larry starling
Member
Sent to both Senators!
Resources
- Thread starter hso
- Start date
reggie_love
Member
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2012
- Messages
- 38
Even if your reps are obviously anti-gun, write 'em anyway. Let them know it's costing them your vote. This way they'll know how politically expensive the legislation they're pushing is to them and their party.
Wrote all my reps, split my christmas bonus between JPFO, NRA, and GOA. Civic engagement feels good.
Wrote all my reps, split my christmas bonus between JPFO, NRA, and GOA. Civic engagement feels good.
I borrowed a bit from Billy Shears, but improved upon some areas that I though were lacking some concept of the mental health field, and having uneducated folks make "lists" and such.
Here is my version..
"
I have refrained from writing to you on this matter before now, as it seemed only decent to wait a few days, unlike those who immediately leaped to politicize this horror in Connecticut. But having heard the increasing calls for gun control, and statements from prominent politicians that this represents “a tipping point,” I am compelled to write to you and express my vehement opposition to a renewal of the so-called “assault weapons ban,” or any other similar legislation. Why anyone imagines such legislation will be effective is a mystery I have yet to solve. As William Ralph Inge said, “It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism, while wolves remain of a different opinion.” Gun control laws, which will only be observed by the law abiding, amount to sheep passing a resolution in favor of vegetarianism. Yet criminals, who are prepared to break other laws, against murder, robbery, rape, and other offenses – laws which carry far greater penalties for breaking them than any gun control ordinance – are to be expected to balk at laws carrying or using guns because they have been outlawed? This makes no kind of sense.
Every year in this country, guns are used by law abiding people to defend themselves; even the lowest estimates put such uses in the hundreds of thousands per year. In 1994, the Department of Justice commissioned a survey which put the number at one and half million. Now, anti-gun zealots would put the ability of decent, law-abiding people at risk because of a single incident, horrific though it was, that cost a score of lives. I don’t say this to be callous or to make light of the lives lost at the Sandy Hook Elementary School. But these events are rather like plane crashes: both spectacular, headline-grabbing events, but both are rare, and the loss of life from other causes actually far outstrips them. Many people are afraid of flying, and news of an airliner crashing will feed that fear. Yet the fact remains that if you want to travel from New York to Los Angeles, you are far more likely to arrive safely if you get on an airliner than if you climb into the family car to do it. However, if the family sedan is hit by a drunk driver, no one outside your family and friends will probably ever hear of it. If the airliner crashes, on the other hand, the whole nation will. So, such spectacular events as plane crashes make the news, and feed people’s fears of flying. Yet all the while, vastly greater numbers of lives are lost in automobile accidents.
It is much the same with firearms. One spectacular, news-making tragedy like Sandy Hook feeds people’s fears of guns, and stokes the demand for gun control. But none of those laws will be obeyed by criminals or madmen, and may cost far more lives than they save when law-abiding people, who will comply with the new laws, are thereby disarmed. None of the proposals I am hearing would have stopped Adam Lanza.
A properly trained concealed carry permit holder -in this case- teacher, security, or school resource officer may have prevented, or minimized this tragedy.
Gun-free zones are delusional concept in false sense of security. Statistics prove this, as do such recent events. That is a related but different discussion.
Today I am writing to you to stand up for the gun rights of the law-abiding citizens.
I, and many others believe the United States Constitution is the most supreme document in the modern world.
According to the second amendment, we have a right to be armed against tyranny, foreign and domestic. To be armed, one must be able to be equally armed. Making illegal higher capacity magazines, and certain ergonomic and cosmetic features would halter the design of the second amendment.
Not only that, but we plain out have fun at the range with our guns, as we ought to be able to.
But I realize that you and your colleagues in Congress are under tremendous pressure to do something. But I implore you to resist the knee-jerk calls for actions that will not have the slightest positive impact, and instead focus your efforts on achieving something that will help. The real problem that needs to be addressed is with the deranged individuals who commit these crimes.
Myself and many other believe some very simple yet highly effective measures could be standardized with the NICS background check system, and state level mental health records.
I am aware in some states, when a person is delayed for further review in the NICS system, the state has a process for sending relevant court and mental health records in for consideration.
I believe some basic factors should be standardized with this concept.
NICS should be able to access a basic profile on a persons mental health records, like they can conviction records, at the point of the call in, anybody that is deemed high risk, is immediately delayed, and the transaction is sent up for further review by someone with some unbiased education in the field of psychology.
If a person meets so much criteria, the transaction ought to be denied, much like a person with a felony conviction.
Then there is already an appeals process in place, that could be improved to include opinion of current or former medical care providers of said person, and friends and family, and local law enforcement Intel could be presented, and a formal process to solidify the denial, or put this person into a lower risk category, and proceed the transaction.
With such a measure, we need a system of checks and balances. We need to make sure that a regular Joe who sought treatment for depression 4 years ago, does not see his gun rights or other rights disappear.
