Mark Udall Quotes

I strongly believe that the Second Amendment creates an individual right to possess and use guns for purposes of both hunting and self-defense.

We have to fulfill what the real meaning of the Second Amendment is: reasonable access to guns for self-protection and for hunting. And there's no room in America for these semiautomatic, automatic and other kinds of weapons that are simply designed to cause mass havoc.

I have no problem with responsible gun owners who own weapons for self-protection, hunting, or just sport. The ones who believe they have a constitutional right to 100-round magazines to fight off I don't know what - a zombie apocalypse? - try to shut down dialogue with threats and other macho posing because of their flawed beliefs.

I don't see any need for citizens to own semi-automatic assault rifles, any more than I do nuclear weapons. Those aren't self-defense weapons.

I would respectfully disagree that the right to own a military-style weapon is a God-given right. I didn't see that anywhere in the Bible that I read.

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

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.

I support gun safety measures, and I'll tell you, I grew up in a family of gun owners and hunters, and I went hunting with my dad as a kid, and you know, I have deep respect for the Second Amendment and the culture of our country.

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.

Semi-automatic weapons have no socially redeeming purpose.

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.

Gun bans disarm victims, putting them at the mercy of murderers or terrorists who think nothing of breaking the gun laws.

When the Bill of Rights was written, no one owned a MAG5100, 100-round magazine for an M-16. The concept of a mass slaughter carried out over a matter of minutes was incomprehensible.

Gun control means control. It means control for the government and the government starts controlling the people.

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.

More guns equaling more safety is a slippery slope, and what makes it so is human blood.

If the Founding Fathers could have looked into a crystal ball and seen AK-47s and Glock semi-automatic pistols, I think they would say, you know, 'That's not really what we mean when we say bear arms.'

We know that when law abiding citizens who know how to utilize a firearm have one on their person, it helps prevent crime.

I'm 100 percent behind the Second Amendment. I believe it's not just a hunting right. It's a right for everyone to carry their weapons.

The right to bear arms? What about the right to live?

I am in support of the NRA position on gun control.

Gun Control? You control your gun, and I’ll control mine.

I don’t want American citizens killing American citizens.