Need Help Responding to my Senator

[eflatminor]

I suspect we all would consider this Senator anti-gun, but I wish to express my point of view (and exersize my vote) as is my right. The Senator stated in a written letter to me:

"I have supported legislation such as the Brady Bill, the Child Safety Lock Act and efforts to close the so-called "gun show loophole." These measures are designed to make firearms safer and to help keep them out of the hands of people who are not legally allowed to own them. They do not interfere with the right of lawful citizens to purchase or own guns."

I've drafted my own response but would love to hear from others, especially if you can quote statistics, viable studies or other compelling reasons why the Senator might want to consider NOT supporting these measures.

Thanks for the help.

 

[Titan6]

I would keep it short.

"Thank you for being clear on your position of the second ammendment. That alone is reason enough for me to vote for whoever is running against you in the next election. "

Sincerly....

 

[alucard0822]

http://www.gunfacts.info/

if you don't already have this it is a wealth of stats and arguments against most gun control topics and all sources are footnoted. I keep a printed copy at home as a quick reference for letters to congresscritters., and thank you for helping us all in the good fight

 

[Robert Hairless]

Your senator could not wish for any gun control better than that at Virginia Tech. The university had the most stringent gun control imaginable. It absolutely banned all guns from campus except those carried by the police.

Unfortunately the police were not there on April 16 to prevent one mentally deranged young man from spending nearly an entire day murdering students and faculty at his leisure. Cho Seung-Hui even took a two hour recess in his murder spree so that he could relax, prepare a video taped manifesto, and ship it to NBC. He had the time to reload and get chains with which he could secure the doors so his next victims could not escape. Then continued on his deadly mission.

None of his victims had the means to defend themselves. At least one of them had military training. All of them were law abiding citizens who complied with the university's ban. One of them was a Holocaust survivor: he escaped death by Adolf Hitler and the Nazis but he could not escape the consequences of Virginia Tech's gun control. Cho Seung-Hui did not comply. He also did not comply with laws intended to discourage murder, assaults, or other violence, nor with Virginia Tech's many explicit policies that absolutely prohibits such behavior. Cho Seung-Hui had every reason to know that he was violating many laws and many Virginia Tech policies. He could have been expelled. He did not care.

Your senator wants to turn all of this country into Virginia Tech. If your senator were able to ban all guns of every description throughout the entire world, he would not be able to stop even one mentally deranged person or criminal from murdering as many other people as they want whenever they want.

All he can succeed in doing is to restrict the ability of law abiding people the means to defend themselves against superior force. So far it looks as if Cho Seung-Hui murdered 30 people and wounded about 20 others. How many more murdered and damaged people does your sentator want?

Law abiding citizens will comply with whatever bans your senator is successful in imposing. All of them will be defenseless against the mentally deranged people and criminals who will not comply. That is why they are mentally deranged and criminal.

If your senator still wants to support making law abiding citizens defenseless, he should at the very least press for your state to assume responsibility to protect all individual citizens in your state and to expressly assume liability for any failures to do so.

Your senator is not thinking well. He wants only what Virginia Tech wants for its students, faculty, parents, and campus visitors: that they "feel safe." Neither he nor the university can promise that they will "be safe," because neither of them is interested in reality, only the illusion of reality. Illusions kill.

 

[MDHunter]

Here You Go...

Senator __________,

Thank you for responding to my letter. By supporting the Brady Bill and other legislation you have referenced, you demonstrate either a lack of concern for the safety of your constituents, or a lack of understanding in terms of how this legislation can render a home defense weapon useless in a rapid-response-to-threat situation. I hope your concern for the children extends to the swimming pools and bicycles that kill more children annually than firearms.

Based on the clarity of your response, please be just as clear that I will be actively seeking another candidate to support in the next election.

Sincerely,

__________

 

[answerguy]

Out of curiosity I just went to my senators homepage (Carl Levin). To send him an email you have to use a form supplied on his webpage. You have to choose from a drop down menu of 35 'issues'. Interestingly 'gun control' was not one of the 35.

I sent this email: Comments: I have heard much lately about the gun show loophole. I would like to know what it is and whether you are in favor of closing it or not. Also did the gun show loophole have anything to do with the recent tragedy in Virginia?

BTW- I know he is as anti-gun as they come, I just want to see what kind of reply I get if I don't state my point of view on the subject.

 

[Shipwreck]

Tell him - "Yo, Senata... I wanna keep my piece in my crib, ya dig?"

Seriously - it's not that hard to write a letter - but yea, keep it as short as you can. No one reads these humoungous complaint letters.

 

[Henry Bowman]

the so-called "gun show loophole."

At least he said "so-called," acknowledging that it is suspect and semantic trickery.

 

[answerguy]

At least he said "so-called," acknowledging that it is suspect and semantic trickery

That is funny that someone on the side of gun control would refer to it as the 'so-called gun show loophole".

 

[alucard0822]

you should see how happy the bradys are that we lost the battle on what as advertised as a "shoot first" and a"wild west" bill, one was to allow protection from litigation for a person who uses force to protect themselves from an intruder engaged in "a felonious act" on their property, and another to change the CCW law from may issue (sole discretion of MD police comissioner) to shall issue

 

[Rumble]

I'd just say that since your and your Senator's opinions on the matter cannot be reconciled, you will be sure to support his or her opponent in future elections.

 

[alucard0822]

Dear senator _________,
I greatly appreciate your candid and honest reply to my letter, and the value of your words in helping me to understand your firm opposition to my constitutional rights. I feel that by supporting infringements to the second ammendment and increased regulation for law abiding gun owners that you do not represent the interests of myself and millions of other law abiding constituents. This issue is of the utmost importance to me as I firmly belive in the principles that our founding fathers created this great nation under, and an individuals right to keep and bear arms uninfringed. I have taken a proactive stand to protect my rights by joining organizations that support my beliefs, and to research the positions of candidates seeking office to ensure the best representation with my vote, and will continue to encourage others to do the same. I am sincerely dissapointed that your views and actions stand as an obstacle to my support.

sincerely, _________