Quantcast
Grand Combined Letter Thread: Templates, Examples and Replies - Page 9 - THR
THR  

Go Back   THR > Social Situations > Activism

Welcome to THR
You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have, access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!


If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please visit the help section.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 1, 2013, 05:50 PM   #201
Ehtereon11B
internet infantryman
 
 
Join Date: August 20, 2012
Posts: 983
Response from our Rep.

Received a letter response from the letters and emails to our elected officials today. From (the office of) Spencer Bachus, 6th District, Alabama. Long post but I will put the important part in bold.

Quote:
Thank you for expressing your concerns regarding your Second Amendment rights and your thoughts on the continuing gun control discussions. It is certainly important to consider the best ways to prevent violent acts in our society, and having your input is beneficial to me.

Many of the legislative recommendations made by the "Biden Task Force," announced by President Obama on January 16, 2013, will fall under the jurisdiction of the House Committee on the Judiciary, on which I serve. With any response, Congress must respect the Constitution, which we have sworn an oath to support and defend, and the rights of law-abiding Americans. In particular, my support for preserving the rights afforded under the Second Amendment is longstanding and strong. The Second Amendment specifically states that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed," and I have always supported and defended this constitutional right It is my firm belief that citizens should not be prohibited from protecting themselves, their family, or their property from harm, and that criminals, rather than law-abiding citizens, should be punished for crimes committed. As specific proposals come before the Committee and House for consideration, please know that I will remember your views, and that I welcome your continued involvement and feedback
He rambles on for two more paragraphs about how EOs work so that is the important stuff.
Ehtereon11B is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 06:45 PM   #202
gdcpony
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 28, 2008
Location: Sherrodsville, OH
Posts: 546
Yet another one:
Quote:
January 30, 2013







Dear SSgt. Clayton,



Thank you for contacting me to express your support for H.R. 35, the Safe Schools Act of 2013. I appreciate having the benefit of your views on this important issue.



As you may know, H.R. 35 was introduced by Representative Steve Stockman (R-TX) on January 3, 2013. This legislation would repeal provisions making it unlawful to possess or discharge a firearm in a school zone.



H.R. 35 was referred to the House Judiciary Committee. Please be assured that I will keep your support in mind should this legislation come before the full House of Representatives for a vote. I will also work with my colleagues to address the violence that seems to permeate our culture, ensure that our children and teachers are safe at school, and make certain that those with significant mental challenges are being appropriately identified, diagnosed, and treated so to prevent tragedies, like Sandy Hook, from taking place.



Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any additional questions or concerns. I also encourage you to follow me on Facebook, Twitter, and at www.billjohnson.house.gov , so that you may keep track of my most recent work in Congress. I look forward to hearing from you in the future.



Sincerely,

Bill Johnson
Member of Congress
__________________
“I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.”
- Thomas Jefferson
gdcpony is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 06:48 PM   #203
gdcpony
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 28, 2008
Location: Sherrodsville, OH
Posts: 546
And another too!
Quote:
Dear George,

Thank you for contacting me to express your views about the President's gun control proposals. It is good to hear from you.

As you know, President Obama recently issued 23 executive actions and endorsed gun control legislative initiatives following the terrible tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School.

I had hoped President Obama would look to address the root causes of senseless acts of violence and work with Congress to develop a comprehensive plan to lessen the likelihood of these kinds of tragic incidents in the future. Unfortunately, the President has chosen to act unilaterally wherever he can and focus on new gun bans which I believe would undermine the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.

In response to tragic attacks like the one at Sandy Hook Elementary, I remain committed to ensuring that those who suffer from mental illness, a common thread in these instances, receive proper care, that current gun laws are enforced, and that school safety is enhanced as we address the deeper issue of violence in our society.

Thank you again for taking the time to contact my office. For more information, please visit my website at www.portman.senate.gov . Please keep in touch. EMAIL.BEGINHIDE.MERGE



Sincerely,
Rob Portman
U.S. Senator
__________________
“I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery.”
- Thomas Jefferson
gdcpony is offline  
Old February 1, 2013, 06:51 PM   #204
HKGuns
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 29, 2004
Location: Bora Bora
Posts: 1,797
They're both garbage and they need to go.
HKGuns is offline  
Old February 2, 2013, 09:33 AM   #205
bigfatdave
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 13, 2008
Location: Near Camp Perry
Posts: 5,400
that's a good response

did you put it in the combined letter thread as well?
__________________
Write your legislators

Really, stop reading this and write your legislators, at all levels

Last edited by bigfatdave; February 2, 2013 at 10:43 AM.
bigfatdave is offline  
Old February 2, 2013, 05:40 PM   #206
Ole Humpback
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 29, 2010
Location: IN, USA
Posts: 389
Heres another pair of replies I received this week:

IN State Representative Hal Slager:

Quote:
Dear Ole Humpback,

Thank you for taking the time to contact me concerning gun control, especially in the wake of the horrific tragedy that occurred recently in Newtown, Connecticut. I appreciate you sharing your thoughts in response to this tragic event.

