Langenator
Member
Letter to Many Editors
This is a draft of a letter I'm going to send to the editor of every paper I can find in the state of WA. Senator Murray is up for re-election this year, and I'm attempting to make sure every hunter in the state knows she wants their deer rifle.
Comments welcome.
-------------
Senator Patty Murray doesn’t want law abiding American citizens to have modern rifles. At least, she doesn’t want you to be able to use them. That’s the only possible interpretation that can be drawn from her votes in the Senate earlier this month. Apparently, the Second Amendment’s guarantee that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed†holds no meaning for Washington’s senior senator.
During the debate on the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in the first week of March, several amendments were offered to the bill. One of these was propsed by Senator Feinstein of California, whose attitude toward guns in the hands of ordinary citizens is summed up by her statement, “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them in.†This amendment would have extended the Clinton semi-automatic weapon ban. Apparently, Senator Murray feels that firearms that fire on bullet every time the trigger is pulled are too dangerous for the average citizen to own, because she voted in favor of the amendment.
Another amendment, proposed by Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts, would have banned what Senator Kennedy called “armor piercing†ammunition. Senator Kennedy’s definition of “armor piercing†means anything that will penetrate standard police body armor. The problem with this definition is that police body armor is designed to stop only pistol bullets. Due to bullet shape and higher velocity, most rifle bullets, including virtually all of the most popular calibers used for hunting, will penetrate police body armor with little trouble. Even the lowly .223, popular for hunting coyotes, woodchucks, and other small game, and so lacking in lethality on larger game that most states forbid its use for deer hunting, punches holes in police body armor. Other popular hunting rounds, such as the .30-30, .30-06, and .308, similarly penetrate body armor. Yet even though rifle rounds can penetrate body armor, they are rarely used in crime, for the simple reason that rifles are large, bulky, and hard to hide. And yet Senator Murray supported this amendment, which would have made your hunting rifle as useless as a car with no gasoline.
I have written to Senator Murray, and received replies stating that she supports “protecting the rights of legitimate, law-abiding gun owners.†But her actions say differently. And actions speak louder than words.
This is a draft of a letter I'm going to send to the editor of every paper I can find in the state of WA. Senator Murray is up for re-election this year, and I'm attempting to make sure every hunter in the state knows she wants their deer rifle.
Comments welcome.
-------------
Senator Patty Murray doesn’t want law abiding American citizens to have modern rifles. At least, she doesn’t want you to be able to use them. That’s the only possible interpretation that can be drawn from her votes in the Senate earlier this month. Apparently, the Second Amendment’s guarantee that “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed†holds no meaning for Washington’s senior senator.
During the debate on the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act in the first week of March, several amendments were offered to the bill. One of these was propsed by Senator Feinstein of California, whose attitude toward guns in the hands of ordinary citizens is summed up by her statement, “Mr. and Mrs. America, turn them in.†This amendment would have extended the Clinton semi-automatic weapon ban. Apparently, Senator Murray feels that firearms that fire on bullet every time the trigger is pulled are too dangerous for the average citizen to own, because she voted in favor of the amendment.
Another amendment, proposed by Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts, would have banned what Senator Kennedy called “armor piercing†ammunition. Senator Kennedy’s definition of “armor piercing†means anything that will penetrate standard police body armor. The problem with this definition is that police body armor is designed to stop only pistol bullets. Due to bullet shape and higher velocity, most rifle bullets, including virtually all of the most popular calibers used for hunting, will penetrate police body armor with little trouble. Even the lowly .223, popular for hunting coyotes, woodchucks, and other small game, and so lacking in lethality on larger game that most states forbid its use for deer hunting, punches holes in police body armor. Other popular hunting rounds, such as the .30-30, .30-06, and .308, similarly penetrate body armor. Yet even though rifle rounds can penetrate body armor, they are rarely used in crime, for the simple reason that rifles are large, bulky, and hard to hide. And yet Senator Murray supported this amendment, which would have made your hunting rifle as useless as a car with no gasoline.
I have written to Senator Murray, and received replies stating that she supports “protecting the rights of legitimate, law-abiding gun owners.†But her actions say differently. And actions speak louder than words.
Last edited: