Monkeyleg
Member.
Just got this email a few minutes ago from a self-described sportsman and veteran. My response follows.
*****************
on 11/23/03 7:37 PM, "X" at .com wrote:
To Whom It May Concern,
I am a retired Airborne Infantry Officer in the United States Army. I was raised in the northwoods of Wisconsin and lived in a household with firearms. I don't remember the first time I discharged a firearm, but I'm sure I was very young. I got a .22 for Christmas when I was 9 and a .270 Winchester for my 12th birthday. I have owned several types of hunting rifles over the years and have found them to be a good tool when the job fits. I have lived with and been skillfully trained with firearms my whole life. My father always kept our firearms in a gun vault when not being employed. In the military ALL firearms are kept under the highest security at all times. People truly who know about firearms and have seen their power also know when to employ them.
This legislation will not employ firearms in a logical manner. Just ask the people who know the true purpose and responsibility of firearms, Police, etc. Please stop your petition and recognize what it is you are truly doing. Many people are not as skillful with the handling of firearms as some of us would like to assume. Good sense and good reflexes are not criteria for citizenship. People will die unnecessarily if this legislation passes. We do not need this!
With Great Concern,
"X"
Good evening, "X". Please let me begin by thanking you for the service that you have given our country. It is because of men like you that we can have an open discussion like this.
In your training in the Airborne Infantry, the objective was to kill as many of the enemy as possible, or at least render them inoperable. Am I correct on that point?
As a hunter, your goal is to kill your prey. Again, am I correct on that point?
As a citizen of Wisconsin, my responsibility isn't to charge the attacker, try to flank him, try to barge into his home, try to subdue him, nor do my best to kill him. Under the law, it is my legal responsibility to run as fast as possible, to use any means available to escape the attacker, and to use the threat of deadly force only as the absolute last resort.
I don't know where you live in the state, but here in Milwaukee there are many areas where the average citizen is constantly under watch by violent criminals who wait until they find an attack area where their crimes won't be seen. Further, these criminals know that citizens of Wisconsin cannot defend themselves. As one who has fallen prey to these violent predators more than once, I speak from experience, as do so many other volunteers in our group. Our volunteers consist of rape victims, assault victims, spouses of police officers and sheriffs' deputies whose lives have been threatened, corrections officers and their families whose lives have been threatened, and people who live or work in truly dangerous areas or professions.
If this bill passes, in a year's time you will read newspaper headlines that state, "nothing has happened because of concealed carry." This has been the story in every state for over twenty years as forty-five states have decided that citizens should have the right to defend themselves against criminals. Only Wisconsin and four other states still cling to the notion that criminals have a greater right to self-defense than do law-abiding citizens.
Like you, I was raised with many firearms in the home: shotguns, rifles, pistols, revolvers. Yet, it never occurred to me to use them in an illegal manner. That's because we were taught to respect those guns. The criminals who roam our streets were never taught anything like that. For them, the guns are just tools of the trade. And 80% or more of the shootings and homicides we read about involve criminals shooting each other.
You and I are not the problem. But, given the opportunity to defend ourselves under the law, you or I or another person we know may just prove to be part of the solution.
Respectfully yours,
Dick Baker
Treasurer, Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association
*****************
on 11/23/03 7:37 PM, "X" at .com wrote:
To Whom It May Concern,
I am a retired Airborne Infantry Officer in the United States Army. I was raised in the northwoods of Wisconsin and lived in a household with firearms. I don't remember the first time I discharged a firearm, but I'm sure I was very young. I got a .22 for Christmas when I was 9 and a .270 Winchester for my 12th birthday. I have owned several types of hunting rifles over the years and have found them to be a good tool when the job fits. I have lived with and been skillfully trained with firearms my whole life. My father always kept our firearms in a gun vault when not being employed. In the military ALL firearms are kept under the highest security at all times. People truly who know about firearms and have seen their power also know when to employ them.
This legislation will not employ firearms in a logical manner. Just ask the people who know the true purpose and responsibility of firearms, Police, etc. Please stop your petition and recognize what it is you are truly doing. Many people are not as skillful with the handling of firearms as some of us would like to assume. Good sense and good reflexes are not criteria for citizenship. People will die unnecessarily if this legislation passes. We do not need this!
With Great Concern,
"X"
Good evening, "X". Please let me begin by thanking you for the service that you have given our country. It is because of men like you that we can have an open discussion like this.
In your training in the Airborne Infantry, the objective was to kill as many of the enemy as possible, or at least render them inoperable. Am I correct on that point?
As a hunter, your goal is to kill your prey. Again, am I correct on that point?
As a citizen of Wisconsin, my responsibility isn't to charge the attacker, try to flank him, try to barge into his home, try to subdue him, nor do my best to kill him. Under the law, it is my legal responsibility to run as fast as possible, to use any means available to escape the attacker, and to use the threat of deadly force only as the absolute last resort.
I don't know where you live in the state, but here in Milwaukee there are many areas where the average citizen is constantly under watch by violent criminals who wait until they find an attack area where their crimes won't be seen. Further, these criminals know that citizens of Wisconsin cannot defend themselves. As one who has fallen prey to these violent predators more than once, I speak from experience, as do so many other volunteers in our group. Our volunteers consist of rape victims, assault victims, spouses of police officers and sheriffs' deputies whose lives have been threatened, corrections officers and their families whose lives have been threatened, and people who live or work in truly dangerous areas or professions.
If this bill passes, in a year's time you will read newspaper headlines that state, "nothing has happened because of concealed carry." This has been the story in every state for over twenty years as forty-five states have decided that citizens should have the right to defend themselves against criminals. Only Wisconsin and four other states still cling to the notion that criminals have a greater right to self-defense than do law-abiding citizens.
Like you, I was raised with many firearms in the home: shotguns, rifles, pistols, revolvers. Yet, it never occurred to me to use them in an illegal manner. That's because we were taught to respect those guns. The criminals who roam our streets were never taught anything like that. For them, the guns are just tools of the trade. And 80% or more of the shootings and homicides we read about involve criminals shooting each other.
You and I are not the problem. But, given the opportunity to defend ourselves under the law, you or I or another person we know may just prove to be part of the solution.
Respectfully yours,
Dick Baker
Treasurer, Wisconsin Concealed Carry Association
