i just finished drafting my letter that i will send to my elected officials. i would appreciate any edits, additions, and comments. also feel free to take any parts of it and use them as your own.
Thank You
Derek Rodgers
Mail: P.O. box 217 Glover VT 05839
Phone: (802)-673-2722
I am 18 years old and voted this election for the first time. I very happily put my vote behind you because I believe that you have served the people of Vermont well in the past. But if your vote is in favor of new firearm restrictions my vote will not be in your favor next election.
There are many misconceptions about “assault weapons” that the media only makes worse. Before I get into my letter I would like to clear up these misconceptions. First one that I would like to make completely clear is that these weapons are not fully automatic or even burst fire. Those weapons are highly regulated, taxed, kept track of, and priced. The weapons that are threatened by the ban are semi-automatic, which means that the trigger is pulled once and the firearm will fire once. Next I am not sure about other states but in Vermont there is no such thing as a “gun show loophole”. To purchase a firearm at a gun show in Vermont you have to fill out the same form and undergo the same background check as you do purchasing a firearm anywhere else at any other time. Another misconception is that these weapons are more powerful then others. This is not only untrue it is the complete opposite. “Assault weapons” are defined by firing intermediate cartridges. Intermediate cartridges are a cartridge between a full sized rifle cartridge and a pistol cartridge. Take the popular AR15 which fires a 62 grain 5.56x 45 NATO bullet and compare it to the popular hunting caliber of a 30-06 Springfield that fires a 162 grain bullet. They have much less power then common cartridges. Also it seems as though people think that features of firearms such as pistol grips, fore grips, barrel shrouds, collapsible stocks, and threaded barrels just to name a few make them more dangerous. First off if all these features were stripped from a weapon it would not affect its performance one bit. Secondly if these features were stripped from a weapon it would be no different then a common hunting rifle that also uses a detachable magazine, which no one is trying to ban. These are some of the larger misconceptions out of many surrounding “assault weapons”.
Banning more firearms is not the answer. You can clearly see this by the fact that Vermont has the least restrictive gun laws in the nation, a very high rate of gun ownership and the lowest rate of gun deaths and gun crimes both per capita and total. On the other hand Washington DC, California, NY and CT have the toughest most restrictive gun laws in the nation yet they also have the highest gun crime rates both per capita and total. Banning weapons is a knee jerk response every time a shooting happens because anti gun people can use emotions to convince others to support their cause. All that it will accomplish is taking these weapons out of good peoples hands. Good people who use them for hunting, sport shooting and self defense, not for killing innocent people. And how would it stop a criminal. A criminal does not follow laws that’s why they are criminals. They would just come by the weapons from a criminal source. A magazine capacity limit would also not stop some one set on murder. I personally can change magazines in less then 2 seconds. Please don’t take good peoples weapons or accessories because of the acts of madmen.
It is also clear that a large amount of the people of Vermont and the nation support these weapons. For examples look any were that ammunition or magazines are sold for firearms in the proposed ban everything is on backorder until at lease March. Look at the rise in sales of these weapons and the rise of donations to the NRA. People support the personal ownership of “assault weapons”. And isn’t the point of the government to support what the people want.
I hope that you will take into consideration all that I have put before you. I thank you very much for taking the time to read my letter. I will thank you with my vote next election year if you listen.
“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.”
Sincerely,
Derek Rodgers
Thank You
Derek Rodgers
Mail: P.O. box 217 Glover VT 05839
Phone: (802)-673-2722
I am 18 years old and voted this election for the first time. I very happily put my vote behind you because I believe that you have served the people of Vermont well in the past. But if your vote is in favor of new firearm restrictions my vote will not be in your favor next election.
There are many misconceptions about “assault weapons” that the media only makes worse. Before I get into my letter I would like to clear up these misconceptions. First one that I would like to make completely clear is that these weapons are not fully automatic or even burst fire. Those weapons are highly regulated, taxed, kept track of, and priced. The weapons that are threatened by the ban are semi-automatic, which means that the trigger is pulled once and the firearm will fire once. Next I am not sure about other states but in Vermont there is no such thing as a “gun show loophole”. To purchase a firearm at a gun show in Vermont you have to fill out the same form and undergo the same background check as you do purchasing a firearm anywhere else at any other time. Another misconception is that these weapons are more powerful then others. This is not only untrue it is the complete opposite. “Assault weapons” are defined by firing intermediate cartridges. Intermediate cartridges are a cartridge between a full sized rifle cartridge and a pistol cartridge. Take the popular AR15 which fires a 62 grain 5.56x 45 NATO bullet and compare it to the popular hunting caliber of a 30-06 Springfield that fires a 162 grain bullet. They have much less power then common cartridges. Also it seems as though people think that features of firearms such as pistol grips, fore grips, barrel shrouds, collapsible stocks, and threaded barrels just to name a few make them more dangerous. First off if all these features were stripped from a weapon it would not affect its performance one bit. Secondly if these features were stripped from a weapon it would be no different then a common hunting rifle that also uses a detachable magazine, which no one is trying to ban. These are some of the larger misconceptions out of many surrounding “assault weapons”.
Banning more firearms is not the answer. You can clearly see this by the fact that Vermont has the least restrictive gun laws in the nation, a very high rate of gun ownership and the lowest rate of gun deaths and gun crimes both per capita and total. On the other hand Washington DC, California, NY and CT have the toughest most restrictive gun laws in the nation yet they also have the highest gun crime rates both per capita and total. Banning weapons is a knee jerk response every time a shooting happens because anti gun people can use emotions to convince others to support their cause. All that it will accomplish is taking these weapons out of good peoples hands. Good people who use them for hunting, sport shooting and self defense, not for killing innocent people. And how would it stop a criminal. A criminal does not follow laws that’s why they are criminals. They would just come by the weapons from a criminal source. A magazine capacity limit would also not stop some one set on murder. I personally can change magazines in less then 2 seconds. Please don’t take good peoples weapons or accessories because of the acts of madmen.
It is also clear that a large amount of the people of Vermont and the nation support these weapons. For examples look any were that ammunition or magazines are sold for firearms in the proposed ban everything is on backorder until at lease March. Look at the rise in sales of these weapons and the rise of donations to the NRA. People support the personal ownership of “assault weapons”. And isn’t the point of the government to support what the people want.
I hope that you will take into consideration all that I have put before you. I thank you very much for taking the time to read my letter. I will thank you with my vote next election year if you listen.
“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.”
Sincerely,
Derek Rodgers
