Action: now's the time to walk the walk...by talking the talk

[alan]

Via capitol switchborad toll free number (1-800-648-3516), I again contacted the offices of Senators Arlen Specter and Rich Santorum along with Congresswoman Melissa Hart.

Message was as follows: Cannot to strongly urge that you oppose the extention, broadening, making permanent or in any way maintaining the existing Assault Weapons ban, scheduled to "sun set" September 2004. Ditto for the useless limits on capacity of firearm magazines, otherwise known as "ammunition feeding devices".

These restrictions are bad law, they serve no legitimate public purpose, they must die.

 

[AZTOY]

E-mail sent to

Sen. Jon Kyl

Sen. John McCain

Rep. Raul Grijalva

The printed letters will be in the mail today!!

3-12-03
Dear, Sen. John McCain
As you know, the restrictions on certain types of rifles, what some people call the "Assault Weapons Ban" will sunset in Sept of 2004. This will be a decisive issue for your party, and your attempt to get candidates elected.
In 1994, the bill was passed by a Democrat majority House of Representative and Senate. Two months later, for the first time in nearly 50 years, the Republicans won a majority in the House and also the Senate. These two circumstances are linked. Gun owners took the Democrats out of control and put the Republicans in. In every election since, gun owners have made the difference in the majority. We plan to do the same thing in 2004
Millions of gun owners will be watching this issue. We are in every precinct, in every county, in every state of the country. That is a dense saturation of votes.
However your party stands on this issue, will determine how those millions of gun owners will vote.
I, like millions of others, will not vote for a party that stood against my Constitutional rights. Letting the ban sunset is in your best interest.
Sincerely,
Frank Berki Jr

 

[Giant]

Question?

I would like to participate in this, but I have a question regarding proper protocol. Is it ok to contact any member of congress, instead of ones elected representative? I have given up with writing Boxer, Feinstein, Stark, since replaced by another house member, I think Mike Honda is the new one.

Anyway, these California folk have shut the door on communicating with any constituent who is not in complete agreement with their far, far, far to the left socialist ideology.

Also, I'm thinking some mention should be made by those who do write about the hugh amounts of money gun owners put into the national economy each year. I know that all sportsmen and women contribute to the national economy a recently quoted figure of 70 billion per year.

In this age of instant communication, we as a nationwide organized group linked on many online forums and special interest groups (SIGS) stand a good chance of achieving non renewal for this particular piece of poison legislation that was meant to break the back of law abiding gun owners, gun dealers, and gun manufacturers in america.

Many have a tendency to bash antigun people. Don't do it! This time let us show what we are about by writing well thought out polite factual intelligent letters.

Finally, since some may not have really killer ideas on letter content, I urge others here to post a few examples of letter form and content.

Vote! Vote in every election, it is the only way to win...

Giant

 

[alan]

Giant:

In no particular order, I will make so bold as to try to answer some of your questions.

1. I do not believe that there is any such thing as a "killer letter". I belive that all that is required is a calm, reasoned presentation of whatever is is that you think important or worth while saying. You might, take a quick look at my post, copied below, for your convenience.

Via capitol switchborad toll free number (1-800-648-3516), I again contacted the offices of Senators Arlen Specter and Rich Santorum along with Congresswoman Melissa Hart.

Message was as follows: Cannot to strongly urge that you oppose the extention, broadening, making permanent or in any way maintaining the existing Assault Weapons ban, scheduled to "sun set" September 2004. Ditto for the useless limits on capacity of firearm magazines, otherwise known as "ammunition feeding devices".

These restrictions are bad law, they serve no legitimate public purpose, they must die.

2. If your congresscritters are a "dead loss", as seems to be the case, try others, for you are paying them, and legislation that they vote on could effect you, even though you might not live in "their" district. Always try to be polite, speaking to others, as you would like to be spoken to.

3. I know nothing of Mike Honda. As to Boxer and Feinstein, they ran for office, and obviously they were elected. Gunnies need to do better.