We need to make sure unelected bureaucrats are not in a position to further an agenda that would take away the rights of for example:
A person who lost their spouse to cancer and had a nervous breakdown a few years ago, because instead of having the time to take off from work to properly heal and cope, they had to make a mortgage payment, keep working, keep going, and somehow make the income of one work with a planned life of two incomes and such.
Then you will have a solid achievement to point to when asked what steps have been taken to prevent another such tragedy as the one at Sandy Hook, and such a measure as this will not infringe the 2nd amendment rights of ordinary Americans, and will have the support of the NRA and other gun rights organizations, such as Gun Owners of America, National Association for Gun Rights, and Second Amendment Foundation. It’s a better idea, it’s politically feasible, and it’s more just. This is an opportunity to improve upon existing laws or look into the idea to enact laws that may actually work, instead of infringing on the rights of the people with ineffective and unwarranted false solutions that actually do more harm than good, and cost a lot of time and money.
If you recall the election that followed the passage of the ineffective and agenda-influenced "Assault Weapon Ban" of 1994.. EVERY gun owner in America remembered who had forsaken the constitution, and many were voted out. With modern technology, the internet, and social media.. the facts are out there, the statistics are out there, and so are the votes of every senator and congressperson.
I hope you take the opportunity to consider the facts, and get to the bottom, and offer some real solutions, if any. Banning inanimate objects from law abiding citizens does harm to the country, and the constitution.
Sincerely,
"
Here is my version..
"
I have refrained from writing to you on this matter before now, as it seemed only decent to wait a few days, unlike those who immediately leaped to politicize this horror in Connecticut. But having heard the increasing calls for gun control, and statements from prominent politicians that this represents “a tipping point,” I am compelled to write to you and express my vehement opposition to a renewal of the so-called “assault weapons ban,” or any other similar legislation. Why anyone imagines such legislation will be effective is a mystery I have yet to solve. As William Ralph Inge said, “It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions in favor of vegetarianism, while wolves remain of a different opinion.” Gun control laws, which will only be observed by the law abiding, amount to sheep passing a resolution in favor of vegetarianism. Yet criminals, who are prepared to break other laws, against murder, robbery, rape, and other offenses – laws which carry far greater penalties for breaking them than any gun control ordinance – are to be expected to balk at laws carrying or using guns because they have been outlawed? This makes no kind of sense.
Every year in this country, guns are used by law abiding people to defend themselves; even the lowest estimates put such uses in the hundreds of thousands per year. In 1994, the Department of Justice commissioned a survey which put the number at one and half million. Now, anti-gun zealots would put the ability of decent, law-abiding people at risk because of a single incident, horrific though it was, that cost a score of lives. I don’t say this to be callous or to make light of the lives lost at the Sandy Hook Elementary School. But these events are rather like plane crashes: both spectacular, headline-grabbing events, but both are rare, and the loss of life from other causes actually far outstrips them. Many people are afraid of flying, and news of an airliner crashing will feed that fear. Yet the fact remains that if you want to travel from New York to Los Angeles, you are far more likely to arrive safely if you get on an airliner than if you climb into the family car to do it. However, if the family sedan is hit by a drunk driver, no one outside your family and friends will probably ever hear of it. If the airliner crashes, on the other hand, the whole nation will. So, such spectacular events as plane crashes make the news, and feed people’s fears of flying. Yet all the while, vastly greater numbers of lives are lost in automobile accidents.
It is much the same with firearms. One spectacular, news-making tragedy like Sandy Hook feeds people’s fears of guns, and stokes the demand for gun control. But none of those laws will be obeyed by criminals or madmen, and may cost far more lives than they save when law-abiding people, who will comply with the new laws, are thereby disarmed. None of the proposals I am hearing would have stopped Adam Lanza.
A properly trained concealed carry permit holder -in this case- teacher, security, or school resource officer may have prevented, or minimized this tragedy.
Gun-free zones are delusional concept in false sense of security. Statistics prove this, as do such recent events. That is a related but different discussion.
Today I am writing to you to stand up for the gun rights of the law-abiding citizens.
I, and many others believe the United States Constitution is the most supreme document in the modern world.
According to the second amendment, we have a right to be armed against tyranny, foreign and domestic. To be armed, one must be able to be equally armed. Making illegal higher capacity magazines, and certain ergonomic and cosmetic features would halter the design of the second amendment.
Not only that, but we plain out have fun at the range with our guns, as we ought to be able to.
But I realize that you and your colleagues in Congress are under tremendous pressure to do something. But I implore you to resist the knee-jerk calls for actions that will not have the slightest positive impact, and instead focus your efforts on achieving something that will help. The real problem that needs to be addressed is with the deranged individuals who commit these crimes.
Myself and many other believe some very simple yet highly effective measures could be standardized with the NICS background check system, and state level mental health records.
I am aware in some states, when a person is delayed for further review in the NICS system, the state has a process for sending relevant court and mental health records in for consideration.
I believe some basic factors should be standardized with this concept.
