Two million felons have tried to buy a gun and, because of the background check, have been denied.

To be smart on crime, we should not be in a position of constantly reacting to crime after it happens. We should be looking at preventing crime before it happens.

I don’t think we need more gun control laws.

The NICS database has holes big enough to drive a Mack truck through.

The policemen or soldiers are only a gun in the establishments hand. They make the racist secure in his racism.

Fixing a broken immigration system. Protecting our kids from gun violence. Equal pay for equal work, paid leave, raising the minimum wage. All these things still matter to hardworking families; they are still the right thing to do; and I will not let up until they get done.

Should there be cameras everywhere in outdoor streets? My personal view is having cameras in inner cities is a very good thing. In the case of London, petty crime has gone down. They catch terrorists because of it. And if something really bad happens, most of the time you can figure out who did it.

I think we ought to raise the age at which juveniles can have a gun.

How accurately can the law fix the crime? There has to be a mechanism for very fast action. The law is like this: catch them and punish them.

For centuries the death penalty, often accompanied by barbarous refinements, has been trying to hold crime in check; yet crime persists. Why? Because the instincts that are warring in man are not, as the law claims, constant forces in a state of equilibrium.

The act of policing is, in order to punish less often, to punish more severely.

‚Getting smart on crime‘ does not mean reducing sentences or punishments for crimes.

The appropriate response to terrorist crimes is police work, which has been successful worldwide.

Do countries with strong gun control laws have lower murder rates? Only if you cherry-pick the data.

Sometimes if you want to get rid of the gun, you have to pick the gun up.

Beto’s copy of the Bill of Rights goes from one to three. Mine includes the Second Amendment. But there are a whole host of people here in Washington… they would be happy to confiscate America’s guns. And if you don’t believe that, then you probably also still believe in Bigfoot.

There is a group of people that I think in good faith honestly believe that further curtailing our Second Amendment rights will enhance public safety. But there’s another group that just hates the Second Amendment.

Most Americans think there’s already universal background checks. They don’t understand why there wouldn’t be a background check to purchase a weapon.

People should not be in a position where their children have access to weapons and ammunition.

In religious and in secular affairs, the more fervent beliefs attract followers. If you are a moderate in any respect – if you’re a moderate on abortion, if you’re a moderate on gun control, or if you’re a moderate in your religious faith – it doesn’t evolve into a crusade where you’re either right or wrong, good or bad, with us or against us.

As for gun control advocates, I have no hope whatever that any facts whatever will make the slightest dent in their thinking – or lack of thinking.

Punishment is the last and the least effective instrument in the hands of the legislator for the prevention of crime.

Guns are bad, I tell you.

Some of my colleagues argue that by further curtailing our Second Amendment rights, they can enhance public safety. Fine, the burden of proof is on them.

I have a very strict gun control policy: if there’s a gun around, I want to be in control of it.