That's about it for now, have to finish packing for a trip tomorrow. Hope the above help, even just a little.

I noticed your mention of engineering. Who is still out there in the Bay Area. Many years ago, when I lived out that way, and was a Piping Designer, I worked at Bechtel, and WKE, a subsidiary of Arthur G. McKee in San Francisco, and Ehrhart and Associates, probably spelled it wrong, in Oakland and the Martinez Shell Oil refinery. Lived about 1/2 mile, maybe less away from Kaiser Engineers in Oakland for a while.

This was late 60's early 70's, yeah, a long time ago. We used to shoot on the range at Fort Barry, across the GG Bridge and through the one way tunnel, and the Marine Corps range at Vallejo. Also there was a small 200 yard range at Chabot Park, in the hills above Oakland as well as some others in odd corners. In those long past days, Spengers under the freeway in Berkley was a good place for fish. Then there were the Basque places in North Beach and of course all the Italian joints same area. Oriental eats were very good too, if you fancied that style. Great food, and believe it or not, you could sit down in a resturant or bar and smoke a pipe, cigaretts or cigars, without so much as a peep from anyone.

As the late P.O. Ackley once observed, "while change indicates movement, it isn't necessarily movement in the direction of improvement". Enough of this foolishness.

 

[othermarc]

On Feb 18, 2003, I contacted Sen. Chris Dodd (CT) at
The Honorable Christopher J. Dodd
US Senate
Washington, DC 20515-1103
(202) 224-2823

Also Contacted Sen. Joe Lieberman (CT) at
The Honorable Joseph Lieberman
US Senate
Washington, DC 20515-1103
(202) 224-4041

and finally Rep. Christopher Shays (CT-4th District) at
The Honorable Christopher Shays
1126 Longworth
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202) 225-5541

I wrote them a 1 page letter about letting the AW ban sunset as it has stopped little, if any crime. I also invited them to contact me or visit me to discuss the matter. No response as of yet.

 

[Giant]

Alan

your comments are right on. Looks like there are enough hints in this thread to guide most who would want to write or call their congress critters, whether they be from their district, or a committee member who might be of help on the issues at hand. I intend to write some letters, a few minutes of letterwriting may pay off big time for all gun owners.

California is starting to look like a ghost town, nearly every company in the Bay Area is laying off workers and not replacing those who retire, etc. Electronic engineers are driving cab, sling hash as short order cooks and such, that is if they can even get a job. Looks like the state is in a meltdown implosion. The only answers those in elected office have is to raise taxes.

Spengers was there a couple of years ago, I think it is gone now, recall reading of it's demise some months back.

Vote! The politicians don't want you to vote, so tic them off by voting!!!!!!

Giant

 

[Malone LaVeigh]

I just wrote a letter to Feinstein, for what it's worth. I tried to appeal to her political sense, that the issue is a loser for Democrats. I did so in a respectful tone (it wasn't easy) in which I acknowledged what is good and worth preserving of the Democrats' agenda (not as hard.)

I don't know if it will make any difference, but it's worth a try.

 

[Kaylee]

Gadzooks, finally sat down with a telephone.. halfway there.

I called the offices of four of the supposedly sympathetic reps on the judiciary committee -- Feeney, Keller, Pence, and Goodlatte. In talking with their staffers, Congressman Keller's staff was quite vocal in agreement that it's got to go.. the others didn't really know where their Congressman stood, and promised to get the message to him, and write back.

Four down, four to go. I've not bothered with the Idaho contingent yet 'cause they ain't on the judiciary commitee, so they haven't seen it. But I'll prolly hassle 'em again soon anyhow.

ALSO.. I called the NRA, making it clear that my continuing membership was based on their holding the line here. The woman I spoke with assured me that such was their intention, but they're playing their cards close to the chest at this point, and not wanting to "tip their hand" yet.

I also asked if Mr. Heston would mind raising up something made "anytime in the last century" sometime... no response but a giggle on that one. Nice girl.


whee...

