Not everyone loves John Boehner, but...


PDA






GiorgioG
January 10, 2013, 03:35 PM
...ultimately at the federal level he's a major player in what does or does not pass. We must hold his feet to the proverbial fire:

http://www.speaker.gov/contact

If you enjoyed reading about "Not everyone loves John Boehner, but..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
VA27
January 10, 2013, 04:34 PM
Email sent.

KMatch
January 10, 2013, 04:57 PM
My letter is filled out, ready to go. Which issue of the list best suits this?

Edit: I sent it as "family". Letter sent:

My heart goes out to those who've lost loved ones. I hope you understand punishing me, along with millions of other law abiding citizens with gun bans, magazine bans, or any other Second Amendment restriction is NOT the answer, now will be tolerated. History has proven steps like this do nothing to protect us from criminals. I fully expect your support in taking action to protect our children all the while upholding our Constitution rather than providing a "feel good" measure that does nothing other than making those that just don't understand, feel better about the world around them. Let's educate those in fear and protect those in danger as a team, rather than dividing us up banning the very instruments we protect ourselves with. Thank you.

Spelling corrections made (that screen they use makes it tough!) and redirected to civil rights. Thanks!

psyopspec
January 10, 2013, 05:06 PM
Which issue of the list best suits this?

Civil Rights. E-mail sent.

ETA: Thank you Giorgio. I hadn't thought to send a message to the Speaker.

horsemen61
January 10, 2013, 05:14 PM
Email sent

razorback2003
January 10, 2013, 05:29 PM
He is what will stop this crazy anti gun stuff from becoming law. If he caves in, we will be messed up.

Wyndage
January 10, 2013, 05:36 PM
I just wrote to Boehner as well.

shaggy430
January 10, 2013, 05:49 PM
Email sent.

BullFrawg
January 10, 2013, 06:14 PM
Here is my letter to the Speaker. He's known to be a caver; we can't let him cave this time!

Speaker Boehner,

It is inevitable that new restrictive gun control legislation is going to be introduced to Congress in the near future. With a majority in the House, Republicans are able to block such legislation, and indeed they should; most of them understand the 2nd Amendment and the complete demonstrable ineffectiveness of previous gun control efforts.

However, the media is portraying the American public as complicit to these "common-sense gun laws," when in fact most are not. Some members of Congress may be tempted to vote for such legislation to appease the fictional, media-created demand to restrict guns. As you are aware, Mr. Speaker, your effectiveness as Speaker has been called into question during the recent fiscal cliff negotiations. The core of the Republican Party is very conservative, and opposing any and all restrictive gun legislation would garner support for both you and the Party.

Gun owners are a very large, influential, and vocal group that inhabit both parties. If Republicans abandon law-abiding gun owners, we will have nobody to represent us. Polls show that 60% of Republicans and 25% of Democrats own guns, and about 40% of the entire country. This is a group that you cannot afford to lose.

Republicans cannot cave on this like they did with the fiscal cliff. Conservatism is growing while the Republican party is shrinking; this is not a coincidence. Republicans must be conservative to remain relevant.

According to the FBI, more than twice as many people are killed by hands and feet every year than are killed by rifles of any type, including the AR-15 and other semi-automatic rifles. Although the recent tragedies are very high-profile, they are statistically insignificant. The previous assault weapons ban did not lower crime rates at all, despite what Senator Feinstein says. These types of legislation only hurt law-abiding gun owners, and are at most feel-good measures with no effect on crime.

Please to not appease the President, who will restrict more and more of our freedoms if not prevented. Negotiation is also ineffective; President Obama will not give up anything he wants, and appeasement will not get you concessions in the future.

-*Name*, one of millions of lawful, peaceful gun owners

gfanikf
January 10, 2013, 06:18 PM
Anyone have a form that a Democract can use saying, I'll remember how you handle this and will reward accordingly to Republicans who don't abandon us the way many democrats will abandon me.

Sergei Mosin
January 10, 2013, 06:58 PM
Good idea. Just wrote him, my House representative, and one of my two senators (the other was just elected and doesn't have a contact form set up yet - I'll check back.)

CharlieDeltaJuliet
January 10, 2013, 06:59 PM
I had wrote him about two weeks ago, this reminded me I needed to do it again. Thanks..

481
January 10, 2013, 07:09 PM
Email sent-

Dear Mr. Speaker,

I am writing to ask you to defend the God-given right of all Americans to keep and bear arms.