As you know, in the wake of this tragedy, discussion has focused on gun control and restrictions, along with how to provide much needed care to individuals with a mental illness, at both the state and the federal level. The 118th Indiana General Assembly convened on January 7, 2013. While it is likely that there will be bills authored regarding gun control and mental health, there are a broad number of opinions on this issue and I would expect a lot of discussion before any action is taken. One of my top priorities has always been ensuring a safe learning environment for Hoosier students. Along with keeping our students safe, I ensure you that I will protect my constituent's second amendment rights, and will make sure that our right to bear arms is secure. If I have the opportunity to hear debate and vote on these issues, I will consider all solutions.

Again, thank you for contacting me and expressing your stance on this issue. If you have any other legislative issues or concerns please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Sincerely,

Hal Slager
State Representative
House District 15
This response isn't as concrete in support of the 2nd Amendment as I would like, but I take him at his word that he is going to weigh all options. Need to keep a dialog going with him.

*EDIT*

Heres the response I sent to Mr. Slager:

Quote:
Dear Representative Slager,

I thank you for your reply to me about the current legislative environment in regards to the Newtown, CT tragedy. I implore you consider all options in the context of what is best for the Second Amendment rights of Hoosier's and their access to mental health care, not what is politically correct at the moment. I have been reviewing the proposals that this nation's US Congressmen have introduced in Congress and found them to be severely lacking in constitutionality & fairness to both law abiding gun owners and people with mental health issues.

As a law abiding gun owner who enjoys hunting & competitive shooting sports, I would be turned into a criminal as all the firearms that I currently own for hunting (which ARE NOT military style weapons in any way, shape, or form) would be classified as "assault weapons" under all legislation that has currently been introduced into Congress for committee's to consider. I find it offensive that many in Congress and State Legislatures in this country claim to support my Right to Keep and Bear Arms yet they insist that I only be allowed to own certain firearms so as to not pose a threat to others. Each firearm I own I bought because it addressed a specific hunting or shooting sport need, now Congress wants to criminalize my law abiding ownership of hunting & sporting firearms because they have features which they are using to define what an assault weapon should be defined as, not what an assault weapon is defined as.

As a person who has been treated for Attention Deficit, Hyperactive Disorder (ADHD), which according to the National Institute of Health is a "problem with inattentiveness, over-activity, impulsivity, or a combination", I find the current proposals for improving access to mental health care for people as well as supplementing the National Instant Check System (NICS) with mental health care data from mental health care providers to be both lacking and illegal. Due to the stereotypes surrounding people with mental health concerns and the fact that supplementing the NICS with mental health care information from providers is a breach of doctor-patient confidentiality, I ask that the discussion on reforming mental health care be thoroughly researched & studied by legislators, health care providers, and health care insurers before any legislation is contemplated. The last thing that we as Hoosier's and American's need for mental health care is a repeat of the disaster that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act has turned out to be.

Sincerely,

Ole Humpback

IN US Representative Peter Visclosky

Quote:
Dear Ole Humpback:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns regarding gun control proposals in response to the recent shooting in Connecticut. I appreciate hearing from you.

I was shocked and heartbroken to learn of the horrific shooting that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. My thoughts and prayers go out to all of the victims of these attacks and their families for their unfathomable loss. As this marks the seventh mass shooting in the United States in 2012 alone, I firmly believe that Congress must take decisive action to prevent such senseless tragedies from happening again.

While I support the possession of legal firearms by responsible law abiding citizens, I am opposed to the availability of military assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices, which pose serious threats to public safety and the law enforcement officers who risk their lives protecting us.

That is why, in the 103rd Congress, I supported the assault weapons ban, which prohibited the manufacture, transfer, or possession of semi-automatic assault weapons, including those with a large capacity ammunition feeding device. I deeply regret that President Bush allowed this ban to expire in 2004. Also in the 103rd Congress, I supported passage of the Brady Act, currently known as the national instant criminal background check system, which requires background checks for all firearm transfers and purchases. I would note that the Constitutionality of these laws have never been challenged before the Supreme Court.

You may be interested to know that Rep. Carolyn McCarthy has introduced H.R. 138, the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act, which would reinstate the ban on semi-automatic weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. Specifically, the measure would prohibit the transfer or possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device, except for its lawful possession within the United States on or before the date of this Act's enactment, and by law enforcement officers. The measure also would prohibit the importation of such a device, and would require large capacity ammunition feeding devices to be identified by serial numbers.

H.R. 138 was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary, where it is currently pending consideration. The measure has 64 cosponsors, and a similar measure has been introduced in the Senate by Sen. Feinstein. The Senate measure, S. 150, has 17 cosponsors and was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary.

Most recently, on January 16, 2013, President Obama announced a comprehensive proposal to prevent future tragedies. Specifically, the proposal calls on Congress to enact legislation to require criminal background checks for all gun sales, reinstate the assault weapons ban, restore a ten-round limit on ammunition magazines, eliminate armor-piercing bullets, provide mental health services in schools, and allocate funds to hire more police officers.

Because these recommendations require Congressional approval, the President supplemented this proposal with 23 separate executive actions which will take effect immediately. These actions include providing law enforcement officials and school officials with better training for active shooting situations, establishing incentives to improve information sharing on background checks, directing the Centers for Disease Control to research the causes and prevention of gun violence, and committing to finalizing mental health parity regulations. The President's executive actions seek to strengthen existing laws related to guns, mental health, and safety.