-K

 

[DeltaElite]

Since Oleg threw down the gauntlet concerning this thread in another thread, here I am.

I have contacted my congress and house rep. In fact I talked to my congressman in his office while on a courtesy visit concerning the protestors that are expected at his office.
I don't see where it will change a thing, he is going to do what it takes to get him elected for what is his 5th term, which is vote to keep the ban.

I am very cynical and I don't think we have much input into our govt anymore. The politicians are bought and paid for by special interest groups. So I don't expect to have any impact on them.

 

[Oleg Volk]

The politicians are bought and paid for by special interest groups.

We are a SIG, too! Buy honest politicians who stay bought...that tends to be less exciting but often more efficient than either doing nothing or asking Henry Bowman to ride again.

 

[DeltaElite]

Well I am a poor SIG, I can't buy off anyone.

Hopefully the NRA, GOA, etc can accomplish something.

BTW, when I first read SIG, I wanted to be a P-220 in 45acp.

 

[labgrade]

We are a "special interest group," if you can call those who'd wish our constitution actually meant what it says.

Alas for that.

As it is, I'd suggest doing a bit of research to find the specific zip codes of those in current influence & write as if you lived there/a constituent.

Sauce for the goose.

Lying? Yup. Deceitful? Of course.

 

[Hard Charger]

I am with a group of people that have a website regarding the sunset; www.awbansunset.com

Any contact info you need will be available there.

Other people to contact:

President Bush probably doesn't read letters, probably doesn't pay much attention to them, and I don't blame him. He is a busy guy.

Chairmen of the National Congressional and National Senatorial Committees are the guys that determine the national platforms they hope will increase their numbers in the House and Senate. They will listen and they will avoid a stance that will cost them seats. They will also influence the President with respect to hot topics that could hurt them in the election.

Politics is all about the numbers. The guy with the most wins. So the individual chairmen will have their ears to the ground, listening for the path of least resistance. We have got to convince them that path is the sunset.

If we put the heat on our 2 Senators, 1 Representative, and the National Level Chairmen, they will feel the heat, and respond accordingly. We want the republican proud to oppose the renewal, and the Democrats afraid to support it. Feinstein and Schumer don't have to worry about reelection, (as long as they are Democrats, they will win) so they will be free to do what they want, but they will need support. We have to make sure they don't get it.

If we turn the heat up on the Democrats, they will be scared of the issue and afraid to oppose the millions of gun owners in every precinct of America.

Even Terry McAuliffe will avoid the issue if he fears it will cause a repeat of the 2002 congressional and senatorial elections.

American gun owners have made the difference in every election since 1994, we know and they know it. We just need to remind them that we are aware of it.

Gun owners need to be the 800 pound gorilla.


Chairman of the Republican National Senatorial Committee, George Allen

http://www.nrsc.org/nrscweb/aboutus/

Chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. Tom Reynolds;

http://nrcc.org/nrcccontents/issuesagenda/contact.shtml


National Republican Committee Chairpeople: (addresses at bottom of pages)

http://www.rnc.org/rncleadership/chair.htm Mark Racicot

http://www.rnc.org/rncleadership/cochair.htm Ann Wagner



The Democrats

http://www.dscc.org/information/contact/ John Corzine Chairman

http://www.americashouse.org/index.phtml?here=yes Robert Matsui, Chairman

http://www.Democrats.org/ Terry McAuliffe, Chairman



Another tactic we are pursuing is to get a booth at gun shows and have people there to discuss it with people as they walk by. Perhaps even give them contact lists, for those that are not on the net.

We have a commitment from one promoter Claude Hall Gun Shows for free table or booth space. If we can get people to attend and spread the word, it will vastly increase the numbers of gun owners that are involved.

I don't mean to take away any effort here at the High Road. But if you want to help in our effort, please stop by our site. We have a forum specifically for gun show coverage. It is called "awbansunset.com army".

http://www.awbansunset.com/forums/


We are trying to list cities and promoters so we can have a place for organization of our efforts.