NICS should be able to access a basic profile on a persons mental health records, like they can conviction records, at the point of the call in, anybody that is deemed high risk, is immediately delayed, and the transaction is sent up for further review by someone with some unbiased education in the field of psychology.
If a person meets so much criteria, the transaction ought to be denied, much like a person with a felony conviction.
Then there is already an appeals process in place, that could be improved to include opinion of current or former medical care providers of said person, and friends and family, and local law enforcement Intel could be presented, and a formal process to solidify the denial, or put this person into a lower risk category, and proceed the transaction.
With such a measure, we need a system of checks and balances. We need to make sure that a regular Joe who sought treatment for depression 4 years ago, does not see his gun rights or other rights disappear.
We need to make sure unelected bureaucrats are not in a position to further an agenda that would take away the rights of for example:
A person who lost their spouse to cancer and had a nervous breakdown a few years ago, because instead of having the time to take off from work to properly heal and cope, they had to make a mortgage payment, keep working, keep going, and somehow make the income of one work with a planned life of two incomes and such.
Then you will have a solid achievement to point to when asked what steps have been taken to prevent another such tragedy as the one at Sandy Hook, and such a measure as this will not infringe the 2nd amendment rights of ordinary Americans, and will have the support of the NRA and other gun rights organizations, such as Gun Owners of America, National Association for Gun Rights, and Second Amendment Foundation. It’s a better idea, it’s politically feasible, and it’s more just. This is an opportunity to improve upon existing laws or look into the idea to enact laws that may actually work, instead of infringing on the rights of the people with ineffective and unwarranted false solutions that actually do more harm than good, and cost a lot of time and money.
If you recall the election that followed the passage of the ineffective and agenda-influenced "Assault Weapon Ban" of 1994.. EVERY gun owner in America remembered who had forsaken the constitution, and many were voted out. With modern technology, the internet, and social media.. the facts are out there, the statistics are out there, and so are the votes of every senator and congressperson.
I hope you take the opportunity to consider the facts, and get to the bottom, and offer some real solutions, if any. Banning inanimate objects from law abiding citizens does harm to the country, and the constitution.
Sincerely,
"
Last edited:
OP
OP
Keep 'em short and focused on one point if you want them to be effective.
SilentStalker
Member
Thank you for all of those that have written their congressman. This is something we must do. However, I would like to address the point that I think most of us need to be more stern in our letters. In others words, instead of being all nice about it we need to blatantly tell them that any legislation enforcing any of these proposed bans or any ban of any kind will be met with resistance. That will get them thinking. I am serious about this. The time for being nice about it is over. We need to stand our ground and speak with a stern voice that this will not be tolerated.
I would also like to point out that many of us have not even brought up the fact that if these bans do get put in place then they could be effecting 150,000-200,000 people's jobs. That is a lot of people without work in an already dismal economy. Not to mention all of those soldiers from overseas that may be coming home looking for work. What are they going to do with all of those people? I bet you money that they have not even thought about that. Anyways this really hits close to home for me because I work in the industry and I just thought it might be something else to bring up in the letters you guys write to your congressmen. Thanks guys/gals.
I would also like to point out that many of us have not even brought up the fact that if these bans do get put in place then they could be effecting 150,000-200,000 people's jobs. That is a lot of people without work in an already dismal economy. Not to mention all of those soldiers from overseas that may be coming home looking for work. What are they going to do with all of those people? I bet you money that they have not even thought about that. Anyways this really hits close to home for me because I work in the industry and I just thought it might be something else to bring up in the letters you guys write to your congressmen. Thanks guys/gals.
Doc7
Member
Here is the letter I wrote:
Used this to find the appropriate individuals:
http://www.contactingthecongress.org/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi
Used this to find the appropriate individuals:
http://www.contactingthecongress.org/cgi-bin/newseek.cgi
GiorgioG
Member
I thought the http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-locally/grassroots/write-your-reps.aspx was the easiest place to identify/contact every one of your state / federal reps.
Gryffydd
Member
One common theme I've noticed on THR lately is a lot of comments along the lines of "Well, I know my reps are anti-gun, so I'm not going to bother writing them".
Maybe if your rep is Feinstein, that's one thing...
But I can't help but think that this is the wrong attitude. No matter how anti-gun they are they should get flooded with letters, emails, emails, and calls. It may not make any difference in the end, but then again it may. And in any case they should get a feel for how many of their constituents disagree with them and how strongly. If everyone did this it might just be an eye-opening experience for them.
Maybe if your rep is Feinstein, that's one thing...
But I can't help but think that this is the wrong attitude. No matter how anti-gun they are they should get flooded with letters, emails, emails, and calls. It may not make any difference in the end, but then again it may. And in any case they should get a feel for how many of their constituents disagree with them and how strongly. If everyone did this it might just be an eye-opening experience for them.
Tim the student
Member
I apologize if this has already been posted, but this thread may be worthwhile to read for those writing letters - which should be all of us.
It may contain some swearing, I don't recall.
It may contain some swearing, I don't recall.