As the nation continues to make sense of the tragedy at Sandy Hook, I hope that our country will have a serious and thoughtful discussion to ensure that we find a proper balance between Americans' right to own guns and the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

Thank you again for contacting me. Do not hesitate to let me know if you have any other questions or concerns.

Sincerely,

Peter J. Visclosky
Member of Congress
This is as anti 2A as I have received so far. Need to write him and prove with data that this viewpoint is patently wrong.
__________________
"Salus populi suprema lex esto" - Latin for "The welfare of the people shall be the supreme law"

Quite fitting for the 2A if you ask me.

Last edited by Ole Humpback; February 2, 2013 at 06:33 PM.
Ole Humpback is offline  
Old February 3, 2013, 08:17 PM   #207
Bobk538447
Member
 
 
Join Date: June 13, 2011
Posts: 50
Received a response from Congressman Ruben Hinojosa, Congressional District 15, Texas:

"It is my belief that a number of President Obama's recent proposals on gun safety are reasonable and common sense safety reforms that are long overdue. I have long supported reinstating the assault weapons ban, and limiting high capacity magazines........Some say that Presidents Obama's proposals are a violation of the second amendment. That is simply false. Like many of our constitutional rights, they are not limitless. Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia put it best in the Supreme Court case District of Coumbia v. Heller opinion, which upheld our constitutional right to bear arms: "Like most rights, the Second Amendment is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:......"
Bobk538447 is offline  
Old February 4, 2013, 06:46 PM   #208
58limited
Member
 
 
Join Date: November 8, 2012
Location: SE Texas
Posts: 73
U.S Congressman from Texas Ted Poe's e-Newsletter:

Received this today, he is a very strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment.

"Dear Neighbor,

The nation continues to grieve with the community of Newtown, Connecticut over the attack that stole the lives of dozens of innocent children and teachers. What happened was unconscionable evil that most of us will never understand. Since then, some elites in Washington have used the Newtown tragedy for political leverage to reignite the gun control debate.

Since the beginning of the year, we have seen a number of extreme proposals from the Senate and 23 executive edicts from the President. Not one of these proposals would have changed the outcome of the tragedy in Newtown. What they will do is redline the Constitution and bruise our right to bear arms which is guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.

Make no mistake--these proposals advocate for more government control not more gun control. I believe in the sanctity of the Constitution. The Bills Of Rights were designed to protect citizens from an oppressive government. This timeless document has guaranteed freedom for Americans for over 200 years; it is certainly not up for negotiation now.

Those who believe that more gun control will end violence should examine the evidence. Mexico, for example, has outlawed guns completely, but there has not been a decline in gun-related deaths. Chicago and Washington, DC have some of the toughest gun laws in America, but they are also two of the most dangerous cities in America. So, what now? The focus of any discussion or action should not be on the gun, but on the shooter. In my previous life as a judge and prosecutor in the Harris County courtrooms, I never saw a gun tried for a crime. That’s because we hold the shooter accountable, not an inanimate object.

And, yet here in Congress, we have legislators advocating for more restrictions on guns while they have the protection of armed guards at every door in the Capitol – hypocrisy at its highest.

I am a staunch supporter of the Second Amendment, and I will continue to defend our constitutional right. More laws amount to more control - not more effectiveness. And more laws mean less liberty. And that’s just the way it is.



God and Texas,

Ted Poe
Member of Congress
2nd District of Texas"
__________________
"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy." ~ Benjamin Franklin
58limited is offline  
Old February 4, 2013, 08:22 PM   #209
HKGuns
Member
 
 
Join Date: August 29, 2004
Location: Bora Bora
Posts: 1,797
I received the form letter response from Levin that I'm sure has been posted already, if I don't find it I will post it up later. The more I thought about it the more it irked me so I decided to respond to him, copying the other Senator and my Representative (who actually gets it). I probably went too far but he needs to be called out for his not upholding his oath to defend the constitution.

Last edited by HKGuns; February 7, 2013 at 10:14 PM.
HKGuns is offline  
Old February 4, 2013, 08:42 PM   #210
leprechaun50
Member
 
 
Join Date: November 27, 2011
Location: SW Minnesota
Posts: 79
This is the reply that I recieved from Minnesota State Senator Bill Weber.
(He grew up less than a mile from me, and his older brother hunted together when we were kids.)

Ed,

First of all, thank you for your service to our great country!

I share your concerns on 2nd Amendment rights. I think it is possible that the federal government will overreach, and I have no doubt that the President will use executive order if he thinks he can get away with it. On the other hand, they will fail to evaluate the trash we see in movies, on TV and in video games claiming protection under 1st Amendment rights.



At the state level, we have a governor who is not on our side of this issue. I believe the Republican Caucus will need to reach out to the rural DFL members to hopefully prevent any state assault on gun rights. If we can achieve a status quo on this issue with the current political structure, it will be a victory within itself.



Thank you for taking the time to contact me. We will keep an eye on this issue and if we need to activate you as concerned citizens, we will alert you to those needs.