As interest grows, we will be getting with more promoters. I am willing to bet that most promoters will be glad to provide free table space for us to use. Especially since we are not selling merchandise.

Please stop by, see what we are trying to do, help if you can. We are open to suggestions.

 

[Hard Charger]

Send something like this to the Chairmen:


Dear Chairman [Name],

As you know, the restrictions on certain types of rifles, what some people call the "Assault Weapons Ban" will sunset in Sept of 2004. This will be a decisive issue for your party, and your attempt to get candidates elected.

In 1994, the bill was passed by a Democrat majority House of Representative and Senate. Two months later, for the first time in nearly 50 years, the Republicans won a majority in the House and also the Senate. These two circumstances are linked. Gun owners took the Democrats out of control and put the Republicans in. In every election since, gun owners have made the difference in the majority. We plan to do the same thing in 2004

Millions of gun owners will be watching this issue. We are in every precinct, in every county, in every state of the country. That is a dense saturation of votes.

However your party stands on this issue, will determine how those millions of gun owners will vote.

I, like millions of others, will not vote for a party that stood against my Constitutional rights. Letting the ban sunset is in your best interest.



Sincerely,







Dear Chairman [Name],

As you know, the Republicans have held the majority in the Congress since 1994. Two months after the passage of the so-called "Assault Weapons Ban". It is America's gun owners that have made the difference in every election since 1994. It is America's gun owners that will make a difference in 2004.

Will your party support or oppose a renewal of the "Assault Weapons Ban", knowing it will be political suicide to support it?

Millions of gun owners, including myself, all across the nation will be watching this issue, and this issue will be the determining factor in how those millions of gun owners will vote.



Sincerely,

__________

 

[labgrade]

"President Bush probably doesn't read letters, probably doesn't pay much attention to them, and I don't blame him. He is a busy guy."

Yes he is.

& so much the better that this renewal never, ever sees the light of day - to preserve our Elected Leader the burden of ever dealing with the renewal - save 'im/he's busy.

& really who cares what The Prez thinks at all?

Call, harrass (that's not a sexual term, for ya'll Southern-folks, BTW ),whatever your House-reps to make sure this sunsets.

If this thing never passes The House, it never gets any air-time in the least for any signing.

Beat it to death in The House.

 

[general]

I recently received this reply from Rep. Joel Hefley, Colorado Fifth District.....
"As you may know, I have always opposed gun control proposals that would place onerous burdens on law-abiding citizens. Also, I have consistently opposed efforts to give free reign to all individuals interested in owning a gun. I support the instant-check system and believe it is working...."
"My position on gun control has remained the same throughout my time in Congress. I have always been a firm supporter of legislation that perserves the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens to own firearms, and that punishes those who use firearms irresponsibly."
Anyway, I wish we didn't need any "legislation" to preserve our constitutional rights.... but.
To contact him...
Washington Office
Joel Hefley
2230 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
(202)225-4422
or
6059 South Quebec, Suite 103
Englewood, Co. 80111
(303)843-0401

I will continue to keep banging away at these public servants with clear, concise and respectful letters, e.mail and telephone calls urging them to respect the 2nd Amendment as it was intended.
:banghead:

 

[justice4all]

I recently wrote letters to both my Senators--Allard and Campbell--as well as to my extremely liberal "representative" in the House, Udall.

I received a reply from the Allard camp; I think it's the same letter he sends back everytime someone writes him about gun issues. He tends toward our side.

No word from the other two, yet.

Slightly off-topic, but I also sent several postcards to various state reps and sens in regard to the new CCW and preemption laws passed this term. Some were thanks for representing my views; others were reminders that I'm watching, and won't forget how they opposed my views.

Keep up the pressure guys. It's often whoever is loudest that gets their laws enacted.