As a retired police officer and law abiding gun-owner, I, like the good people of this Nation, was appalled by the horrific loss of 20 innocent children's lives at Sandy Hook elementary school. Now, in response to this tragedy, the Obama Administration would have us believe that re-enacting a "much-strengthened" version of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban, an act that would infringe unnecessarily upon the rights law-abiding American citizens, is the solution to the problem. It is not.

As you know, even though a virtual duplicate of the 1994 Federal Assault Weapons Ban was in full force in Connecticut during the events of December 14, 2012, none of its provisions stopped the suspect from obtaining weapons, legally obtained by his mother, by first murdering her then stealing them as she lay dead in her bed.

Imposing evermore restrictive firearms legislation upon law-abiding citizens who are not responsible for this terrible act would do nothing except punish decent, honest citizens for the acts of the monster who perpetrated them while leaving the true problem unaddressed.

Instead, I ask you to stand with NRA in their program to provide armed security for our children as they presently sit now, unprotected in their “gun free” (but only to those obeying the law) schools, vulnerable to the acts of any criminal who elects to avail himself of the advertised absence of guns in those schools. I ask you to make sure that none of the proposed firearms legislation ever makes it to the floor of the US House of Representatives because diminishing the rights of law-abiding American citizens is not the solution for preventing these tragedies.

There is only one answer. It is time, whether we like it or not, to secure the safety of our most precious and irreplaceable children with competent, professionally-trained armed security in our schools. We do it for our gold, our nuclear weapons, our celebrities, our military installations, and our sports arenas- why not for our babies?

Respectfully,

......

wacki
January 10, 2013, 07:24 PM
I will send him an email. Even though I don't live in his state, I will pay attention to his next reelection campaign and donate appropriately.

Davey Wavey
January 10, 2013, 07:47 PM
Cool, thanks for the link! Message sent.

BigG
January 10, 2013, 07:55 PM
Boehner is a RINO if there ever was one. I have no respect for him but wish he would man up and act right.

brunowbe
January 10, 2013, 08:01 PM
I, too, have just sent Speaker Boehner a message that reads:

Greetings Speaker Boehner,

I am writing to you as a concerned citizen of the United States to implore you to stand up to those in the government who wish to infringe on law abiding citizens' rights to bear arms. As a person who cherishes our country, Constitution, and the principles that it stands for it terrifies me that there are those who want to take away my God given rights to defend myself from the evils that are present in this world; these evils could be individuals who wish to harm my family, individuals who wish to take or damage my property, or a tyrannical government who wishes to suppress its citizens' freedom (which I hope and pray never happens).

I feel terrible for the families who have lost loved ones to the actions of a evil individuals, but banning or limiting access to firearms does not address the issue as this will only affect those who follow the law resulting in limiting the ways we can protect ourselves from the harm others wish to inflict on us. Evil people, mentally insane people, and criminals do not care about their actions or the law.

This country was founded as a free society and in a free society bad things will happen. I would rather have the freedoms to make my own choices on how to live my life and best protect my family than have to depend on another entity to do that for me. As segments of our society make pleads in the name of safety and a feeling of security, our government does its best to accomplish this task. At what expense though? That expense is the erosion of our freedoms.

Regards,

alsaqr
January 10, 2013, 08:22 PM
Say what you want to about Boehner; he is a dedicated pro-gunner. The judiciary committee is key to the passage or defeat of gun control in the house. The judiciary committee is chaired by US Rep. Bob Goodlatte. Recently Goodlatte stated: "Gun control is not going to be something that I would support."

The judiciary chairman can simply sit on the bill and not bring it up for debate. There is nothing the anti-gunners on the committee can do except whine. This tactic was used by the house and senate judiciary chairmen in opposing the extension of the 1994 AWB.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/politics/july-dec04/ban_09-09.html

KDS
January 10, 2013, 08:36 PM
Done. I also contacted my rep and both senators.

gdcpony
January 10, 2013, 09:16 PM
Sir,

I am asking as a lawful citizen of our country and state for you to avoid punishing us who have done nothing wrong by taking our rights away. Further restrictions on firearms will not solve the issue. The worst places to live due to crime already have the strictest laws and they have solved nothing and in fact made it worse. I can look at many facts to support that, but you have probably heard all of those already. I simply want to add my voice to those. Gun Free Zones are killing Americans, if any one thing can save lives it would be removing them from existence. How many lives could have been saved had a teacher been carrying in that unfortunate school on that tragic day?