Yours Truly,


Bill
leprechaun50 is offline  
Old February 4, 2013, 08:46 PM   #211
leprechaun50
Member
 
 
Join Date: November 27, 2011
Location: SW Minnesota
Posts: 79
The reply from one of our U.S. Senators

Dear Mr. Lynch:



Thank you for sharing your thoughts on guns. I appreciate having the benefit of your comments on this important and timely issue.



As the former chief prosecutor of Minnesota's largest county, I worked to enforce the gun laws already on the books and have long supported efforts to promote gun safety, including background checks. I also believe the Second Amendment gives American citizens the right to own guns for collection, protection, and sport. This right is an important part of our shared history and heritage, and should be protected.



As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I look forward to hearings on the President's recommendations and proposed public safety solutions that include school safety, addressing mental illness, limits on high-capacity magazines and assault weapons, and other efforts to combat violence.



Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. One of the most important parts of my job is listening to what the people of Minnesota have to say to me. I am here in our nation's capital to do the public's business and to serve the people of our state. I hope you will contact me again about matters of concern to you.



Sincerely,

Amy Klobuchar

United States Senator
leprechaun50 is offline  
Old February 5, 2013, 06:07 PM   #212
Mayvik
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 5, 2010
Posts: 96
Form reply from Udall (D-CO):

Quote:
Thank you for contacting me regarding Second Amendment rights. I appreciate that you took the time to write on this important topic.
Responsible gun ownership is an integral part of our Western heritage. The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides for an individual right, and I am dedicated to protecting the rights of citizens to own firearms for personal protection, hunting, collecting or for other legal purposes.
We can all agree that the shootings at Columbine High School; Virginia Tech; in Aurora; Tucson, AZ; Newtown, CT and other instances in which terrible crimes have been committed with guns are national tragedies that should concern us all. No single policy is going to be adequate in preventing gun tragedies in the future. We need comprehensive solutions that examine our culture's glorification of violence, the effectiveness of our laws, our ability to enforce those laws and access to firearms, especially those designed for the battlefield. We must do everything we can - consistent with the Second Amendment - to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals, the mentally ill and those who would turn them against their community. As legislation related to Second Amendment rights is debated, I will carefully examine its intentions and impacts and use your thoughts to help guide me.
I will continue to listen closely to what you and other Coloradans have to say about matters before Congress, the concerns of our communities, and the issues facing Colorado and the nation. My job is not merely about supporting or opposing legislation, but also about bridging the divide that has paralyzed our nation's politics. For more information about my positions and to learn how my office can assist you, please visit my website at www.markudall.senate.gov.

Warm regards,
Mark Udall
U.S. Senator, Colorado
Mayvik is offline  
Old February 7, 2013, 06:48 PM   #213
quietsage
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 5, 2011
Posts: 20
Response from Jim Matheson Congessman

Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding firearms issues. I appreciate hearing about your interest in the issues facing our country and state, and I am glad for the opportunity to respond to your inquiry.

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution establishes the right to bear arms, which more commonly means owning or possessing a firearm. Our Founding Fathers recognized this right when they included it as one of the original 10 Amendments, or Bill of Rights, to the Constitution. The ability to purchase and own firearms can be traced to the founding and defense of our nation, and I believe in the continued importance of the Second Amendment today. I feel strongly that the vast majority of gun owners in Utah and across the country understand the serious responsibilities associated with gun ownership, and they possess and use firearms legally.

Across our country, we have all been shocked and saddened by recent tragedies involving gun violence perpetrated by disturbed individuals. As a result there has been a great deal of discussion in the public policy world about possible steps to prevent tragic acts of violence. I believe responsible individuals have a constitutional right to own firearms, and that this right should not be limited. However, even the staunchest defenders of Second Amendment rights are deeply troubled by acts of senseless and brutal violence. It is here that we need to start, as a country, a broad discussion about how to reduce acts of violence in our society. Each of us should have the expectation of safety in our daily lives.

There are three general topics that should be considered in this discussion. First, we should examine our existing gun laws to determine their effectiveness as they are currently being enforced. Second, we should address the current mental health system in our country and evaluate options to make improvements. Third, we should examine the culture of violence in today’s society and seek out ideas to counteract that culture.

As we attempt to find common ground on efforts to reduce violence in our country, we should keep in mind the importance of seeking pragmatic, bipartisan solutions. Any meaningful proposals should be based on facts and with data demonstrating how they will reduce incidents of violence. For example, the so-called Assault Weapons Ban was in place for ten years before it expired in 2004, and the consensus of dozens of studies of that law demonstrate that the law had no real effect on reducing acts of gun violence in our country. The discussion should be deliberative and not reactionary, broad based and not simplistic, and formed through consensus of a wide range of interests and not from a small group of people.

Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me. If you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact my office.

Best Wishes,
JIM MATHESON
Member of Congress
quietsage is offline  
Old February 7, 2013, 07:57 PM   #214
BLB68
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 18, 2008
Location: WA
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by quietsage View Post

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution establishes the right to bear arms, which more commonly means owning or possessing a firearm.
Someone send this guy a dictionary.
BLB68 is offline  
Old February 7, 2013, 08:49 PM   #215
jonc
Member
 
 
Join Date: July 8, 2008
Location: Utah
Posts: 163
got one today too. It must not have been a form letter today cuase mine was a little different
__________________
"Guns don't kill people. The Government does." - Dale Gribble
jonc is offline  
Old February 7, 2013, 09:05 PM   #216
cluck
Member
 
 
Join Date: June 23, 2010
Location: Gun Lovin' Utah
Posts: 68
Honest response. I didn't expect this. I wonder when I will get my response from him. It's a little encouraging that my representative, despite his party affiliation, is not just spewing the same anti drivel: "I respect the second amendment BUT....".