Screamin'Eagle
Member
Done.
first time for everything
i have never been one to get involved with much because i either didnt know how or did not want to say or do something that would hurt or effect what ever it was i was for or possibly against. i now realize my voice needs to be heard so i contacted my senators here is one response i have recieved thus far.
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison <[email protected]>
9:18 AM (5 hours ago)
to me
Dear Friend:
Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control legislation. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.
While we all support the strongest measures to ensure that guns do not end up in the wrong hands, I believe that one of the most powerful deterrents we have is the consistent, full enforcement of the numerous laws that already address many aspects of the problem. For instance, there are more than a dozen laws at the state and federal level that deal with the use, carrying, ownership, or trafficking of guns, and we must prosecute without qualification those who violate these laws.
Rather than usurping the rights of law-abiding citizens, I believe we should vigorously prosecute those who use guns to commit crimes. I have worked to enact federal anti-crime legislation that imposes tough minimum sentences on those convicted of using firearms to commit crimes, prevents early parole for violent criminals, and provides federal funds to build new prisons and fund local law enforcement. I will continue to support legislation that fights crime and upholds our Second Amendment rights.
On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court upheld the individual right to keep and bear arms in District of Columbia v. Heller. I submitted an amicus brief to the Court in support of affirming the District of Columbia's gun ban as unconstitutional, and was joined by 55 Senators, 250 House members, and the Vice President of the United States. This historic decision will affect gun laws throughout the country that try to unjustly undermine our rights under the Second Amendment.
I appreciate hearing from you, and I hope that you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
i am still waiting to hear back from the other senator i contacted.
i say come on guys if i can do it so can everyone else,we need to stand together and let our voices be heard.
i have never been one to get involved with much because i either didnt know how or did not want to say or do something that would hurt or effect what ever it was i was for or possibly against. i now realize my voice needs to be heard so i contacted my senators here is one response i have recieved thus far.
Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison <[email protected]>
9:18 AM (5 hours ago)
to me
Dear Friend:
Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control legislation. I welcome your thoughts and comments on this issue.
While we all support the strongest measures to ensure that guns do not end up in the wrong hands, I believe that one of the most powerful deterrents we have is the consistent, full enforcement of the numerous laws that already address many aspects of the problem. For instance, there are more than a dozen laws at the state and federal level that deal with the use, carrying, ownership, or trafficking of guns, and we must prosecute without qualification those who violate these laws.
Rather than usurping the rights of law-abiding citizens, I believe we should vigorously prosecute those who use guns to commit crimes. I have worked to enact federal anti-crime legislation that imposes tough minimum sentences on those convicted of using firearms to commit crimes, prevents early parole for violent criminals, and provides federal funds to build new prisons and fund local law enforcement. I will continue to support legislation that fights crime and upholds our Second Amendment rights.
On June 26, 2008, the Supreme Court upheld the individual right to keep and bear arms in District of Columbia v. Heller. I submitted an amicus brief to the Court in support of affirming the District of Columbia's gun ban as unconstitutional, and was joined by 55 Senators, 250 House members, and the Vice President of the United States. This historic decision will affect gun laws throughout the country that try to unjustly undermine our rights under the Second Amendment.
I appreciate hearing from you, and I hope that you will not hesitate to keep in touch on any issue of concern to you.
Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator
i am still waiting to hear back from the other senator i contacted.
i say come on guys if i can do it so can everyone else,we need to stand together and let our voices be heard.
Doc7
Member
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.
Doc7
Member
Sent back:
Unfortunately, I think I may be the only Republican in the 10th district of NJ.
Unfortunately, I think I may be the only Republican in the 10th district of NJ.
Dr. Sandman
Member
Here's My Letter!!!
Here my letter to Congress. Feedback desired!
Dear Three Members of Congress and the President-
Please Vote “NO” on the Assault Weapons Ban!!!
I am your constituent, and I urge you to vote no on Senator Feinsteins Assault Weapons Ban. The details of the ban are oppressive, heavy handed, and over reaching.
The only solution to bad guys with guns are good guys with guns. The results of this bill becoming law will ensure that law-abiding citizens are less well armed than criminals, degenerates, and psychopaths.
The suggested registration of firearms is a chilling reminder of pre World War 2 Germany, where forced registration made it easy for Hitler and the Nazi’s to confiscate guns and disarm the Jews. There is but one real purpose of forcing gun registration, and it is the future confiscation of firearms from law-abiding citizens. Remember, criminals and crazies won’t register their guns. Registration does not keep guns out of the hands of the bad guys. Note that the Newtown Massacre culprit did not own any guns, and would not have had to register any. The entire bill is very disturbing, but this is the most worrisome part.
Prohibition of the transfer of grand fathered guns is also very disturbing. U.S. Citizens have the right to own property and the confiscation of said property, even after death, is wrong. Part of the right of owning property is being able to buy and sell that property. That was and is the intension of the founding fathers. If an item is permitted to own, how can there be no trade? In addition, many of these guns are treasured heirlooms that have already come down from generations, and the owners of these guns wish to pass them to their children. Is Senator Feinstein going to take my farm when I’m dead, too?
