Matt Letscher Quotes

I support an assault weapons ban, and I'll tell you why. We already have one in California, so I don't support doing anything above what we do in California.

I'm the original co-sponsor of an assault weapons ban.

I think that there should be an assault weapons ban.

I've come to the conclusion that military style weapons really don't have any place in our society. We ought to reinstate the assault weapons ban that served us well for 10 years from 1994 to 2004.

Plenty of gun opponents have pointed out the obvious: that the Founding Fathers could never have envisioned the kinds of 'arms' that exist today - Washington, Jefferson, and the rest had never even seen a bullet. Musket balls for guns that required constant reloading were the 'arms' of the day.

Firearms manufacturers usually find themselves playing defense.

The major political battles about guns in our society concern handguns and assault weapons, not long arms like hunting rifles.

My position on guns is the same position I've had for a long, long time. That position is that I don't line up a hundred percent with the NRA. I don't see eye to eye with the NRA on every issue.

Once they ban rifles, they're gone forever.

It's just unbelievable to me that the National Rifle Association has so much power.

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.

People should remember that in the 2000s, the gun lobby got a lot passed: they got riders added to appropriations bills. They got immunity for the gun industry. They successfully managed the expiration of the assault weapons ban.

We're not saying 'no guns.' We are saying we want to regulate semi-automatic weapons and the accessories that make them fully automatic because fully automatic weapons are banned.

We must permanently reinstate the Assault Weapons Ban and the restrictions on high capacity magazines.

I am for the Second Amendment, but I am for common-sense gun legislation.

Mexico has strict gun control. You cannot own a gun in Mexico.

Semi-automatic weapons have no socially redeeming purpose.

My belief is that guns are too easy to get in America. My belief is that the NRA has bought much of our congress, to the point that guns are actually the only unregulated consumer product in America. Think about that. It's stunning.

I don't believe gun owners have rights.

When we talk about protecting our right to have guns, we are talking about protecting our right to shoot bullets. So what is it that's so important to shoot at?

I don't think there's any reason on Earth why people should have access to automatic and semiautomatic weapons unless they're in the military or in the police.

I know people get upset and go, 'They're going to take away the assault weapon'. But who needs an assault weapon? Like, really, unless you're carrying out an assault.

If, indeed, a firearm were more dangerous to its possessors than to potential aggressors, would it not make sense for the government to arm all criminals, and let them accidentally shoot themselves? Is this absurd? Yes, and yet the government, of course, is arming criminals.

There is no reason for anybody to have an assault weapon.

The Brady Act was passed in response to what Congress described as an 'epidemic of gun violence.'