Ted Cruz on Gun Control
Lack of individual right to guns leads to confiscation
The court could rule that not a single person in this room has any right under the Second Amendment and the government could confiscate your guns. In any Republican primary, everyone is going to say they support the Second Amendment.
But the voters are savvier than that. They recognize that people's actions don't always match their words. I've got a proven record fighting to defend the Second Amendment.
Source: Fox Business Republican 2-tier debate
, Jan 14, 2016
Obama is coming for our guns
Friend, I own guns. I'm planning on keeping them.˙But there's a problem: Obama is coming for our guns. You see: Obama's aides have alerted the press that if Congress won't cooperate--
Obama will use executive actions to, "keep guns out of the hands of criminals and others who shouldn't have access to them," it reads. By "others who shouldn't have...them," Obama means you and me.
Source: Washington Post 2015 coverage of 2016 presidential hopefuls
, Oct 16, 2015
2nd Amendment is ultimate check against government tyranny
"The Second Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice," Cruz has said, per the
New York Times. "It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny--for the protection of liberty."
[Other Republicans assert similar sentiments]: Rick Santorum has said, "The Second Amendment is there to protect the First Amendment!"
Rand Paul is an ardent defender of the Second Amendment. Rick Perry is an NRA supporter and Second Amendment advocate
Source: Rolling Stone magazine on 2016 presidential hopefuls
, Jun 18, 2015
Opposes unreasonable and burdensome gun restrictions
Ted Cruz has led the way in defense of our right to keep and bear arms.
Source: Campaign website, www.tedcruz.org, "Issues"
, Jul 17, 2011
- Authored a brief on behalf of 31 states supporting the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms
- Argued against unreasonable and burdensome gun restrictions
Honored by a 2008 resolution passed by the National Board of the NRA, thanking Ted for leading the States before the Supreme Court in the DC gun case, and noting that his "efforts made this victory for the American people possible."
Voted NO on banning high-capacity magazines of over 10 bullets.
- The term 'large capacity ammunition feeding device' means a magazine or similar device that has an overall capacity of more than 10 rounds of ammunition
- It shall be unlawful for a person to import, sell, manufacture, or possess a large capacity ammunition feeding device.
- Shall not apply to the possession of any large capacity ammunition feeding device otherwise lawfully possessed before 2013.
- Shall not apply to qualified or retired law enforcement officers.
Proponent's Argument for voting Yes: Sen. BLUMENTHAL: This amendment would ban high-capacity magazines which are used to kill more people more quickly and, in fact, have been used in more than half the mass shootings since 1982. I ask my colleagues to listen to law enforcement, their police, prosecutors who are outgunned by criminals who use these high-capacity magazines. I ask that my colleagues also listen to the families of those killed by people who
used a high-capacity magazine.
Opponent's Argument for voting No: Sen. GRASSLEY. I oppose the amendment. In 2004, which is the last time we had the large-capacity magazine ban, a Department of Justice study found no evidence banning such magazines has led to a reduction in gun violence. The study also concluded it is not clear how often the outcomes of the gun attack depend on the ability of offenders to fire more than 10 shots without reloading. Secondly, there is no evidence banning these magazines has reduced the deaths from gun crimes. In fact, when the previous ban was in effect, a higher percentage of gun crime victims were killed or wounded than before it was adopted. Additionally, tens of millions of these magazines have been lawfully owned in this country for decades. They are in common use, not unusually dangerous, and used by law-abiding citizens in self-defense, as in the case of law enforcement.
Reference: Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act;
Bill S.Amdt. 714 to S. 649
; vote number 13-SV103
on Apr 17, 2013
Opposes restricting the Second Amendment.
Cruz opposes the CC Voters Guide question on the Second Amendment
Christian Coalition publishes a number of special voter educational materials including the Christian Coalition Voter Guides, which provide voters with critical information about where candidates stand on important faith and family issues.
The Christian Coalition Voters Guide summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: "Further restrictions on the right to keep and bear arms"
Source: Christian Coalition Voter Guide 12-CC-q10 on Oct 31, 2012
Oppose the United Nations' Arms Trade Treaty.
Cruz signed Letter to Pres. Obama from 50 Senators
Dear President Obama:
We write to express our concern and regret at your decision to sign the United Nations' Arms Trade Treaty. For the following reasons, we cannot give our advice and consent to this treaty:
We urge you to notify the treaty depository that the US does not intend to ratify the Arms Trade Treaty, and is therefore not bound by its obligations. As members of the Senate, we pledge to oppose the ratification of this treaty, and we give notice that we do not regard the US as bound to uphold its object and purpose.
Source: Letter to Obama from 50 Senators 13-UNATT on Sep 25, 2013
- The treaty violates a 2009 red line laid down by your own administration: "the rule of consensus decision-making." In April 2013, after the treaty failed to achieve consensus, it was adopted by majority vote in the UN General Assembly.
- The treaty allows amendments by a 3/4 majority vote. When amended, it will become a source of political and legal pressure on the US to comply in practice with amendments it was unwilling to accept.
- The treaty includes only a weak, non-binding reference to the lawful ownership and use of firearms, and recognizes none of these activities, much less individual self-defense, as fundamental individual rights. It encourages governments to collect the identities of individual end users of imported firearms at the national level,
which would constitute the core of a national gun registry
- The State Department has acknowledged that the treaty is "ambiguous." By becoming party to the treaty, the US would therefore be accepting commitments that are inherently unclear.
- The criteria at the heart of the treaty are vague and easily politicized. They will steadily subject the US to the influence of internationally-defined norms, a process that would impinge on our national sovereignty.
- The treaty criteria as established could hinder the US in fulfilling its strategic, legal, and moral commitments to provide arms to key allies such as Taiwan and Israel.
Page last updated: Mar 30, 2016