Response from Colorado Congressman


PDA






mr_dove
February 10, 2004, 08:18 PM
Here's the response that my wife got from our congress critter. Not much hope here.

Thank you for contacting me regarding the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban. I am pleased to learn your views and appreciate the opportunity to share mine.

As you know, the Second Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the right to bear arms. I support the Second Amendment. I also believe Congress has an obligation to protect Americans from gun violence. Law-abiding citizens, including those who hunt and participate in firing range activities have every right to own guns, but it is also our collective responsibility to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and children. I believe the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban is critical in keeping our communities free from the deadly impact of weapons that have only military purposes. For this reason, I support efforts to reauthorize the Assault Weapons Ban.

Again, thank you for letting me know your views. Please feel free to visit my web page at www.house.gov/degette for further information. There you can sign up for my e-newsletter to stay up-to-date on current events on Capitol Hill. I look forward to our continued communication.

Sincerely,

Diana DeGette
Member of Congress

If you enjoyed reading about "Response from Colorado Congressman" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Logistics
February 10, 2004, 08:27 PM
Sir,

You are a true gentleman and more people should do as you have done and written their congressmen/women. However this is truly not surprising, obviously.

:barf:

If anything you should possibly write her back saying she has lost every vote your family could have afforded her. Just a thought.

~L

Roadkill Coyote
February 10, 2004, 10:18 PM
Here's what I got back from Ben Nighthorse Campbell on Monday

Thank you for contacting me about the semiautomatic assault weapons ban which was enacted nearly 10 years ago and which is set to sunset September 13, 2004. I appreciate the wide range of input I have recieved from Coloradans on this issue.

The original legislation banning effectively stopped the manufacture or import of a wide-array of firearms defined as assault weapons. However, assault weapons legally owned prior to September 13, 1994 have not been restricted and can be transferred according to applicable federal and state laws. As the end of the authorization of this legislation approaches, there has been increased debate as to whether the ban should be allowed to expire or be extended.

On May 8, 2003 Sen. Feinstein (D-CA) introduced S. 1034, the "Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act of 2003" which would repeal the sunset on the ban of certain semiautomatic firearms and make it permanent. S. 1034 has been referred to the Judiciary Committee.

Over the years I have heard the concerns that has not done much to prevent dangerous criminals -- who willingly break the law -- from getting their hands on banned guns while simultaneously adversely affecting the ability of law abiding citzens' to defend themselves from these same criminals. This gun ban actually led to a dramatic increase in gun sales, an unintended consequence that those favoring more gun control likely did not expect. Clearly those who were intent on purchasing assault weapons were not hindered by the law from doing so. One look at the television news coverage of bank robberys and carjackings proves that.

I am also concerned about the impact it has had on legitimate hunters and the dramatic price increase it brought about. I have also heard from those who favor the ban and want it extended. On top of it all, I deeply and firmly support the Constitution and my sworn oath to uphold it, guaranteeing the "right of the people to keep and bear Arms." I have no doubt that all of this will be thoroughly debated once again, and I look forward to that debate.

Please know that I will be sure to keep your concerns about this or any similar legislation in mind should it come to the floor of the full Senate for consideration. It is difficult to assess legislative efforts as they are introduced until the amending process is complete. Often bills look completely different upon final vote than they did on introduction. Additionally, controversial bills and often attached to other important legislation in an effort to further partisan agendas.

Again, thanks for taking the time to contact me. I certainly appreciated your input.

Sincerely,
Ben Nighthorse Campbell
U.S. Senator

Seems to be positive and well informed.

7.62FullMetalJacket
February 10, 2004, 10:39 PM
Well, I think we know where Sen. Campbell sits. It seems that some thought was actually put to paper there, as opposed to the blissninny reply from the shemale congress critter.

mr_dove
February 10, 2004, 10:55 PM
Nighthorse seems to be up in the air still (to me). He said he's waiting for the debate. He obviously leans towards supporting the 2nd though.

