AWB renewal now on Senate calendar.!!!!!

[nico]

the people who "represent" me are some of the usual suspects. How can I write a letter to them that simultaneously shows I have no respect for them and isn't downright rude? I know the latter would make it totally ineffective (not that it would be anyway) but I refuse to pretend like I have any more respect for them than a cicada.

Senator Sarbanes strongly supported the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 that forbids the manufacture, sale, or possession of nineteen assault-style weapons typically used in criminal activity. These weapons, such as the UZI, the AK-47, and the "Street-Sweeper," are used primarily for harming people rather than hunting or target shooting, and are all too frequently being used by criminals to commit violent crimes against policemen and ordinary citizens.

I'm not throwing in the towel by any means, but "my" senators were elected with 63 and 71% of the vote and the representative was elected with 73% of the vote. They really don't care what I think whatsoever :banghead:

 

[general]

PUMC_TomG:
It's ok to ask to speak with the person you're calling for, ie: "Is the Honorable Senator Whoever available?"
I don't believe he/she will be available, but you never know. Ask who you are speaking with, I write it down in a log book I keep by the phone, then leave your short, concise message with the staffer, they are paid to do that - and they are usually of the same mindset as the person who employs them. If they give you grief, I have a fax for that.
Everyone:
Check to see if your PC will do faxes... don't wait till later - you won't have time - late nite (2AM) faxes cost about a nickle.

 

[Moparmike]

When is this up for a vote?

 

[twency]

Or should I just expect to talk to some staffer who may or may not pass on my message?

My sister-in-law used to be a staffer for a conservative member of Congress. She said they kept a tally sheet of every call and every letter for or against a particular bill or position. They didn't always relay the details of what was said (kind of tough when you're getting slammed with hundreds or even thousands of calls and letters on a subject) But they kept, at minimum, a record of how many constituents contacted, and the counts for yea or nay.

They would take calls, and listen politely, to non-constituents, but they didn't included them in the tallies, as I recall. (Even so, if you have the time and desire to contact someone who's not a rep for your district, go for it. You might still have an effect.)

She said their policy was fairly common (keep tally sheets on all positions), but of course your mileage may vary.

_________
"The parent who complained, Karen Young, doesn't want fish-shaped toy guns in her house because she accidentally shot an ex-boyfriend one time when the gun she was beating him with went off."

 

[alan]

general wrote:

PUMC_TomG:
It's ok to ask to speak with the person you're calling for, ie: "Is the Honorable Senator Whoever available?"
I don't believe he/she will be available, but you never know. Ask who you are speaking with, I write it down in a log book I keep by the phone, then leave your short, concise message with the staffer, they are paid to do that - and they are usually of the same mindset as the person who employs them. If they give you grief, I have a fax for that.
Everyone:
Check to see if your PC will do faxes... don't wait till later - you won't have time - late nite (2AM) faxes cost about a nickle.

You can certainly ask to speak with whomever it might be that you want to speak with, however it's unlikely that you will get the senator or congressperson themselves.

You might consider the following approach. Ask to speak with the staffer involved with the subject of your concern, whatever that might be. Sometimes they aren't available either, however you can usually leave a message for them, and at times, they will call back. I have had such return calls.

In any event, I suspect that even if you simply leave a brief message, along with your name and address, your coments will be tallied, numbers can count.

Other than the foregoing, once again, the TOLL FREE NUMBER FOR CAPITOL SWITCHBOARD IS 1-800- 839-5276. Faxes will work too. As for "snail mail", what with "mail security", it is quite possible that an ordinary letter will never get anywhere, other than some bureaucatic trash heap.

 

[Brat7748]

Being from New York my 2 senators are on the list of 11 co-sponsors of course. sending them a letter is a waste of a good stamp. BUT I can, have and will write to Rebublican party LEADERS and tell them in no uncertain terms that the PARTY will NOT ever get another 5 cents of support from me if they allow the bill to pass. Even if they are not my senators they are pols and they live and die for the MONEY!

 

[WilderBill]

If all your local congress critters are anti, you can still get their attention.
Just pretend that you voted for them last time, but won't even consider it again if they vote to extend the AWB.
They don't want to start thinking they might actually lose votes because of this.

 

[ShaiVong]

Sent..

Though our morons in Maine are worse than ole lady frankenstein; they vote for gun control, but at the same time parroting bullcrap about 'reasonably preserving the RKBA'. Give me a nose biter over a backstabber any day, at least those who vote for them know where they stand.