"Each of us should have the expectation of safety in our daily lives."
This is the only statement that seems ignorant to me. Safety is an illusion.
If his votes match his stated position, I may have to vote for him next time.
__________________
<Sent from my tactical full metal jacket assault phone>
The samurai's entire being was embodied in his sword.
cluck is offline  
Old February 8, 2013, 12:02 PM   #217
BLB68
Member
 
 
Join Date: May 18, 2008
Location: WA
Posts: 333
Trying to redefine the word "bear" seems a bit suspect to me. Probably will have to wait and see how he votes on things to be sure of his position.
BLB68 is offline  
Old February 8, 2013, 05:54 PM   #218
blahpony
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 14, 2012
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 56
Here is a response from VA senator Tim Kaine.

Quote:
Thank you for contacting me to share your views on proposals to reduce gun violence. I appreciate hearing from you.

No one can deny that gun violence is a serious problem in this country today. We owe it to the victims of the growing number of mass shootings to vigorously debate specific and comprehensive proposals that can keep our communities safer. The right approach focuses on many issues - improvements to the mental health system, better security protocols and common sense rules about gun use, including keeping firearms out of the hands of dangerous individuals.

When I was on the Richmond City Council in the 1990s, our city was mired in an epidemic of gun violence that included the city having the second-highest homicide rate in the United States. The most successful step we took was implementing Project Exile, a program that involved federal prosecution and tougher penalties for gun crimes that were previously treated more leniently in state courts. Celebrated by diverse groups engaged in the gun violence debate - including the National Rifle Association and the Brady Campaign - the program helped drive down Richmond's homicide rate by nearly 60 percent within a few years.

In 2007, the tragic shooting at Virginia Tech revealed glaring weaknesses in campus security protocols at colleges and universities, in our mental health system and the gun background check system for gun purchases. In a bipartisan spirit, I worked with then-Attorney General Bob McDonnell to immediately improve our background check system and issued an executive order ensuring that those adjudicated to be mentally ill and dangerous would be entered into a national database and barred from purchasing weapons. We also changed standards for mental health treatment and increased funding for community health programs while dramatically improving campus security and efforts to assist college students suffering from mental stress.

In January I attended a round-table event in Richmond with Vice President Biden on gun violence, to talk about the lessons learned in Virginia and the need for a comprehensive approach to these problems. As your U.S. Senator, I will work to bring that kind of comprehensive approach that will strengthen the safety of our communities, while protecting our Second Amendment rights. As a gun owner who worked with others to constitutionally guarantee Virginians the right to hunt, I know that you can be a strong supporter of the Second Amendment without tolerating the gun tragedies that are too often a part of our daily lives.

Concerning specific proposals, I am a strong supporter of universal background record checks. This is the only way we can enforce existing laws that prohibit dangerous individuals from purchasing guns. I am open to supporting legislation placing reasonable limits on high capacity magazines, combat-style weapons and gun trafficking if they are carefully drafted.

Please be assured that I will keep your views in mind as Congress continues to debate strategies to reduce gun violence. Thank you once again for contacting me.

Sincerely,


Tim Kaine

Bolding is mine.
blahpony is offline  
Old February 9, 2013, 08:11 AM   #219
BBQJOE
Member
 
 
Join Date: March 13, 2007
Location: ARIZONA
Posts: 589
Paul Gosar AZ house of reps

I've been sending all kinds of emails, like the rest of you.
here is Paul Gosar's response to my email asking him to oppose any new firearm legislation, as well as a promise to do my best to have someone else fill his seat if he does.

Dear Mr. Heslin,

Thank you for contacting me about the tragic events that occurred at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut. This tragedy affected so many, and I am always glad to hear your thoughts, concerns, and opinions on the matter.

First, my thoughts and prayers are with all of those affected by the tragic shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. My deepest sympathies are with the families and loved ones of the staff and students who were killed or injured and those who witnessed this horrific event. We mourn the loss of the school children and adults whose lives were claimed by the heartbreaking acts on December 14, 2012.

We must now pause and reflect as to how we can prevent a repeat of the events in Newtown, Connecticut while preserving our liberties and values, including the right to bear arms. Our Constitution recognizes certain core liberties that we are endowed with by God—not by the Federal government. The right to defend oneself and one's family and property are among these. The founders of this country knew that having capable citizens willing to take up arms to defend the Republic was essential. For that reason, each individual was given the right to own, possess and responsibly use firearms.

In an effort to prevent other instances like the events in Newtown, we must also engage in a broader discussion that includes increased access to mental health care services. This should include educating the public about the warning signs of those who would harm themselves and others and addressing the stigma related to diagnosis and treatment. Most individuals with severe and persistent mental illness will not commit violent crimes but we need a system in place to recognize and intervene when a risk is posed.

It is crucial that we enforce existing gun laws already on the books. It is my hope that this tragedy results in solutions designed to prevent other similar occurrences.