My congresscritter is overtly against.

ksnecktieman
February 10, 2004, 11:07 PM
Did I miss something? It looked to me like Nighthorse said absolutely nothing:confused:

Publicola
February 10, 2004, 11:07 PM
Don't count on campbell. From his letter he sounded as if he was just prepping it either way depending on who he sold his vote to.

In short it was a BS letyter that stated no position one way or the other b/c he has no position other than what's best for him at the moment.

& Dianne - ignorant or evil. Doesn't matter which it means the same thing - she wants to disarm us while singing BS about sporting purposes to keep our vote.

Ya know - I'd love just a ten minute debate in front of congress (televised of course) with either of the aforementioned or damn near any other congresscritter be it state or federal.
Barring that have I mentioned that I really think we gave up that whole "tar & Feather" concept waaaay too soon?

Standing Wolf
February 10, 2004, 11:26 PM
Did I miss something? It looked to me like Nighthorse said absolutely nothing

You didn't miss a thing. Campbell is to Republicanism as Kool-Aid is to whisky.

Jay Kominek
February 11, 2004, 12:07 AM
You didn't miss a thing. Campbell is to Republicanism as Kool-Aid is to whisky.

Wasn't he a democrat at one point, and he changed parties? Or am I completely misremembering?

Bartholomew Roberts
February 11, 2004, 09:50 AM
Nighthorse-Campbell at least understood the issue and didn't just give the boilerplate form letter back. Even on the solid pro-gun side, you don't see that very often.

emc
February 11, 2004, 10:02 AM
Campbell did indeed change parties. I also agree that his thoughtful letter ultimately said nothing, which is totally frustrating. :fire:

I am preparing to write my congressman, Dan Burton, who is very supportive of 2nd Amendment rights, and my disgusting senators, Lugar and Bayh. For the senators, I am going to finish my letter with the comment that "the lack of an affirmative response to my request will be interpreted as a vote AGAINST my position. This will leave me with no choice but to actively support any and all political opponents that you will have, in word, deed and financially. My friends and family will most certainly do the same, as they have the same position on this issue."

I hope that this will help avoid the usual form letters that result from these jerks.

FWIW,

emc

justice4all
February 11, 2004, 10:10 AM
I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Campbell voted for the AWB ten years ago, when he was still a Democrat.

His letter is a canned response, in which he tries to please everyone. He needs to understand that the majority of Coloradans oppose gun control. I've already written him several times. I hope the rest of you have, too.

Bob Locke
February 11, 2004, 10:52 AM
Nighthorse-Campbell is as middle-of-the-road as they come. He was a right-leaning Democrat, and now he's a left-leaning Republican. Same old, same old.

I haven't sent anything to Marilyn Musgrave, because there just isn't any need. Maybe a word of support sent to her, but I already know that she's against the AWB.

DeGette is Patty's little girl, so what else could we expect?

emc
February 11, 2004, 11:06 AM
Bob, is the Patty you're referring to Patricia Schroeder? As a former Colorado resident, I seem to recall that she once posed for photos on the Great Wall of China dressed in a rabbit costume. What an idiot......ignoring the fact that she was just as anti-military as Hillary Klinton. :barf: I was glad that I lived in the suburbs of Denver, rather than be "represented" by the likes of her.

Ed

Bob Locke
February 11, 2004, 04:15 PM
Bob, is the Patty you're referring to Patricia Schroeder?
The one and (thank God) only.

DeGette is very, very bad. But she's an improvement over Patty.

labgrade
February 11, 2004, 04:58 PM
ksnecktieman, et al.

"Did I miss something? It looked to me like Nighthorse said absolutely nothing."

Nope. You read it it right. Straight from the Politician's Response Guide. BTW, those who wrote in to express their likes for the AWB got the same letter - with only a few words changed.

