I had my meeting this afternoon with the district director for Congressman Davis and it suprisingly went very well. When I entered the office and met the director he had a very solemn look on his face. The first words out of his mouth were "so as a physician I'm guessing that you want us to vote for H.R. 1022." I was stunned for a few seconds and almost coudn't get words out of my mouth.
Needless to say the mood lightened tremendously when he found that I was in opposition to the bill. He joked around with me a little bit and said that he thought he was in for a fight this afternoon as he was ready to have to defend himself on not supporting the bill. I first asked him about the article in which the Congressman said that he would support an assault weapons ban and he said something to the effect that it was taken out of context and Davis was only speaking of fully automatic weapons. I asked him if he knew that they were heavily taxed and no new weapons can be purchased by the general public since '86. He did know of the tax but did not know that no new ones could be purchased.
He did note that Davis did say a few times in speeches that an ar-15 isn't needed to hunt deer but never that he wanted to ban them (i did explain to him that it is even illegal to hunt deer in some states with the .223, and made sure he understood that it was because the round wasn't thought to be lethal enough)
He said that every gun ban bill that has crossed his desk has been way too broad. He even stated that there hasn't been one gun ban bill that he has ever seen that Rep. Davis would ever sign. He reinforced this statement in saying that they wouldn't support a ban unless they could empirically prove that a ban would reduce crime. I began to remind him that the Brady Bunch and other groups like to get a little creative with their statistics. I then started to quote some of the FBI findings of the '94 ban's ineffectiveness and the District Director pretty much finished my sentence for me. He knew of the study and of the results. He even laughed and mentioned that the anti-gunners try to gloss over those statistics.
He made mention several times about the "liberal left" and their disdain for the 2nd amendment and that several of the anti-gun congressmen did not like Davis. He pointed out that all of the co-sponsors were of the "liberal left"
I also informed him of Parker vs DC and he reminded me that Congressman Davis has voted against the DC gun ban many times. The director noted he was unaware of the ruling and we had a discussion about individual and collective rights. I appologized to him of my layman's interpretation but he agreed and knows that Davis does feel that the 2nd amendment supports an individuals right to bear arms.
He also said that it's unlikely the bill will leave the Judiciary committee. I reminded him about how anti-gun some of the other Congressmen on that committee including the chair and he said that his office is fully aware.
Overall it was a very candid meeting and I did not feel like we were talking in circles.
Needless to say the mood lightened tremendously when he found that I was in opposition to the bill. He joked around with me a little bit and said that he thought he was in for a fight this afternoon as he was ready to have to defend himself on not supporting the bill. I first asked him about the article in which the Congressman said that he would support an assault weapons ban and he said something to the effect that it was taken out of context and Davis was only speaking of fully automatic weapons. I asked him if he knew that they were heavily taxed and no new weapons can be purchased by the general public since '86. He did know of the tax but did not know that no new ones could be purchased.
He did note that Davis did say a few times in speeches that an ar-15 isn't needed to hunt deer but never that he wanted to ban them (i did explain to him that it is even illegal to hunt deer in some states with the .223, and made sure he understood that it was because the round wasn't thought to be lethal enough)
He said that every gun ban bill that has crossed his desk has been way too broad. He even stated that there hasn't been one gun ban bill that he has ever seen that Rep. Davis would ever sign. He reinforced this statement in saying that they wouldn't support a ban unless they could empirically prove that a ban would reduce crime. I began to remind him that the Brady Bunch and other groups like to get a little creative with their statistics. I then started to quote some of the FBI findings of the '94 ban's ineffectiveness and the District Director pretty much finished my sentence for me. He knew of the study and of the results. He even laughed and mentioned that the anti-gunners try to gloss over those statistics.
He made mention several times about the "liberal left" and their disdain for the 2nd amendment and that several of the anti-gun congressmen did not like Davis. He pointed out that all of the co-sponsors were of the "liberal left"
I also informed him of Parker vs DC and he reminded me that Congressman Davis has voted against the DC gun ban many times. The director noted he was unaware of the ruling and we had a discussion about individual and collective rights. I appologized to him of my layman's interpretation but he agreed and knows that Davis does feel that the 2nd amendment supports an individuals right to bear arms.
He also said that it's unlikely the bill will leave the Judiciary committee. I reminded him about how anti-gun some of the other Congressmen on that committee including the chair and he said that his office is fully aware.
Overall it was a very candid meeting and I did not feel like we were talking in circles.