 

[redbone]

Following sent to Senators Lugar and Bayh:

"Senator Lugar:

I am writing to respectfully request that you vote against S.2498, Sen. Feinstein's bill that seeks renewal of the 1994 assault weapons ban. I do not believe that passage of this bill would in any way reduce crime, reduce the availability of these firearms to criminals (who I do not believe make much use of them in criminal activities anyway). In fact, this bill would only prevent lawful gun owners such as myself from obtaining these semi-automatic rifles in a newly manufactured form, as they are readily and legally available in the pre-1994 models. As such, the only real consequence of this bill is to continue the inflated prices on pre-1994 models, and make it more difficult and expensive for lawful gun owners to obtain them.

Certainly the criminal element in our society will not be deterred by another law against the activity that they pursue; i.e., someone who is already compelled to commit a federal crime such as bank robbery, murder, rape, etc. will not be deterred if they are faced with a firearms violation in addition to their other crimes.

I feel that S.2498 will only affect my ability to legally purchase and own these semi-automatic rifles, and I believe that the second Amendment guarantees me the right to do so. I urge you to vote against S.2498.

As a law-abiding gun owner, holder of B.S. and M.S. degrees, Eagle Scout and father of an Eagle Scout, and a 49-year old life-long resident of Indiana, I believe that my views are representative of a large portion of your constituency. On this day that our former president Reagan is laid to rest, I ask that you support the values that he embraced concerning our Constitutionally guaranteed personal liberties, and vote against S.2498."

Feel free to borrow this text, edit appropriately, and use it yourself.


Contact info:

[email protected] <[email protected]>

http://bayh.senate.gov/WebMail1.htm



RBH

 

[twency]

redbone, I really like the tone of that letter. I might semi-plagiarize it, since you gave permission. Thanks.

-twency

_________
"The parent who complained, Karen Young, doesn't want fish-shaped toy guns in her house because she accidentally shot an ex-boyfriend one time when the gun she was beating him with went off."

 

[burbanite]

redbone,

I have called their offices repeatedly, they listen and throw you in the "send a condescending form letter" pile. Calling is also a much more effective way of communicating your feelings, you will be tallyed immediately.

I am not saying we should give up, goodness knows I speak to their people and write constantly, it is just that Lugar is done after this term. He will move on to other things in D.C. and does not need our votes. We should impress upon him the notion that it is those that follow him that will be affected, those in his party that are the recipients of the bad will he left behind.

I commend you for taking the time to stand and be heard and offer condolences for having to put up with a snake in the grass like him.

 

[Rotty]

letters sent to ALL of my representatives, and already recieved a response from one.

 

[joe sixpack]

My first letters on the subject of gun control sent to the deadly duo
of Fienstein and Boxer.

cheers, ab

 

[Binkster]

I am also going do a letter my senators Specter and Santorum. Don't forget to mention in your calls and letters that the Center for Disease Control found in a study that the Assault Weapons Ban (and other similar gun laws) had no affect on reducing crime.

 

[ExtremeDooty]

You can also send emails to both parties at:
www.dnc.org
www.rnc.org

The more often they hear from us the better.

 

[alan]

If someone has already posed this question, bear with me please.

Given that in the NORMAL COURSE OF LEGISLATIVE EVENTS, a proposal is assigned to the relevant committee for their consideration, how come S. 2498, Feinsteins Latest went directly to The Senate Calender?

How did the necessary arrangements get made, or might it be that the answer is all to obvious, and composed of exactly two words. UNANIMOUS CONSENT, a very convenient ruse, which is usually derived from a NON-RECORDED VOTE, often cast in the dead of night.

Interested readers might want to pose such question to their respective "senate creatures"

 

[tulsamal]

Given that in the NORMAL COURSE OF LEGISLATIVE EVENTS, a proposal is assigned to the relevant committee for their consideration, how come S. 2498, Feinsteins Latest went directly to The Senate Calender?

I read the answer to that over on http://www.awbansunset.com/

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) has once again introduced legislation to renew the so-called "assault weapons" ban. S.2498 was introduced last week, and, by using a "nuclear option" referred to as Rule XIV, has gotten the bill placed on the Senate calendar.

As a Senate educational article on the subject puts it,

"Most bills are routinely referred to the committee with appropriate jurisdiction as soon as they are introduced. But if a Senator plans to introduce a bill and believes that the committee to which it would be referred will be unsympathetic, Rule XIV permits the Senator to bypass the standing committee system altogether and have the bill placed directly on the Calendar of Business, with exactly the same formal status the bill would have if it had been the subject of extensive hearings and exhaustive mark-up meetings in committee."

The article goes on to say that this option is considered a last resort by Senators, because it "undermines the committee system as a whole and because they do not wish to encourage a practice that can be used against their own committees."