I've met The Nice Senator Nighthorse a coupla times. He's worthless - as a politician, as a human being. Idiot always wants to shake your hands .... ran into him once in a 'Springs executive airport restroom & the guy's not quite yet at the wash station & a "Oh Hi!" wants to shake hands ..... :rolleyes: I tell 'im to wash up first & then afterwards "No thanks." Hands shook are with those either known to be honorable, or at the least - unknowns. He has proved himself to be neither.

BTW, the guy touts himself as an American Idian/Native American & for all I've seen, the cracker's family stems from Portugal.

"DeGette is very, very bad. But she's an improvement over Patty."

She is, Bob, but only because she is relatively ineffective. Patsy really was a thorn - Degette's just "petite," but nonetheless still not on our side.

Roadkill Coyote
February 11, 2004, 08:44 PM
If you don't think Campbell is solid enough on the issue write him a letter, he's your senator too. Be sure to throw in how you find him a worthless human being because he likes to shake hands and you suspect his family comes from Portugal. It's as sure to make you look as good there as it is here. :rolleyes:

labgrade
February 12, 2004, 01:36 PM
Roadkill Coyote,

Matters not what you think, or have "observed" through this network. I've met the guy, I've talked to him & I've looked him in the eye - while discussing the issues.

"If you don't think Campbell is solid enough on the issue write him a letter, he's your senator too. Be sure to throw in how you find him a worthless human being because he likes to shake hands and you suspect his family comes from Portugal. It's as sure to make you look as good there as it is here." (even with your rolleyes)

C'mon, sport.

The deal is this guy is a Politician - to beat the band - he doesn't reflect any view other than wjat will get him relected. Period.

The guy's a hack.

Yup.

I've written him letters, I've met him, I've seen him in person, I've talked to him, I've looked in his eyes & he in mine.

This guy is a simple politico.

He's a liar, simply put.

His "native American bit" is rediculous, as is everything else he does.

The guy's a fake.

Roadkill Coyote
February 12, 2004, 02:09 PM
If you don't care what I think why did you post a reply? What was the purpose of that post? You appear to be trying to make a point, just doing it poorly. Lets say that a person who hasn't made up his mind comes along and reads this thread. How does a condescending attitude and personal attacks further our side here on what is supposed to be the High Road?

labgrade
February 12, 2004, 02:29 PM
RoadKill,

Wow!

I posted a reply because what you said has no bearing & you personally, apparently have no bearing, or any idea about what Ben Nighthorse has to offer - that's all.

I've met the guy, I've talked to him, I've looked in his eyes - & his in mine. He's a sell-out. He's a political puke.

Have you?

Far as my reply to yours, I mentioned only facts. You seemed to have some other agenda ....

Frankly, I don't get it.

Likely, we've reached an impasse where we both agree, but can't express it through verbage.

A PM, & I'll give yo my home phone number & we can discuss this at length ....
at my dime.

Roadkill Coyote
February 12, 2004, 04:06 PM
I'll try this one last time.

Your not making any converts with insults.

The fact that you have met someone in person doesn't prove their a liar and a puke.

If you want to make an actual argument based upon the issues do so, by all means. But it will work better if you climb back up here to the high road first.

labgrade
February 15, 2004, 12:34 AM
RoadKill,

If you wouldlike to depend Nighthorse, please do so on his voting, otherwise, please don't even go there.

His record actually sucks for any of our BoRs agenda.

I have written him at length, I have received his receipts - at length, I have talked to him in person, etc.

If you do have something more to offer, please do present that6 - but please, if otherwise, do shut your mouth, because you have no substinent thing to offer.

Fact is.

I have made congent effort with this man - I've talked, in person with him - regards the issues at stake, & am merely pointing out what I have observed.

Have you? Made that effort? Actually talked, in perso, with him?

I am not insulting the man personally - I am making a point regards his political persuasioon, *& if you cannot differeentiate that & my observations, so sorry for you & your ilk.