Irresponsible and criminal use of arms cannot be tolerated, but I believe that using new gun control laws to address this case and others like it would be unwise and ineffective. The federal government must not sink to the lowest common denominator to punish responsible citizens and to infringe on Constitutional rights. I find it distasteful that some people seek to capitalize on a tragedy in order to trample on our Constitution for political gain.

Please know that as your Congressman, I fully support Second Amendment rights and the right to own and carry firearms in a responsible manner. I will oppose any unconstitutional efforts by the federal government to infringe upon Second Amendment rights. I have been a life-long supporter of responsible gun ownership. I have also been a hunter for most of my life, and I am well aware of our rights and duties relative to firearms. We must remain vigilant and enforce all of our constitutional rights, not simply pick and choose the ones we like. Our constitutional rights are not dependent upon which president, or which Congress, is in office.

Again, I appreciate your thoughts and concerns. It is a pleasure to serve Arizona as part of its Congressional Delegation. Your suggestions are always welcome, and if ever I may be of assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me.
__________________
Sent by my S&W M&P 9mm

Our rights are not gifts from the government.
BBQJOE is offline  
Old February 9, 2013, 11:40 AM   #220
MaterDei
Member
 
 
Join Date: September 23, 2003
Location: Katy, Texas
Posts: 3,092
This is Ted Poe's response to an email I sent. Emphasis is my own...

Dear Mr. MaterDei:

Thank you for contacting me to share your thoughts on firearms and the Second Amendment. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.

The tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut was unspeakable, incomprehensible and unimaginable evil. There are no words that can offer enough comfort and solace to a grieving community. Since that tragedy, there have been calls for immediate action ranging from legislation for more and less gun control and a national discussion on mental health.

I am an ardent supporter of the individual right to keep and bear arms protected under the Second Amendment. As a former prosecutor and judge, I have tried many shooters in criminal cases, but never a gun. Some may misplace blame on videogames, Hollywood, or the media, but the blame should always be on the shooter. Nations, like Mexico, that have outlawed guns completely have not seen a decline in gun-related deaths. Additionally, Fox News reported that Chicago has some of the toughest gun laws in America, but leads the nation in gun violence.

On January 16, 2013, the Administration issued 23 actions that they plan to take to address gun violence. Ranging from strengthening background checks to launching a national responsible gun ownership campaign, all actions are targeted to facilitate gun control. I do not believe executive orders are the way to control gun violence. The focus of any discussion or action must be on the individual, and I look forward to having that discussion with my colleagues in Congress.

Thank you again for contacting me with your thoughts. For additional information regarding current legislation and my representation of the 2nd District, please refer to my website: poe.house.gov. While you are visiting the website, be sure to sign up for my electronic newsletter.


God and Texas,

TED POE
__________________
God and Texas!
NRA Benefactor Life Member
TSRA Life Member
GOA Life Member
MaterDei is offline  
Old February 11, 2013, 06:44 PM   #221
nfafan
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 12, 2009
Posts: 47
Sen Bob Casey of PA - his anti-gun auto-reply

Meanwhile, my reply back to the most boring senator in the known universe after his auto-reply;


Dear Mr. Casey,

Thank you for the acknowledgement of our communications with your auto-reply, but I think we have a problem here - and I know that you don’t want to be a problem to your constituency here in Pennsylvania.

First off to your opening points, Yes – we are ALL horrified and repulsed by the events in Newtown.

But… What was being hidden behind a smokescreen of anti-gun rhetoric is the fact that a vidiot-gaming nutcase took his mother’s LEGAL guns - purchased and owned LEGALLY under onerous Connecticut laws – and then ILLEGALLY used them to ILLEGALLY kill his own mother before ILLEGALLY killing the Sandy Hook children.

What part of ILLEGAL action is not understood here?

The mother’s body hadn’t even officially been discovered yet before Biden’s anti-gun ghouls were already in the cameras relishing the Sandy Hook blood to push their agenda against LEGAL guns.

I am not going to get into the Second Amendment/Founding Fathers yadda yadda – as I know that YOU SHOULD UNDERSTAND exactly what “shall not be infringed” means. And we intend to hold you to it.

If it appears you did not understand “shall not be infringed”, we – as your employers here in PA - will arrange during the next election to give you ample time away from work to learn about the Second Amendment.

To be sure; YOU do not have the political capital to survive going against US voters here in Pennsylvania - your EMPLOYERS - the ones who ELECTED YOU.
As for the others;

• Crazy Uncle Joe Biden has NOTHING to lose with his dimwitted double-barrel blathering – he’ll fade into the sunset to go play pinochle with wacky Howard Dean.
• Obama has NOTHING to lose; he will dethrone Klinton as the official orator of the left.
• Chuck Schumer will remain “in like Flynt” unless proven to be an agent for Hamas.
• Sens Feinswine and Boxer, and Nancy Pelosi are entrenched forever; ditsy ************ns will gladly re-elect their three Macbethian witches even with video proof of a boiling cauldron of dead gay babies.

But for you; we will be watching YOUR vote, and we too, will vote. So unless YOU intend for your privileged Senate career to end with a run for election as a dogcatcher – you need to stand tall and VOTE AGAINST ANY new gun control laws of any kind introduced in the Senate.

