Reply from my Rep

[brlau]

Almost four months ago, I sent this to Mr. Neil Abercrombie:

Dear Representative Abercrombie,

I was disappointed to hear that you have signed on as a cosponsor to this bill introduced by Rep. McCarthy. Just like
the Assault Weapons Ban that sunset in 2004, this bill merely acts on firearms due to their appearance - not due to
their actual potency. The old ban did not significantly reduce crime according to statistics released by the FBI. This
new one will make it even harder for law abiding citizens such as myself to enjoy our hobby, while doing nothing
about limiting access to criminals, who follow no rules anyway.

I do not wish to see this bill or any other bill which further erodes our Second Amendment right become law. The
right to bear arms is an individual right, just like right to freedom of speech, religion and any of the other Amendments.


Sincerely,
brlau


Here is the reply I just got today. There are so many fallacies in his reply I wanted to reply and refute right away. However, given who this guy is (the epitome of an entrenched "progressive"), his track record and the fact that he cites the Brady campaign, I don't know if I should even bother:


Dear brlau:

Thank you for contacting me about H.R. 1022, the "Assault
Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007." I
appreciate hearing from you on this matter.

As you may know, H.R. 1022 would reinstate the criminal
prohibition on assault weapons and large capacity ammunition
feeding devices. Such weapons include semi-automatic and
automatic devices. It would also require a record of existing
devices.

Most of these weapons are used neither for defense of individuals
nor for recreational purposes, but are instead used by criminals to
assault people in our communities and our law enforcement
officials. I have cosponsored this bill, as it reasonably regulates
these dangerous weapons to make our communities safer, but still
allows people to generally carry and own guns.

Since I have been in Congress, I have consistently supported gun
safety legislation such as the Brady Bill. I have also co-sponsored
legislation that would close the gun show loophole, criminalize the
ownership, possession or transfer a junk gun, and require that all
new handguns come with a safety lock or discharge protection
device. Even though I support gun safety legislation, I am not
opposed to law abiding citizens owning guns. My intent is to help
make our communities safer for children and families.

While we do not see eye-to-eye on this issue, I appreciate the
benefit of your mana'o. Mahalo again for writing to me, and
please feel free to contact me at any time.




Sincerely,

Neil Abercrombie
Member of Congress

Mahalo again for contacting me. As your Representative in the United States Congress, it is a privilege
and an honor to serve you.

Please feel free to contact me again on any other issue or matter that concerns you. You may also want to
visit my website at http://www.house.gov/abercrombie where you can sign up for my e-newsletter and keep
current with my latest Congressional activities and policy statements. http://www.house.gov/abercrombie.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: This is an unattended mailbox. Replies sent to this email address will not be
received. Please use either the form on my website or U.S. mail (1502 LHOB, Washington, DC. 20515) or
Fax (202 225-4580) to contact me in the future.

This communication is a confidential. It is intended solely for the use of the designated recipient(s). If this
communication is received in error, please contact the sender and delete this communication.

If you are interested in receiving regular updates from the Congressman on e-mail please click here
http://www.house.gov/abercrombie to subscribe to the e-Neil updates.

 

[Bartkowski]

If you have the will to do so, I would write back to him pointing out everything that was wrong with his response, and give examples of gun control not working and making things worse for law abiding citizens. And thanks for doing you part to oppose bills such as H.R. 1022.

 

[Robert Hairless]

Most of these weapons are used neither for defense of individuals
nor for recreational purposes, but are instead used by criminals to
assault people in our communities and our law enforcement
officials.

Perhaps he could share the statistics demonstrating that most of these weapons are used by criminals. If his statement is true there must be an extraordinarily large proportion of criminals to law abiding citizens in Hawaii despite the heroic efforts of Dog the Bounty Hunter to contain them.

I'm curious about why Rep. Abercrombie made his response to a constituent "confidential." I sympathize with his desire to keep such a communication from being widely disseminated but I wonder what else he doesn't want the public to know. Perhaps you should ask him whether you're in big trouble for publish his "confidential" message and whether most e-mail is used by criminals to assault people in his community.

Most congressional representatives are used neither for the defense of individuals nor for recreational purposes, but are instead used by criminals to assault people in our communities and our law enforcement officials. That statement is absolutely true. I just read it.

 

[fletcher]

Most of these weapons are used neither for defense of individuals
nor for recreational purposes, but are instead used by criminals to
assault people in our communities and our law enforcement
officials.

Thousands of people just on this board use them for recreation. Maybe a handful nationwide use them for crime. Details, details...

Best thing you could do here is whip up some stats and prove him wrong. I'm not really sure where to find statistics that would accurately represent this, though.

 

[AirForceShooter]

I wrote my Rep (Vern Buchanan sp) Fla. 13 and never got a reply.
Tried 3 times so far.

AFS

 

[Geno]

Is this guy an idiot?! The FBI even stated that the stats do not uphold his assertions! There was no change in crime numbers, and most people who possess these firearms both own and use them legally!

If he (they) have knowledge that more criminals than good-guys own these rifles, then by default they must also know where they are located. The next logical step is for them to send the police to get them back from the criminals, and leave ours alone! Of course we all know that their proposed registration is so they can get our address and send the jackboot thugs to our homes in the middle of the night. Why? Because with the stroke of a pen, we will all become felons, not for anything we did, but for what they will write.

This guy is the typical, full-of-hot-air, cranium-in-posterior, it-doesn't-matter-what-you-write, it all is what they (the Dim-wit-ocrats) want it to be! Even when the stats don’t support them, they use “creative” stats to uphold their perversion, and then they close it by interjecting, “…it’s for the children!” Well, so is the Constitution, and so are my firearms for my children.

What a richard cranium!

Doc2005

 

[41magsnub]

That is painfull to read.. all the bad arguments and how a (probably) otherwise intelligent person could write them.

I'm just as embarrassed to be from the state who provided the swing vote to get the Brady Bill passed... damn you Baucus!

 

[coyote_jr]

vote him out

 

[brlau]

vote him out

I don't think I've voted for him the past couple of elections anyway. I am guilty of voting for him earlier in my life, however. Back when I was initially elligible to vote, I think I voted for him simply because I didn't know any better, and didn't pay attention to any issues ("I didn't hear anything bad about him on the news so he must be doing ok"). Back then I just voted because I thought it was my duty to do so. Now, some many years later I believe that was stupid of me - if I didn't know anything about the views of the people I was voting for, I shouldn't have voted. Thus I kind of like Heinlein's idea of limiting suffrage - but I realise that won't eliminate that problem either.

I figure he's been around long enough in politics he should know better about what he's voting on. I thought about asking him if he's ever heard of High Power competitions, the CMP, "what's criminal about a bunch of people in shooting jackets punching paper?," "what makes you believe semi-autos are only used by criminals?" I think he's either insulated himself from the real world and surrounded himself with (ignorant) advisors who all think alike (I wouldn't be that surprised judging by what comes out of a lot of politician's mouths), or he probably knows about shooting competitions and our recreational uses and wants them gone anyway (and the letter is just a polite way of saying that). I can't fathom how someone could be so arrogant and elitist as to be the latter, but that's probably because I lean towards right-libertarian myself.

 

[bender]

he sounds like a spokesman for the brady campaign