Likely, that's a main problem with .... ahhh! what's the matter with politics these days =

I have a problem with The Man = Himself, solely due to his political leanings, while you seem to delve into that's he's a "Republican," or Stands For All That Is Right.

It's total BS! Sport.

That he is a converted republican has nothing more to do with what he stands for as the party with which he has so recently decided to throw his support.

If you cannot get it, I can do nothing for you

As a last resort = lookit.

This country is going to hell in a handbasket, but hopeuly, here is that small% that actually does get it.

The Democrats, nor the Republicans will solve our difficulties.

There is an issue of freedom here.

& the only thing that will solve this main problem is those whp cast their votes towards that goal - read the Declaration of Independence, thepre-amble of the Bill of Rights.

If you politico isn't voting that way, .......

& Roadkill, Inoticed yo haven't taken me up on the PM,for my homephone numer to actually discuus, in person, thi sissue..... figured as much.

Better men have done so.

Jay Kominek
February 15, 2004, 01:01 AM
I am not insulting the man personally...
He's worthless ... as a human being
the cracker's family

And then, Better men...

Exactly how much of that was necessary?

labgrade
February 15, 2004, 02:04 AM
jkominek, et al.

I'm not going to further defend anything I've said.

Nothing! You want futher responses, you contact me PM - you'll have my personal house/ phone number & we can discuss this further.

I've met these people face-to-face = they are liars. & I have proof from speeking to them. I have zero political ambitions & willing to speak to ou you - somethhing that hey willl never do.

You can take it at face value, or you can go talk - at length - to the The Man yourself & make your own decision (if yoU can ever get through to even talk to them) . & likely, any of you making "excuses" for this man having yet to ever talk to him, met him in person, nor ever really had anything to do with anything political in this whole state - which makes me wonder where the hell you would get off anyway having any view where anything poltical happens ..... Damnit!

All I'm stating - as fact - is what I have personally experiecend & this from being the Colorado Second Amenment Sister's Legislative & Governmental Director's mouth! (Besides as The Founding Person of the Natonal Tryanny Responce Team .... ) I DO have somewhato f a political perspectic.)

Have any of you! who exposused so far, to have any opinion whatsoever even participated in any political venue in this - or any part- of this State! Have you!?

I am literally incessened with those who'd say, " Have you!?"

If so, more power to you, but if not, just shut your mouth! You have no opinion whatsoever, because you have not expressed it towards your political masters, at all, simple as that - it's a republic, after all.

Have you any idea what machinations go on!?

I have discussed, at length, & in person with these folk, to our mutual advantage - for our rights - for The Second Amendment & for our rights of every one of us to hold dear everything that our federal & state constitutions state very cleary.

I've been in executive sessions with our state governor to address these issues.

Have you?

& if you - any of you - would for one second, think, that I'd abridge that, you have another think comin'!

God bless you every one! who has the faith to believe this can come out right, & damn you every one who is a naysayer soley due to what I've presented.

Facts is this: if you believe in personal liberty = you'll jump on the bandwagon, & if you don't, you'll perceive "justice" as the way to your salvaltion.

Differnce between persoal liberty/savaltion & "justice" is the whole crux.

YOo eithet get it, or you don't.

& I'llbebranded as as extremeist, because I hold thes right dear -& this, on The High Road.

jimpeel
February 15, 2004, 02:17 AM
Diana DeGette? She ran on an anti-firearms platform! She's the ditz that took Patsy Schroeder's place with her blessing!

Jay Kominek
February 15, 2004, 02:42 AM
you'll jump on the bandwagon

The bandwagon of being rude?

I don't doubt for a second that Nighthorse is a politician who'd say anything he thought would get him reelected. I hardly need people on the Internet to tell me the depths to which politicians will sink.

I havn't seen anything in your, uh, political analysis with which I'd disagree. Rather I find the personal attacks you make in the process to be disappointing. You've looked Nighthorse in the eyes, ooo, fine, now you can say he is a worthless human being.