The list of guns exempted by name contains not a single handgun. This bill lays the groundwork for the future prohibition of all handguns, a right that has recently been confirmed by the Supreme Court in the Heller case.
The bill seeks to ban “high capacity ammunition feeding devices” in addition to “assault weapons”. Many have asked “Why does the average citizen need an assault rifle and a 30 round magazine?”. The answer is in Bill of Rights.
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
This says nothing about hunting, self defense, sport shooting or target practice (Although the very weapons most used in these practices are those which the bill seeks to ban). This says that the people may one day need to fight an army. Thus military style weapons should not be prohibited. In fact, this amendment serves to create a check on the government. I find it highly interesting that there are those who want to dissolve this check.
You swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. Please uphold it by voting “NO” on Senator Feinsteins Assault Weapons Ban.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Dr. Sandman
Here my letter to Congress. Feedback desired!
Dear Three Members of Congress and the President-
Please Vote “NO” on the Assault Weapons Ban!!!
I am your constituent, and I urge you to vote no on Senator Feinsteins Assault Weapons Ban. The details of the ban are oppressive, heavy handed, and over reaching.
The only solution to bad guys with guns are good guys with guns. The results of this bill becoming law will ensure that law-abiding citizens are less well armed than criminals, degenerates, and psychopaths.
The suggested registration of firearms is a chilling reminder of pre World War 2 Germany, where forced registration made it easy for Hitler and the Nazi’s to confiscate guns and disarm the Jews. There is but one real purpose of forcing gun registration, and it is the future confiscation of firearms from law-abiding citizens. Remember, criminals and crazies won’t register their guns. Registration does not keep guns out of the hands of the bad guys. Note that the Newtown Massacre culprit did not own any guns, and would not have had to register any. The entire bill is very disturbing, but this is the most worrisome part.
Prohibition of the transfer of grand fathered guns is also very disturbing. U.S. Citizens have the right to own property and the confiscation of said property, even after death, is wrong. Part of the right of owning property is being able to buy and sell that property. That was and is the intension of the founding fathers. If an item is permitted to own, how can there be no trade? In addition, many of these guns are treasured heirlooms that have already come down from generations, and the owners of these guns wish to pass them to their children. Is Senator Feinstein going to take my farm when I’m dead, too?
The list of guns exempted by name contains not a single handgun. This bill lays the groundwork for the future prohibition of all handguns, a right that has recently been confirmed by the Supreme Court in the Heller case.
The bill seeks to ban “high capacity ammunition feeding devices” in addition to “assault weapons”. Many have asked “Why does the average citizen need an assault rifle and a 30 round magazine?”. The answer is in Bill of Rights.
Amendment II
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
This says nothing about hunting, self defense, sport shooting or target practice (Although the very weapons most used in these practices are those which the bill seeks to ban). This says that the people may one day need to fight an army. Thus military style weapons should not be prohibited. In fact, this amendment serves to create a check on the government. I find it highly interesting that there are those who want to dissolve this check.
You swore an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America. Please uphold it by voting “NO” on Senator Feinsteins Assault Weapons Ban.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Dr. Sandman
OP
OP
Elected officials opposing an AWB will receive my ardent support during the next elections and those supporting it will receive my passionate opposition.
Any AWB is a failed idea. This is not an opinion but a fact stated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), The University of Pennsylvania, and the National Institute for Justice. Even the Brady Commission admits to the trivial effect of the last national AWB. It doesn't address the root cause of the shooting at Sandy Hook. It is unconstitutional in the light of the SCOTUS rulings on DC and Chicago clarifying that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right. It is unworkable because of the burden it would add on the federal budget with the additional bureaucracy it creates and because it would turn millions of voters into felons when they fail to register their existing firearms thinking their firearms isn't included in the ban. It is insulting and offensive because it treats 200 million voters as if they were criminally insane instead of actually spending the money to treat the criminally insane.
If you oppose an AWB I pledge financial support and to work for your reelection to keep a rational elected official in office. On the other hand, any support for an AWB will result in my donating that money to your opponent and my passionately working for any opponent running to unseat you. This will be the case regardless of your opponents stance on and AWB. The backlash against politicians who supported the 1994 AWB will pale in comparison to the backlash against those that don't oppose such misguided politically motivated legislation.
Any AWB is a failed idea. This is not an opinion but a fact stated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), The University of Pennsylvania, and the National Institute for Justice. Even the Brady Commission admits to the trivial effect of the last national AWB. It doesn't address the root cause of the shooting at Sandy Hook. It is unconstitutional in the light of the SCOTUS rulings on DC and Chicago clarifying that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right. It is unworkable because of the burden it would add on the federal budget with the additional bureaucracy it creates and because it would turn millions of voters into felons when they fail to register their existing firearms thinking their firearms isn't included in the ban. It is insulting and offensive because it treats 200 million voters as if they were criminally insane instead of actually spending the money to treat the criminally insane.