I am happy to be defending our freedoms and this one is the one I care about most of all. I can protect myself, my family, and any innocents near me. I can enjoy my sport with my children and wife, and hope to do so for many years to come.

Thank You,
SSgt George D. Clayton
USMC

pty101
January 10, 2013, 10:54 PM
Thanks for posting, it reminded me to write my reps and senators as well as Boehner. He is very important in the RKBA fight. Keep writing everyone, we need to build up our support in congress before the serious debates start.

Doc Savage
January 10, 2013, 11:13 PM
I guess I'll start copying him on what I've been sending. Every couple of days I hit the NRA letter generator and send a short note on a different aspect of protecting the 2A to all my federal elected officials, need to find a way to copy Biden also, have a couple I'd love for him to see ;)

Robert

SouthernYankee
January 10, 2013, 11:31 PM
I sent a written letter, e-mail and called to: Obama, Biden, Reed, McConnell, Boehner, Cantor and then my people from FL. Waiting for responses.

radiotom
January 11, 2013, 07:43 AM
...ultimately at the federal level he's a major player in what does or does not pass. We must hold his feet to the proverbial fire:

http://www.speaker.gov/contact
Hopefully better than we did over the result of the fiscal cliff...

OilyPablo
January 11, 2013, 08:31 AM
Done. I basically told him not to cave on this one, there is nothing in it for him to compromise.

Wyndage
January 11, 2013, 10:45 AM
What I wrote:

Dear Speaker:

As I'm sure you are aware, gun prohibitionists are using the Newtown tragedy as a platform from which to launch a new assault on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens. While we can all agree on the importance of keeping firearms out of the hands of the mentally ill, legislation that has been introduced in Congress would do much more than that by effectively punishing millions of Americans for a crime they did not commit.

HR 138 would arbitrarily limit the capacity of magazines and other feeding devices to ten rounds. Congress has tried this approach before, and it didn't work. The ten-year ban on so-called high-capacity magazines between 1994 and 2004 did not have a measurable impact on gun crime according to the Department of Justice. History proves this point: At the Columbine High School massacre, Eric Harris brought thirteen ten-round magazines and fired at least 98 rounds. At the Virginia Tech shooting, Seung-Hui Cho used seventeen ten- and fifteen-round magazines and fired about 170 rounds--or ten rounds per magazine. When faced with reduced magazine capacities, mass murderers will simply bring more magazines. The only people that a restriction on magazine capacity will hinder are law-abiding citizens, who in a self-defense situation will typically have only one magazine: The one that is in their gun. Having witnessed a violent assault by multiple assailants, I know there are situations where ten rounds aren't enough.

HR 142 would ban the sale of ammunition over the Internet, and require sellers of ammunition to be licensed. This would create a considerable roadblock for law-abiding citizens who have a Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, and by extension the ammunition those arms require to function. Moreover, HR 142 would require ammunition purchases to be tracked. This would be an expensive invasion of privacy. I am aware of no evidence to suggest that mass murderers (or criminals in general) would be deterred if they were forced to buy ammunition in a face-to-face transaction. I consider any attempt to restrict the supply of ammunition to law-abiding citizens to be an assault on their Second Amendment rights, and I will support no politician who favors such action.

I have supported Republican candidates for my entire voting life, so please hear me out when I say that this is a make-or-break moment for the GOP. My continued support for the Republican party is contingent on its continued support for the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding American citizens. There are 80 million gun owners who are just as law-abiding today as we were the day before Adam Lanza murdered 20 elementary-aged children. As the father of a kindergartener, I understand why this tragedy has hurt Americans so deeply. But formulating policy around an emotionally charged event is unwise, especially when some of those policies have been tried before and failed to make a difference.

Please uphold your oath to support the Constitution of the United States by opposing any and all efforts to further infringe the Second Amendment.

Sincerely,

XXXX

Westfair
January 11, 2013, 11:26 AM
Done. I basically told him not to cave on this one, there is nothing in it for him to compromise.
Especially since the other side defines compromise as capitulation.

raddiver
January 11, 2013, 11:52 AM
I didnt even think about contacting him.
Thank you and sent.

hang fire
January 11, 2013, 02:01 PM
It matters not as to the passing any firearm laws in the congress. Obama is talking about implementing anti gun enforcement by fiat, using executive orders.