How long did you have to stare into Coyote's eyes before you earned the right to make implications about his character?

If you would like to defend Nighthorse, please do so on his voting, otherwise, please don't even go there.

Why havn't you stuck to attacking Nighthorse's voting record? Why do you need to make these personal attacks, now not only on Nighthorse but on others? In fact, I havn't seen you address his voting record at all, merely make personal attacks against a fellow who isn't present.

But hey! Voting record! Lets take a look!

He gets a mere 15% from Brady (http://www.bradycampaign.org/facts/scorecard/scorecard.php?inds=12), having voted against them 17 out of 20 times. And he has a B- from GOA (http://www.gunowners.org/108srat.htm).

Sorry, I'd respond to the rest of your post, but I can't really make much sense of it. You seem to think we're all jumping up and defending Nighthorse, when in fact, I havn't seen anyone defend him until I posted his voting record. The responses so far have just indicated disgust with your personal attacks.

general
February 15, 2004, 10:26 AM
I can just see the spittle flying...
Someone neds a napkin and a spellcheck...

Dear Sir or Madam,
If this is an example of the type vitriol you spew, it is no wonder you do not achieve results with Sen. Nighthorse and thus have low regard for those you have interacted with. If, in fact, you are the SAS's L&G Dir's "mouth" as you say, I would suggest a course in common courtesy, as well as basic literacy, as you will achieve nothing by demonstrating an absence of both. The very act of belittling others for their efforts says volumes about yours. And, before you also accuse me of not measuring up to your high standards of personally interacting with my "political masters", I do correspond and voice my concerns with my representatives in government. I may not like their positions or lack thereof, but I refrain from personal attacks upon them and encourage others to do likewise. We may not have the "inside" access you do, but to discourage, attack or berate us for our efforts, or any effort really is, I believe, a mistake. But, this is just my personal opinion and maybe I should just "shut my mouth" because, according to your posts, that is the true road to civil discourse.
Regards,
General
ps: And no, I will not accept any invitation to be insulted telephonically even though you have stated to others that, "Better men have done so".


jimpeel: Doesn't DeGette have a sister in the print media somewhere...?

jimpeel
February 15, 2004, 01:50 PM
I better answer this one quickly as this thread is bound for the Glory Train.

I have no idea about any of DeGette's family; only her politics. I was living in CO when she was elected.

The Second District is rife woith Liberals and there will always be a liberal hack representing them. Patsy Schroeder ran on the guy she replaced being inn office too long and how it was "time for a change". She then warmed the same chair for twenty-two years. :rolleyes:

Go figure.

Expect the same from DeGette.

Roadkill Coyote
February 15, 2004, 08:45 PM
His record actually sucks for any of our BoRs agenda.
Ok, finally an argument on the issue at hand! I agree that the Senator's voting record isn't what it could be, which is all the more reason we should be trying to convince him, rather than talking trash about his ancestory.
If you cannot get it, I can do nothing for you
Why certainly you can. You could just stick to the issue. For example, you could tell us what he lied to you about. As you may or may not have noticed, an appeal based personal experiance alone, which is what you have been making cuts very little ice online.
If you do have something more to offer, please do present that6 - but please, if otherwise, do shut your mouth, because you have no substinent thing to offer.
I will continue to voice my opinions as I see fit, your valuation of their worth not withstanding.
& Roadkill, Inoticed yo haven't taken me up on the PM,for my homephone numer to actually discuus, in person, thi sissue..... figured as much.
The obvious and appropriate response to incivility in a public forum is to object in that same public forum. You may figure what you will from my willingness to make my points in public.

This is supposed to be the high road.

Tropical Z
February 16, 2004, 11:13 AM
DeGette supports the 2nd ammendment-YAH RIGHT!
Just remember shes from the same district that put Pat Schroeder in office for so many awful years! They are both the :evil:

If you enjoyed reading about "Response from Colorado Congressman" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!