A Quote by Gary Ackerman

We're not looking at banning all weapons. — © Gary Ackerman
We're not looking at banning all weapons.
This would be a very good moment to institute a call for imposing the Chemical Weapons Convention on the Middle East. The actual Chemical Weapons Convention. Not the version that [Barack] Obama presented in his address to the nation and that media commentators repeat. What he said is that the convention bars the use of chemical weapons. He knows better. And so do the commentators. The Chemical Weapons Convention calls for banning the production, storage and use of chemical weapons, not just the use. So why omit production and storage?
I've had people say to me, 'Well, I enjoy going to the firing range and using the assault weapons.' But the pleasure derived from that compared to the horrendous damage that it can do, we believe that the damage warrants banning assault weapons.
It is my view that there is no sensible military use for nuclear weapons, whether "strategic" weapons, "tactical" weapons, "theatre" weapons, weapons at sea or weapons in space.
Nations have succeeded before in banning classes of weapons - chemical, biological and cluster munitions; landmines; blinding lasers.
What is the only provocation that could bring about the use of nuclear weapons? Nuclear weapons. What is the priority target for nuclear weapons? Nuclear weapons. What is the only established defense against nuclear weapons? Nuclear weapons. How do we prevent the use of nuclear weapons? By threatening to use nuclear weapons. And we can't get rid of nuclear weapons, because of nuclear weapons. The intransigence, it seems, is a function of the weapons themselves.
My goal is to maintain the international norm on banning chemical weapons. I want that enforcement to be real. I want it to be serious. I want people to understand that gassing innocent people, delivering chemical weapons against children is not something we do. It's prohibited in active wars between countries. We certainly don't do it against kids. And we've got to stand up for that principle.
Banning guns is like banning forks in an attempt to stop making people fat.
I'll be bossy and damn proud! Banning words, please. Try banning the system that produces polices that promote inequity.
The people that are proposing banning assault weapons, well, first of all they're already banned. Assault weapon is a fully automatic, those are already banned.
Banning guns because of their misuse is like banning the First Amendment because one might libel or slander.
I definitely think there should be stronger gun safety laws, including prohibiting the sale of assault weapons, probably banning the sale of certain magazines that allow you to fire a large amount of bullets.
No, we're not looking at how to control criminals... we're talking about banning the AK-47 and semi-automatic guns.
When did banning anything, ever work? I mean, we banned liquor once in this country, oh, that worked like a charm, didn't it, folks? You couldn't find a drink in the roaring 20's, could ya? See that's the problem with the banning thing! I say why stop there, let's not ban guns, I know, let's ban crime!
If Iraq's weapons are weapons of mass destruction, surely ours are weapons of growth and nurturing.
Why can't a democrat get fired up about protecting the environment and enacting gun control legislation just as right wing republicans get fired up about making sure that children have access to assault weapons and banning 'the Catcher in the Rye' and 'Harry Potter'?
Chemical weapons, biological weapons, and nuclear weapons should never be used.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!