Understand that this isn’t like the pointless “ban laws” of the past – we have the Internet now for fast, mass communications. I intend to make sure my message to YOU is posted to every message board I know of so that fellow gun owners know of this.

We are and will be watching – and voting.

Sincerely,




Dear Mr. xxxxxxxx:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me about recent proposals related to guns. I appreciate hearing from you about this issue.

As you know, on December 14, 2012, an individual in Newtown, Connecticut forced his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School and opened fire on teachers and staff in the building. In total, the perpetrator murdered 20 students between the ages of six and seven years old, as well as six adults, many of whom heroically sought to stop the shooter and save the lives of children. Like many Americans, I was deeply affected by the scope and brutality of this act. My thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.

The motives that led to this senseless massacre will likely never fully be comprehended. However, I believe that all public officials have a responsibility to work to prevent such an event from occurring again. This incident reflects a complex problem that requires a comprehensive strategy, including funding for law enforcement officers and the mental health care system. Too many individuals with mental illness are not receiving the services they need and tragically, sometimes a small number of these individuals turn violent. I have supported access to affordable and accessible mental health services for all Americans and I will continue to review proposed solutions to improve our mental health system. As lawmakers consider an appropriate response to this challenging issue, we should consider all of the factors that could prevent such heinous acts.

As you may know, I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. Pennsylvania has a fine hunting and sporting tradition, and I will defend the right to bear arms as it is enshrined in our Constitution. I will continue to back the right to bear arms for purposes of self-defense, recreation, sporting and collection. However, I also believe that the attack at Sandy Hook Elementary School highlights very serious dangers posed to public safety by the misuse of certain weapons and technology originally developed for warfare. According to reports, the shooter was able to kill many children and adults very quickly because he possessed a military-style semiautomatic weapon. He also allegedly used magazines containing up to 30 rounds of ammunition and carried hundreds of rounds more. After much reflection and careful study of the issue, I have decided to support a federal assault weapons ban as well as legislation restricting high capacity magazines. In light of what occurred at Sandy Hook, these are two measures that will lessen the chances that this will happen again. Before supporting such a law, I would first and foremost ensure that it did not unduly abridge the right to bear arms as established by the Second Amendment.

Our Nation has already begun a critical dialogue as we examine what steps must be taken to prevent this type of tragedy in the future. On January 17, 2012, President Obama unveiled a package of proposals to reduce gun violence, which included strengthening the system of background checks, reinstating the assault weapon and high-capacity magazines ban, improving school safety and expanding access to mental health services. I look forward to reviewing these proposals in detail and to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to address this complex issue.

On January 24, 2013, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California introduced S. 150, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. This legislation would explicitly permit the possession of affected firearms that were owned prior to the bill’s enactment; firearms that are manually operated; firearms used by military, law enforcement and retired law enforcement; and antique weapons. Further, this legislation lists 2,258 hunting and sporting rifles and shotguns that are entirely exempt from the ban.

This legislation would ban the sale, transfer, manufacturing and importation of all semiautomatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one of seven specified military features. S. 150 would further ban semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one of certain listed military features, as well as ammunition magazines that can accept more than 10 rounds. The Assault Weapons Ban would also regulate the transfer and storage of permitted, grandfathered weapons and allow local law enforcement to use certain federal funds for voluntary gun buyback programs. The Assault Weapons Ban was referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, of which I am not a member. Please be assured that should this legislation come before the full Senate for consideration, I will have your views in mind.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.

For more information on this or other issues, I encourage you to visit my website, http://casey.senate.gov. I hope you will find this online office a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.

Sincerely,
Bob Casey
United States Senator

P.S. If you would like to respond to this message, please use the contact form on my website: http://casey.senate.gov/contact/
__________________
In a victim nation, a classroom full of dead children is morally superior to a teacher holding a smoking gun knowing she just protected her students.
__________________
“After a shooting spree, they always want to take the guns away from the people who didn't do it.” - William S. Burroughs
nfafan is offline  
Old February 11, 2013, 07:20 PM   #222
Warrior1256
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 8, 2013
Location: Louisville, Ky.
Posts: 8
Typical reply from the senator. But your reply to him was fantastic!
Warrior1256 is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 08:09 AM   #223
ZeSpectre
Member
 
 
Join Date: October 10, 2006
Location: Deep in the valley
Posts: 5,476
Letter sent to Va 6'th District Mr. Robert Goodlatte
-----------------------------

Mr. Goodlatte;

I write you as a citizen who is gravely concerned about the attitudes being taken towards American citizens and their rights and freedoms. While I am both angered and saddened by the actions of a few loose cannons in our society this cannot and must not be allowed to change the core beliefs upon which this Nation and the Commonwealth of Virginia were founded.

I would like for you to stand strong against the poorly considered and emotionally driven gun control policies being rushed forward and ramrodded through the judicial process without consideration as to the economic and legal impacts of the vast majority of citizens who have not, and will never, commit any sort of crimes.

Universal background checks sound like a good idea, but anyone who doubts the abuse that would follow such a de facto gun registration list should study more history including the confiscation actions taken by California in the 1990s even after they expressly promised no such actions would happen.