If you oppose an AWB I pledge financial support and to work for your reelection to keep a rational elected official in office. On the other hand, any support for an AWB will result in my donating that money to your opponent and my passionately working for any opponent running to unseat you. This will be the case regardless of your opponents stance on and AWB. The backlash against politicians who supported the 1994 AWB will pale in comparison to the backlash against those that don't oppose such misguided politically motivated legislation.
Last edited:
Sent this, use and change as it suits;
Dear Senator ----,
As a resident of the State of _______ and a firearms enthusiast I am writing you to express my grave distress about the Honorable Senator Feinstein's upcoming proposed legislation concerning a firearms and magazine capacity ban.
The summary of the proposed legislation found on the Honorable Senator Feinstein's website shows that it is a rewrite of H.R. 3355 –Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 with some disturbing additions. These alarming additions to the current bill will make millions of currently law abiding citizens into potential criminals with the stroke of a pen should it be passed. During the time that H.R. 3355 was an active law and after its sunset in September of 2004 there was no statistical indication that either its enforcement nor its sunset had any measurable impact on crime as the crime rate has continued the trend of dropping since its enaction and after its sunset. The Honorable Senator Feinstein's assertion that a new ban will reduce the rate of murder and violent crime attributable to semi automatic rifles and 'high capacity' magazines is logically flawed and has no statistical evidence to corroborate it.
I implore you as my representative in the United States Senate and as an American to vote no on this bill.
Sincerely,
Dear Senator ----,
As a resident of the State of _______ and a firearms enthusiast I am writing you to express my grave distress about the Honorable Senator Feinstein's upcoming proposed legislation concerning a firearms and magazine capacity ban.
The summary of the proposed legislation found on the Honorable Senator Feinstein's website shows that it is a rewrite of H.R. 3355 –Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 with some disturbing additions. These alarming additions to the current bill will make millions of currently law abiding citizens into potential criminals with the stroke of a pen should it be passed. During the time that H.R. 3355 was an active law and after its sunset in September of 2004 there was no statistical indication that either its enforcement nor its sunset had any measurable impact on crime as the crime rate has continued the trend of dropping since its enaction and after its sunset. The Honorable Senator Feinstein's assertion that a new ban will reduce the rate of murder and violent crime attributable to semi automatic rifles and 'high capacity' magazines is logically flawed and has no statistical evidence to corroborate it.
I implore you as my representative in the United States Senate and as an American to vote no on this bill.
Sincerely,
I am trying to draft a letter. Can I get an opinion?
Dear Congressman ---,
I'm writing today to convey my concerns regarding the gun control legislation currently being discussed in the wake of several recent tragedies. The intention of these laws are to reduce the incidence and deadliness of mass shootings, however, I do not believe they are an effective means of doing so.
I studied chemistry and psychology in college with the intent of going to graduate school in a psychology or neurobiology related field, and have friends who study the biological, clinical, and social aspects of psychology. The motivations that drive people to commit senseless acts of violence is complex and poorly understood, but the fact that our country lacks an effective means of helping treat mentally ill individuals is a major factor in these tragedies.
I believe the answer to these issues lies in better mental health care, and less in gun control laws. I would feel more comfortable with a greater number of guns and fewer mentally ill individuals rather than the opposite.
Sincerely,
---
Dear Congressman ---,
I'm writing today to convey my concerns regarding the gun control legislation currently being discussed in the wake of several recent tragedies. The intention of these laws are to reduce the incidence and deadliness of mass shootings, however, I do not believe they are an effective means of doing so.
I studied chemistry and psychology in college with the intent of going to graduate school in a psychology or neurobiology related field, and have friends who study the biological, clinical, and social aspects of psychology. The motivations that drive people to commit senseless acts of violence is complex and poorly understood, but the fact that our country lacks an effective means of helping treat mentally ill individuals is a major factor in these tragedies.
I believe the answer to these issues lies in better mental health care, and less in gun control laws. I would feel more comfortable with a greater number of guns and fewer mentally ill individuals rather than the opposite.
Sincerely,
---
dc.fireman
Member
I wrote a letter to Sen. Mark Warner(D)-Va. this evening, using leadcounsel's letter as a starting point. I'm glad I did - here's a clip from his most recent interview with NPR:
SI: Senator, I wanted to ask about one other thing. Our sports commentator Frank Deford was on the air this week and he said that gun control advocates will take an opportunity like this to push their positions and gun rights advocates will push back on their positions and it’s a predictable dance and nothing will really change, he said. Unless sportsmen, hunters, decide that they are willing to push for what they might see as reasonable gun restrictions. Do you think that’s right?
Senator Warner: I think we need to hear their voices in this conversation and I think they will. And I again hope that those listeners who are hunters and gun owners will step up as well.
SI: Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, always a pleasure to speak with you, thanks very much.
Remember, this guy has presidential aspirations...