Obama has done such before in direct contradiction of the constitution and has suffered no negative consequences. LSM and the antis will cheer him on as he breaks laws of the land, and then beg for more.

gdcpony
January 11, 2013, 04:01 PM
Dear Mr. President,

If you want citizens like me involved in a reasonable factual discussion, I am all in favor. However, your administration has been proven to be ignoring facts in favor of emotional responses that make problems worse. I now fear for the country I have spent almost half my life defending. I fear for my family's future during and in the after effects of your two terms in office.

I am afraid that actual statistics agree with your opposition. Even if I weren't a lawful firearms owner, I would only need five minutes to research and find fault with every rumored proposition your committee has released.

1. Banning "assault weapons" is foolish. The total number of murders committed with ALL rifles total is less than that of many other instruments. In fact several states report no rifles used in homicides last year. The state with the most murders committed by rifles is actually California which has an AWB in place already. That alone proves the uselessness of such a rule. Connecticut, it might be worth pointing out, had an AWB in place and it failed to prevent the tragedy in New Town.

2. Increasing Firearms regulations is also ineffective. The states with the strictest restrictions on firearms are also the ones in which most of the murders occurs. If you move it down to the local level those areas with the strictest laws are the highest most crime prone areas in the country. I would think that trying such a failed tactic would seem doomed to fail on a national level.

3. “Gun Free Zones” are killing Americans. As a Marine I am sworn to defend those who cannot defend themselves by Honor. Yet I have been stripped of that right in my own nation for my own children. I hate to think that this is true, but it is. If you look at the shootings you yourself are so focused on, almost every single one is in a place where firearms are barred. Meanwhile, there are many stories you are not allowing to be seen that show that having firearms present in such situations actually save lives. I would feel much better about my three children attending a school where teachers are allowed to protect them properly than them being easy victims of an evil man.

4. Magazine capacity has little or nothing to do with lethality. I tested this myself. I can change a magazine in my personal AR 15 in less than one second. Being that I am trained as a Marine, I asked my eleven year old child to try it. After two tries she can consistently reload in less than two seconds. I can tell you that that will not save lives. If you ban them, who will have them? The criminal element you are trying to protect us against. You again will fail. It only limits my right as a lawful gun owner.

5. Registering every firearm is not likely to succeed and will be resisted by many. I will not register my rightfully owned firearms on a list that could be later used to confiscate them. There is no nation that has registered firearms and not later confiscated most or all of them. In many of those countries, the strong soon after preys upon the weak. This can be seen in the per capita crime rate in Great Britain and Australia. It can be seen melodramatically in the former Soviet Union, last century Germany, and early 20th century Turkey.

6. Background checks on private sales will accomplish nothing as well. Many of the firearms used in crime are stolen. Those bought lawfully are by and large used that way. It is near impossible to enforce and would save no lives.

If you wish to know what I would suggest, it would be simple. Leave us alone. Lawful gun owners cause no problems and save lives that are not tracked on many occasions. We are most often able to take care of ourselves. It is not us who ask for your help, but instead are always willing to offer it to any who need it. We enjoy our sport shooting, hunting and our right to self defense. We cause little trouble unless it is brought to us, and are in general the most patriotic of citizens. We need less interference rather than more.

Another idea would be to ask the media to not release the name(s) of any shooter involved with a mass shooting. They want fame and denying them that would go farther than anything shy of getting rid of “gun free zones” in reducing the occurrence of these heinous crimes. No fame and no easy opportunities are the greatest deterrents and the reason.

I hate to repeat cliché terms, but the Second Amendment protects the rest of our rights. Without it we have no others. There is a direct line between that amendment and our freedom as citizens of a free nation. One of the hallmarks of the United States has always been that the people are stronger than the government. That is in place for a reason and should never be tampered with. It is the same reason that our nation still stands despite hardships that have broken other nations.

I swore an oath to the Constitution and the reason was to defend this one right so that anyone can defend their own rights. Should it be infringed upon unbearably as you are preparing to do, I will begin to wonder what it is I have been doing with my life. Have I wasted so many years? Only you can answer that now.

I simply want a life where I can enjoy those freedoms promised to me by my country. I wish this nation to remain place where I can teach my children responsibility and raise them with a sense of right and wrong. I want them to see an example now of a person in our government who will put aside all other things and look at the morality, history, and logic of his actions and choose accordingly. I ask you to provide that example for them by not stripping me of my rights because of a wrong I did not commit.

Sincerely,
SSgt George D. Clayton

To the president (as if he'll ever hear it), modified and resent to my reps as well as other reps, and posted where ever I can.

If you enjoyed reading about "Not everyone loves John Boehner, but..." here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!