A Quote by Mike Quigley

The people of Chicago have made it very clear that they favor sensible restrictions on gun ownership. — © Mike Quigley
The people of Chicago have made it very clear that they favor sensible restrictions on gun ownership.
We are for reasonable and sensible gun ownership so long as it's responsible in the way that criminals can't get it.
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.
I don't think it is impossible to make the case to sensible Americans that far greater restrictions on their so-called gun rights is imperative for public safety. It is an argument we can win.
I'm liberal on every social aspect, probably. More liberal than people would even believe. But there's still some of that Texas in me, as far as the gun debate. I wish there were no guns; I'm all for gun restrictions. But I'm also of the mind-set, if nothing changes, I'm getting a gun.
We're in the west, and we have a rich history of gun ownership and hunting, but people here across the state understand the difference between public safety and personal ownership and that we can have both if we protect the second amendment.
When I go to Lockheed or General Motors... all those union members are gun owners. They believe in responsible gun ownership and responsible gun safety, but all those guys are gun owners, and that's not necessarily an issue in New Jersey.
As gun owners, my husband and I understand that the Second Amendment is most at risk when a criminal or deranged person commits a gun crime. These acts only embolden those who oppose gun ownership. Promoting responsible gun laws protects the Second Amendment and reduces lives lost from guns.
I react pragmatically. Where the market works, I'm for that. Where the government is necessary, I'm for that. I'm deeply suspicious of somebody who says, 'I'm in favor of privatization,' or, 'I'm deeply in favor of public ownership.' I'm in favor of whatever works in the particular case.
We have seen that this great labor question cannot be solved save by assuming as a principle that private ownership must be held sacred and inviolable. The law, therefore, should favor ownership, and its policy should be to induce as many as possible of the people to become owners.
Legal gun ownership always prevails over the emotionalism of the gun control movement.
There is no such thing as gun control. There is only centralizing gun ownership into the hands of a small, political elite and their minions.
If you get to the point in your career where you're running with a gun - I've yet to run with a gun. I've stood still with a gun, and I've walked with a gun, but I've never run with a gun. Running with a gun, to me, that's when you know you've really made it.
The ultimate goal of the gun ban 'scientific community' is to make the 'gun ownership is a disease' mantra into politically settled science.
We hate Chicago and Chicago hates us and unfortunately he's on the other team and he's the big gun.
I've made it clear I like Chicago.
Gun violence in Chicago is unacceptable. It threatens everything we have done together and all of the progress we have made in other areas.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!