ then it might alert your button flies all the ♪ ♪ girls and the guys wanna keep that credit score ♪ ♪ high like a private jet free-credit-score-dot-com ♪ ♪ don't forget! narrator: offer applies with enrollment in freecreditscore.com plays a key role throughout our lives. one a day women's 50+ is a complete multivitamin designed for women's health concerns as we age.

it has 7 antioxidants to support cell health. one a day 50+. email marketing from constant contact reaches people in a place they're checking every day -- their inbox. and it gives you the tools to create custom emails that drive business. it's just one of the ways constant contact can help you grow your small business. sign up for your free trial today at constantcontact.com/try.

there is no wa

i want to thank all of my guests tonight and, of course, this terrific studio audience.