So, Sen. Feinstein and her 11 co-sponsors (the usual suspects) have thrown down the gauntlet, and a true showdown is shaping up. Once again, we must contact our Senators, ESPECIALLY those who voted against the AWB renewal amendment several months ago, to stand firm in their opposition to this ill-conceived and proven ineffective idea. Because the AWB renewal has enough votes in the Senate to pass, a filibuster is likely the only way it can be stopped there

The Senators who voted against the recent amendment renewing the ban need our support and encouragement to stand their ground, as it the rhetoric put forth by the anti-gun side will undoubtedly be intense and viscous.

 

[alan]

tulsmal:

Thanks for the reference, though respecting this most "interesting" of senate rules, how come it was that when, on the very rare instance of pro-gun legislation being proposed, such bills NEVER escaped the committee system, notwithstanding the fact that the relevant committee, or it's chairperson might or would be "unsympathetic".

Does this "nuclear option" work only for avowed anti-gunners, and if so, how come, or is it that the senate leadership is gutless??

 

[BarnsBeware]

Despite the fact that the GOA website makes it so easy for you to act, man, I feel sick. I just sent mine to Feinstein and Boxer. You have to select one of "their topics" in order for your message to be heard. What a pretentious line of

I used a little bit of redbone's version, but I couldn't help editing it as it seems like that message was intended for a reasonable human being. Instead I had to be a little more... less subtle with my approach. Kept it civil, but it took all my strength and dignity.

I seriously think I'm gonna

 

[alan]

BarnsBeware:

I do not think that "picking one of their topics" is a problem, for the following reason, though I admit that I haven't seen either Feinstein's nor Boxer's e-mail form".

A number of elected officals, House and Senate use a "web mail form", which includes your information, name, address, e-mail address, phone number. Then they provide a listing of topics, which includes Gun Control, as well as "Other", Now then, if you stated that your letter, phone call or e-mail was not likely to change the minds of either Feinstein or Boxer, I'd agree, but that is another matter.

My Congress Person is Melissa Hart, and she is as pro-life as the proverbial summer's day is long. Her legislative actions and positions taken clearly show this, and I doubt that she is going to change her mind either. That aside, I have, from time to time, criticized some of her actions in this regard. I still contact her office.

 

[BarnsBeware]

Indeed, I also doubt she will change her mind, as the form letter I received back was very vague, and was of course, expected. I know that few legislators have the time and energy to respond to each and every one of their constituents. It just sucks to have to be reminded of how small your voice is every time you do what you think is right. I should have included <vent> tags...

Off to email the good guys next...

 

[BHPshooter]

Done.

I'm proud to have senators who have been against this every time it's come up. With some luck, we'll shoot this down this time.

Wes

 

[D_Burchfield]

Done. Been on top of this one since day one. Several letters to each senator and my congressional rep. I have recieved answers to each letter from all of them. At this point, Senators Zell Miller(D) and Saxby
Chambliss(R) are very pro 2nd Amendment. Chambliss is a co-sponsor of S.659. My congressman, Max Burns(R-GA) is on board as well. Let's keep their feet to the fire, though. We need to win this one.

Doug

 

[Nightcrawler]

Just heard back

I just heard back from one of MI's senators, Senator Debbie Stabenow.

Thank you . . .

. . for contacting me regarding the renewal of the federal assault weapons ban. I appreciate you taking the time to communicate your views with me.

As you know, the assault weapons ban of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 will expire in September, 2004. Senator Dianne Feinstein has introduced the Assault Weapons Ban Reauthorization Act (S.1034), which would reauthorize the ban for 10 more years.

Similarly, Senator Frank Lautenberg has introduced the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003 (S.1431) which would increase the scope of firearms defined as assault weapons, and prevent the federal assault weapons ban from expiring.

Currently, both these bills are pending in the Judiciary Committee, of which I am not a member. I share your concern about protecting second amendment rights and assure you that I will keep your strong views in mind if this important matter should come before the Senate for consideration.

Thank you again for contacting me. Please feel free to do so again if I may ever be of assistance in the future.


Sincerely,
Debbie Stabenow
United States Senator

Pretty generic and vague, but if what she said is true then the AW Ban renewal has been put to the Judiciary Committee.

 

[alan]

Nightcrawler:

Re your senator's letter, the one you posted, it's correct in-so-far as it goes. Interestingly, it doesn't go very far, and you did not indicate the date of this letter, which could be rather interesting respecting to the letter's representations.

The bills mentioned have been sent to The Judiciary Committee, however Feinstein's latest, S. 2498 escaped the committee system, having been placed, as a result of parlimentary legedermain, "on the senate calendar", where it could be brought to the floor, and voted on, most any time.

With respect to what I've read, and or heard of Senator Stabenow, I would not bet very much on her professed caring for The Second Amendment, but that is simply my take, and I do not live in Michigan.