SI: Senator, I wanted to ask about one other thing. Our sports commentator Frank Deford was on the air this week and he said that gun control advocates will take an opportunity like this to push their positions and gun rights advocates will push back on their positions and it’s a predictable dance and nothing will really change, he said. Unless sportsmen, hunters, decide that they are willing to push for what they might see as reasonable gun restrictions. Do you think that’s right?
Senator Warner: I think we need to hear their voices in this conversation and I think they will. And I again hope that those listeners who are hunters and gun owners will step up as well.
SI: Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, always a pleasure to speak with you, thanks very much.
Remember, this guy has presidential aspirations...
GeeJ
Member
Wow! This thread really took off! I'm excited to see so much activism, collaboration and the will to go out of one's way to help another! The letters I'm seeing letters that illustrate with clarity that American gun owners are very well-informed of the actual facts and potential consequences surrounding these issues and that we will fight to defend them. Keep up the great work!!
Now, with my original thread post likely being buried (and VERY HAPPY to see that), I'd like to remind anyone interested in my original PDF attachment which helps streamline the layout process of a professional looking letter. With approval from forum Moderators, I put together a PDF form/auto-formatting template that users can simply copy-&-paste the content of their choosing (as all text fields can be edited) and the PDF will maintain proper formatting & layout, as well as automatically generating an addressed envelope; so that you don't have to. I have updated it and is attached below. Also, it can continuously be used for any future letter writing you might do. If I can help even one person, then I'm happy. I explain the finer details of the PDF in the original post of this thread.
I can't tell if anyone has been using it, but I'd would very much like feedback regarding functionality issues or ideas. However, please PM those messages because our present momentum in proactively engaging lawmakers like this and the willingness to help each other write the most impactful letter they can is EXPONENTIALLY MORE IMPORTANT.
Keep up your efforts! Be it in this thread, another thread, a different forum site, involvement with 2A organizations, or simply in your daily life!
As I said in my original post:
Letter writing from *only* the individual may have no impact by itself, but the collective voice of a great number DOES HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT and does influence the laws that govern our lives and that of those we love. Don't EVER feel discouraged, belittled, insignificant, or think that you are a letter writing nobody. You ARE important! YOU ARE IMPORTANT to you, YOU ARE IMPORTANT to your friends and family, YOU ARE IMPORTANT to all of us, and YOUR LETTERS ARE IMPORTANT to the rights and liberties that are worth what it cost to attain them and are certainly worth what it will cost to retain them.
Letter Layout Template To Lawmakers 12-24-2012
Now, with my original thread post likely being buried (and VERY HAPPY to see that), I'd like to remind anyone interested in my original PDF attachment which helps streamline the layout process of a professional looking letter. With approval from forum Moderators, I put together a PDF form/auto-formatting template that users can simply copy-&-paste the content of their choosing (as all text fields can be edited) and the PDF will maintain proper formatting & layout, as well as automatically generating an addressed envelope; so that you don't have to. I have updated it and is attached below. Also, it can continuously be used for any future letter writing you might do. If I can help even one person, then I'm happy. I explain the finer details of the PDF in the original post of this thread.
I can't tell if anyone has been using it, but I'd would very much like feedback regarding functionality issues or ideas. However, please PM those messages because our present momentum in proactively engaging lawmakers like this and the willingness to help each other write the most impactful letter they can is EXPONENTIALLY MORE IMPORTANT.
Keep up your efforts! Be it in this thread, another thread, a different forum site, involvement with 2A organizations, or simply in your daily life!
As I said in my original post:
Letter writing from *only* the individual may have no impact by itself, but the collective voice of a great number DOES HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT and does influence the laws that govern our lives and that of those we love. Don't EVER feel discouraged, belittled, insignificant, or think that you are a letter writing nobody. You ARE important! YOU ARE IMPORTANT to you, YOU ARE IMPORTANT to your friends and family, YOU ARE IMPORTANT to all of us, and YOUR LETTERS ARE IMPORTANT to the rights and liberties that are worth what it cost to attain them and are certainly worth what it will cost to retain them.
Letter Layout Template To Lawmakers 12-24-2012
Attachments
Boostedtwo
Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2012
- Messages
- 163
I'm not being negative in anyway I have contacted my senator on 2 occasions now, yesterday and about 2 months ago, I still have both reply emails from my senator and they both say the exact same thing, like they have it ready to just input your email and send to you.
Here is the message I have gotten 2 times from him:
Dear Mr. Pardue:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Newtown, Connecticut Elementary School shooting. I appreciate hearing from you about this tragic event.
On December 14, 2012, our nation experienced an unspeakable tragedy in Newtown. My thoughts and prayers go out to the victims of this terrible event, as well as to their families and loved ones. Now is the time to pause and reflect as to how we can prevent such events in the future in a manner consistent with our rights and values. Rest assured, I support law abiding American citizens who choose to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
In the wake of this tragedy, several pieces of legislation are expected to be introduced in the 113th Congress. Senator Dianne Feinstein announced her plans to introduce an assault weapons ban bill on the first day of the 113th Congress which would ban the sale, transfer, importation and possession of assault weapons, as defined in that bill, not retroactively, but prospectively. Her legislation would also ban the sale of clips of more than ten bullets. Additionally, President Obama has announced that Vice President Joe Biden will be heading up an effort to form administration polices to curb gun-related violence. The White House
Here is the message I have gotten 2 times from him:
Dear Mr. Pardue:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the Newtown, Connecticut Elementary School shooting. I appreciate hearing from you about this tragic event.