Modern semi-automatic rifles (media labeled with the pejorative "Assault weapons") and their magazines are extremely common, middle-of-the-road equipment, and exactly the kind of items that the Second Amendment protects. A vote to ban or restrict either is a vote against our own Bill of Rights.

As a constituent, I expect that you will do me the courtesy of letting me know how you are going to vote on gun-control bills that institute universal background checks or that ban or restrict either so called "assault weapons" or their magazines.
__________________
.
"The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on"
ZeSpectre is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 11:03 AM   #224
dukelubas
Member
 
 
Join Date: February 12, 2013
Location: Philly, PA
Posts: 1
I received the same exact response yesterday and it made my blood boil. I've been going over my response in my head ever since and I keep re-writing it (in my head) going from shear raging passion to a more rational response. I fear that even responding will fall on deaf ears. HOW DO WE GET THROUGH TO THESE PEOPLE? Something tells me that we are NOT going to change an anti's mind no matter how much we try and even IF we were to get them to sway to pro, it'll only be to save their hide so they can get re-elected. Holding a vote over a representative's head is not what I call a good compromise.

On another note, here's the response I received from Toomey. A bit better, but it doesn't give me the warm and fuzzies.

Dear [redacted],


Thank you for contacting me about gun control. I appreciate hearing from you.

As you may know, January 16, 2013, President Obama announced a variety of gun policy measures in response to the Newtown, CT killings. I therefore value knowing your views on this important issue, which is important to me as I carefully review the President's proposals. Like many Pennsylvanians, I believe that Second Amendment rights are important and must be protected, but there may be areas of agreement with the White House that can be addressed to improve public safety. I also believe that people who use guns in an illegal manner or harm others with them should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.

That said, we have consistently observed that mass killings are the result of serious mental illness. We therefore need to better protect ourselves from mentally ill individuals who seek to carry out such atrocities, including improved background checks. We also need to review and improve how we take care of the mentally ill. As I continue working with my Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle on public safety, please be assured that I will keep your views about firearms in mind.

Thank you again for your correspondence. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can be of assistance.


Sincerely,


Pat Toomey
U.S. Senator, Pennsylvania
dukelubas is offline  
Old February 12, 2013, 11:21 AM   #225
Pilot
Member
 
 
Join Date: December 29, 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 5,339
I received the same responses after two seperate emails to Casey, and one to Toomey. I agree, Toomey's isn't much better.

I also sent a few emails to Jim Gerlach, my Rep, and his wasn't much better.

Quote:
Dear Mr. Pilot:

Thank you for your contacting me regarding your thoughts on gun control. I appreciate the opportunity to respond.

As you may know, in the aftermath of the school shootings in Newtown, CT, Vice President Joe Biden was charged with leading a task force including members of advocacy groups, teachers, elected officials, and sports and wildlife conservationists to prepare recommendations for President Obama on how to reduce gun violence. On January 16th, President Obama unveiled this broad package of measures that range from legislative proposals to ban assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition clips to Executive Orders to improve incentives for states to contribute records to federal background check systems established under existing law. I look forward to the President bringing these plans to Congress where I hope to have an open and honest discussion with my House colleagues and constituents about how to protect the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens while, at the same time, preventing those who lack the ability and competency to responsibly use firearms from obtaining and using them to harm innocent victims.

Let me make it explicitly clear that my policy positions and votes on legislation are driven and determined by what I believe will be in the best interests of the over 700,000 constituents who I represent in the Sixth Congressional District of Pennsylvania. Our constituency is made up of individuals with a diverse range of opinions and beliefs on all issues, including polarizing and sensitive topics such as gun control, and it is my responsibility to take into consideration all of these thoughts and opinions before making any final decision as to how I will vote on legislation.

With that being said, during my tenure in Congress, I have supported legislation to preserve and protect the constitutional rights of our citizens, including those rights provided under the Second Amendment. However, as is the case with every bill that comes to the House floor, I will evaluate each piece of legislation and weigh the costs, benefits and expected impact of such legislation against the concerns and views of my constituents and one's Second Amendment right to bear arms.

Thank you for contacting me regarding this important issue. Please let me know if I can be of any assistance to you or your family in the future.

With kind regards, I am

Sincerely,

Jim Gerlach
Member of Congress
So, he doesn't vow to uphold the Second Amendment, he will weight the costs and benefits against the concerns and views of his constituents. Meaning if he perceives many of his constituents are for gun bans, he will vote for them even if it violates the 2A. Just great.
__________________
Pilot
Pilot is offline  
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation by vB Optimise.
This site, its contents, Shooting Reviews, and its contents are Copyright (c) 2010-2013 Firearms Forum, Inc.
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Although The High Road has attempted to provide accurate information on the forum, The High Road assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of the information. All information is provided "as is" with all faults without warranty of any kind, either express or implied. Neither The High Road nor any of its directors, members, managers, employees, agents, vendors, or suppliers will be liable for any direct, indirect, general, bodily injury, compensatory, special, punitive, consequential, or incidental damages including, without limitation, lost profits or revenues, costs of replacement goods, loss or damage to data arising out of the use or inability to use this forum or any services associated with this forum, or damages from the use of or reliance on the information present on this forum, even if you have been advised of the possibility of such damages.