A Quote by Jean Kennedy Smith

We need strong gun laws. How can people even ask a question about it? Gun control is so important. — © Jean Kennedy Smith
We need strong gun laws. How can people even ask a question about it? Gun control is so important.
I support gun control. But speaking honestly about the combustible mix of race and guns may be more important to stopping the slaughter in minority communities than any new gun-control laws.
Gun control advocates need to realize that passing laws that honest gun owners will not obey is a self-defeating strategy. Gun owners are not about to surrender their rights, and only the most foolish of politicians would risk the stability of the government by trying to use the force of the state to disarm the people.
If you are for gun control, then you are not against guns, because the guns will be needed to disarm people. So it’s not that you are anti-gun. You’ll need the police’s guns to take away other people’s guns. So you’re very Pro-Gun, you just believe that only the Government (which is, of course, so reliable, honest, moral and virtuous…) should be allowed to have guns. There is no such thing as gun control. There is only centralizing gun ownership in the hands of a small, political elite and their minions.
In Colorado, we passed universal background checks and magazine limits. We need to do that nationally, and we need to raise the purchase age, extend waiting periods for gun purchases, fund gun violence research, pass red flag laws, and more - no matter how hard the gun lobby tries to block it.
John Lott has done the most extensive, thorough, and sophisticated study we have on the effects of loosening gun control laws. Regardless of whether one agrees with his conclusions, his work is mandatory reading for anyone who is open-minded and serious about the gun control issue. Especially fascinating is his account of the often unscrupulous reactions to his research by gun control advocates, academic critics, and the news media.
They're still out there talking about gun control measures, as if somehow terrorists care about what our gun laws are.
Don't condemn the gangbangers, they've got guns that are trafficked, that are not enforced, that are straw purchased and they come into places even that have strong gun laws. Why? Because we don't have sensible gun legislation.
Do not forget that there are millions of Americans, who when they hear about gun control measures, are gonna be loudly applauding it. You know how many dumkoffs there are out there who think that it is the gun that is the problem in our culture, and you know how people believe in this gun control business 'cause whatever reasons they support it. You know it's gonna be applauded, and it's gonna be applauded in the Drive-By Media.
When the gun lobby fights gun-control legislation, its logic is clear: it does not like laws that prevent people from owning or using guns.
Reality: "If we can sue the gun manufacturers for human actions, does this mean we can sue the car manufacturers for being hit by a drunk driver?" They (in favour of gun control) must believe in the existence of a substantial number of persons who are willing and able to break serious laws such asthose prohibiting murder, assault, and robbery, yet who are not willing or able to break gun control laws. Dr.
If we don't get gun-control laws in this country, we are full of beans. To have the National Rifle Association rule the United States is pathetic. And I agree with Mayor Michael Bloomberg: It's time to put up or shut up about gun control for both parties.
The whole gun debate needs to be infused with a discussion about manhood. It's frustrating to hear debates about gun rights vs. gun control, and yet very few people say what's hidden in plain sight: It's really a contest of meanings about manhood.
If in the script there is an argument about gun control, the most precious document you could produce at 'The West Wing' that week is a passionate, intelligent case against gun control. We know how to do the other one.
If gun laws in fact worked, the sponsors of this type of legislation should have no difficulty drawing upon long lists of examples of criminal acts reduced by such legislation. That they cannot do so after a century and a half of trying - that they must sweep under the rug the southern attempts at gun control in the 1870-1910 period, the northeastern attempts in the 1920-1939 period, the attempts at both Federal and State levels in 1965-1976 - establishes the repeated, complete and inevitable failure of gun laws to control serious crime.
Strict gun laws are about as effective as strict drug laws...It pains me to say this, but the NRA seems to be right: The cities and states that have the toughest gun laws have the most murder and mayhem.
I work tirelessly advocating for gun violence prevention and promoting common-sense gun laws that could spare other parents the pain of having their child taken by senseless gun violence - laws the NRA's leadership has fought against relentlessly.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!