On December 14, 2012, our nation experienced an unspeakable tragedy in Newtown. My thoughts and prayers go out to the victims of this terrible event, as well as to their families and loved ones. Now is the time to pause and reflect as to how we can prevent such events in the future in a manner consistent with our rights and values. Rest assured, I support law abiding American citizens who choose to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
In the wake of this tragedy, several pieces of legislation are expected to be introduced in the 113th Congress. Senator Dianne Feinstein announced her plans to introduce an assault weapons ban bill on the first day of the 113th Congress which would ban the sale, transfer, importation and possession of assault weapons, as defined in that bill, not retroactively, but prospectively. Her legislation would also ban the sale of clips of more than ten bullets. Additionally, President Obama has announced that Vice President Joe Biden will be heading up an effort to form administration polices to curb gun-related violence. The White House
barnbwt
member
- Joined
- Aug 14, 2011
- Messages
- 7,340
A bit of a kiss-ass, aren't I
? Whatever. The point is, don't bring gun control up for debate/vote, and you can continue doing the Speaker of the House thing you like so much. I would be open to new legislation returning some of the rights of gunowners wrongly/pointlessly taken during past "crises"TCB
^^^Even if you don't get a real reply, pols are all about "data mining" these days, so the intent of your message was likely hashed out in four or five keywords, and compiled into a statistic or internal poll. Such is our Brave, New, Democracy.
A short and to the point letter
Dear sir,
I urge you to vote against further restrictions on our right to keep and bear arms. Recent events have been tragic, however restricting the rights of law abiding, tax paying, and voting citizens will do nothing to curb these tragities. Education is much more effective than prohibition.
Sincerely,
N--------
Gun owner and voter
Dear sir,
I urge you to vote against further restrictions on our right to keep and bear arms. Recent events have been tragic, however restricting the rights of law abiding, tax paying, and voting citizens will do nothing to curb these tragities. Education is much more effective than prohibition.
Sincerely,
N--------
Gun owner and voter
C5rider
Member
My Letter...
Penned this and on its way to all my reps in big, white, domed buildings.
I am an informed American citizen that has been blessed to live in this great republic and enjoy the freedoms enumerated by our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I participate in our election system with careful research. As such, I cannot vote for any representative that will not follow their sworn oath, which they took while entering office, to uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
I am writing to urge you to continue to uphold your oath of office, and protect the 2nd Amendment from more gun control. I am certain you are under considerable pressure at this time to pass legislation in the name of public safety to prohibit, regulate, or otherwise control firearms. I believe however, that the rights protected by the Constitution should be firmly held and protected.
Knee jerk calls for gun control are never the answer. The 2nd Amendment is too important. I appreciate your time and hope that you will continue to support and defend the Constitution that you have sworn to uphold.
Thank you for your service.
Penned this and on its way to all my reps in big, white, domed buildings.
I am an informed American citizen that has been blessed to live in this great republic and enjoy the freedoms enumerated by our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I participate in our election system with careful research. As such, I cannot vote for any representative that will not follow their sworn oath, which they took while entering office, to uphold the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
I am writing to urge you to continue to uphold your oath of office, and protect the 2nd Amendment from more gun control. I am certain you are under considerable pressure at this time to pass legislation in the name of public safety to prohibit, regulate, or otherwise control firearms. I believe however, that the rights protected by the Constitution should be firmly held and protected.
Knee jerk calls for gun control are never the answer. The 2nd Amendment is too important. I appreciate your time and hope that you will continue to support and defend the Constitution that you have sworn to uphold.
Thank you for your service.
Last edited:
Overall, a pretty good letter. It's concise and hits those emotional notes that play so well in Peoria (metaphorically speaking). I would point out one quick thing though:
Technically, the US Constitution and BoR doesn't "give us" rights. It enumerates them. IOW, it just spells out pre-existing rights, and the BoR restricts the gov't's ability to regulate or restrict them. Mind you, I've gotten emails from congressfolks who also referred to "rights given to us by the Constitution. I never got a response to the emails that I sent correcting them.
(emphasis supplied)C5rider said:
Technically, the US Constitution and BoR doesn't "give us" rights. It enumerates them. IOW, it just spells out pre-existing rights, and the BoR restricts the gov't's ability to regulate or restrict them. Mind you, I've gotten emails from congressfolks who also referred to "rights given to us by the Constitution. I never got a response to the emails that I sent correcting them.
Atbat82
Member
I've written to all my reps. Not sure it will help (My congresswoman is DeLauro...), but it only takes 10 minutes and it just might help. No downside as far as I can tell.
