larry starling
Member
Sent to both Senators!
Hello,
I am writing to voice my opposition to the upcoming assault weapons ban legislation proposed by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California.
The summary of this legislation indicates sweeping and expensive reform that will provide little to no benefit to the country, and at great cost. Protection of home and hearth, hunting, and the shooting sports (which consist of some of America’s greatest pastimes), are all at risk of severe impact from this legislation. Additionally, the law will be specifically disregarded by criminal elements of our great society, while abiding Americans will be forced to pay significant fees to keep firearms that they already own and may depend upon, and make significant changes to their usage of these weapons (such as magazine limits, thumbhole stocks, etc).
I understand that in your position you feel a duty to respond to recent tragedies that have struck and captured the attention of our nation. Please recognize that additional gun control legislation will not stop deranged killers, and do not cop out of the public spotlight on this issue by passing this legislation instead of demanding that the government enforce the laws which are already in place and address mental health issues and database records of mentally incapable individuals in this country.
Here is the ridiculous response I got to my letter. Obviously I should expect a form letter, but an intern could at least select an appropriate response rather than one that agrees with an entirely different position than I showed.Here is the letter I wrote:
Hello,
I am writing to voice my opposition to the upcoming assault weapons ban legislation proposed by Senator Dianne Feinstein of California.
The summary of this legislation indicates sweeping and expensive reform that will provide little to no benefit to the country, and at great cost. Protection of home and hearth, hunting, and the shooting sports (which consist of some of America’s greatest pastimes), are all at risk of severe impact from this legislation. Additionally, the law will be specifically disregarded by criminal elements of our great society, while abiding Americans will be forced to pay significant fees to keep firearms that they already own and may depend upon, and make significant changes to their usage of these weapons (such as magazine limits, thumbhole stocks, etc).
I understand that in your position you feel a duty to respond to recent tragedies that have struck and captured the attention of our nation. Please recognize that additional gun control legislation will not stop deranged killers, and do not cop out of the public spotlight on this issue by passing this legislation instead of demanding that the government enforce the laws which are already in place and address mental health issues and database records of mentally incapable individuals in this country.
Used this to find the appropriate individuals:
http://www.contactingthecongress.org/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi
Thank you very much for your correspondence regarding gun control. I share your concerns and unequivocally support federal solutions to the deadly epidemic of gun violence in our communities. New Jersey is rated by the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence as having the second strongest controls on guns in the country. Unfortunately, however, New Jersey's efforts are tragically stymied by guns purchased in states with weaker gun laws and then transported to our communities. This must stop!
Millions of Americans own guns, and far too often these guns fall into the hands of "high risk" individuals. This is a nationwide problem. As the unfortunate incident at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Connecticut indicates, gun violence can happen anywhere. As such, I am in strong support of the establishment and strict enforcement of gun control laws that make sense, so we can ensure that our communities will become safer places to live for our children and for future generations.
While some Americans believe the only answer to gun violence is tougher penalties for lawbreakers, I believe our government should take a more proactive approach. The Brady Law of 1994 has blocked the sale of firearms to over 1.6 million felons, fugitives, and other individuals prohibited from buying guns under federal law. Other proactive approaches include renewing the assault-weapons ban, closing the gun-show loophole, mandating the installation of trigger locks, prohibiting the sale of firearms to persons on terrorist watch lists, instituting limits on handgun purchases, and eliminating influxes of cheaply made weapons. I view these measures as reasonable life-saving limitations on gun-ownership rights.
Protecting our communities is one of my highest priorities. Therefore, I will be a strong advocate for meaningful gun-control measures that will keep our neighborhoods safe.
As a constituent of the 10th Congressional District of New Jersey, I am honored to work on your behalf and encourage you to contact me about issues that are important to you. Please visit my website www.payne.house.gov, where you may sign up for my electronic newsletter and receive periodic updates on my activities.
Sincerely,
Donald M. Payne, Jr.
Member of Congress
I disagree with your position and will be donating money to your opponents in future elections.
Mr. Speaker,
As you know, legislation is set to be proposed that would unduly restrict the firearms and accessories of law-abiding citizens. It is imperative these bills not be brought up for a vote. There is no demonstrable need for addiitional laws, which are widely accepted to have little impact on the incidence of crime or mass shootings. I do not support any new gun legislation that does not repeal existing ineffective firearms restrictions.
Thank you for considering my position on this matter, and for your continued service to our nation,
TCB
(emphasis supplied)C5rider said:. . . .I am an informed American citizen that has been blessed to live in this great republic and enjoy the freedoms given to us by our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. . . .