 

[labgrade]

"I received a reply from the Allard camp; I think it's the same letter he sends back everytime someone writes him about gun issues."

Please post - wanna see how it's the same" as what I get.


"Keep up the pressure guys. It's often whoever is loudest that gets their laws enacted."

Indeed. Squeaky wheel 'n all that entails.

They feel that their furture guvmint employment is on the line & they'll see the light.

 

[justice4all]

labgrade,

I'm not going to type out the whole reply, as it's a page and a half single-spaced, but it starts out as follows:

"Thank you for contacting my office regarding various gun control initiatives prompted by recent tragedies in our state and nation. I appreciate hearing your feedback on bills which have come before the Senate."

Then there are seven more paragraphs, ending with one about the Lautenberg amendment to the Juvenile Justice Act.

Because the letter is so outdated and general, I assume it's a standard form letter. Hope this helps.

 

[edamon]

So does this sunset affect us in California? Or is our assault weapons ban they passed in 2000 - naming every freakin make and model a seperate issue?

-d

 

[alan]

edamon:

The "sun set" provision involves FEDERAL LAW. Unfortunately, you poor folks in California have a serious LOCAL problem.

I cannot say what the solution for it is or might be, other than the possibility of action by/in the federal courts, or possibly USSC. Of course, if the people of California quit electing the anti-gun/anti civil rights trash that they send to Sacramento, not to mention local elections too, something might be accomplished there.

30 plus years ago, I lived in Oakland and Berkley for a couple of years. In some ways, nothing much seems to have changed, in other ways, a lot has changed, seemingly for the worse, but since I haven't lived in California for many years, what do I know.

 

[Rembrandt]

I applaud everyones efforts, just some things to consider....

This issue hinges on a couple of "what ifs"....it's a political football that neither party knows how to play at this time. "IF" the Democrats early polling shows "gun issues" are a winner for their next election run and they decide to base their campaigns on it....you can be sure the media will be running specials showing fanatics with machine guns every night on the news. This would put pressure on the Republicans to bring the bill up. Many in the House and Senate will be looking closely to see how much political damage they will suffer...also depends how strong Bush is at that time.

"IF" the polling shows Democrats will take another big loss by focusing on guns and they steer clear of making this a campaign issue....then the House & Senate will try to avoid the topic and it will slowly die on the shelf.

The future will hinge on how the Democrats approach this....just have to wait and see.

 

[alan]

Rembrandt:

Re "sun set", an acquaintance of mine is a supervisory agent with the BATFE, as it is now known. Last time I saw him, he did not have horns and or a tail.

I spoke with him a week or so ago, curious as to what he might have heard, either offically or "on the grape vine" regarding this matter.

He said that Officially, he had heard nothing. As to the other aspects, he observed the following. That absent some nut blowing away a bunch of people, something that would really be helpfull to the anti gun side, he thought that the sun would on the assault weapons ban, as well as that business of capacity limits for "ammunition feeding devices", also known as detachable magazines.

Personally, having thought about it some, I'm inclined to agree, which is most definately NOT saying that the pro-gun side can or should "relax". That has been done before, "relaxing" and such ill conceived actions has come back to haunt the pro-gun side. Let's NOT repeat past mistakes.

 

[Rembrandt]

Alan, my political sources in DC tell me a shooting spree could possibly start a fire under this again, it's all about timing....the Democrats also have to consider if they can afford to loose any more Union Gun owner votes by dredging this back up.....they failed to read the tea leaf's correctly last time and really got stung. Depends who is calling the shots on Democratic strategic side. If they did bring it back into the public spotlight, then it's up to the Republicans to defeat it....if things do not go well for GWB, he may not have the political capital to stop it's return....a lot of uncertainty in the political ranks.

 

[alan]

Rembrandt:

No doubt, the "politics" of the situation might well be the key, however consider this if you will.

Might the politics be driven by the antics of some possible nut case, or might it be the other way around?

Either way, I believe that the pro gun side must maintain pressure on the political types.