It appears the ATF has published a 516-page PDF containing all of the commentary it received regarding the shotgun study - inclduing the names, email addresses, telephone numbers, physical addresses, etc. of those who sent comments in.
Oddly it does not contain either of the two emails I sent in regards to this matter... or maybe I have confused this matter with another one but I still think this holds true.
I guess they didnt like me questioning their motives (political vs constitutional) and they didnt like me impeaching them for not living to the oaths many government employess are required to make.
Here is a very slightly modified version (full name removed at signature) of the shorter one.
I am a retired military member and as a part of duty to my country I swore to protect and uphold the constitution and to protect it from enemies both foreign and domestic.
I suspect being officers of your governmental agency that you were also required to swear a similar oath. So as a courtesy reminder I am including the Second Amendment below which I would like to ask you to read aloud to every member present, verbatim.
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.
I would like to ask all of you to define what "shall not be infringed" means to you in plain english.... To many Americans your proposed regulations concerning banning the importation of shotguns is a clear transgression and infringes on our constitutional rights under the Bill of Rights. Further your proposed regulations will not stop one single unlawful entity from performing any unlawful actions as by definition criminals do not obey laws. The end result of your proposed regulation will only affect law abiding citizens who have the right to keep and bear arms and your proposed shotgun importation ban is contrary to the long standing traditional values of this nation.
So I ask each of you, where does your proposed taking away of freedoms stop? How much will be enough to satisfy your agency and how do you weight that against the very oath you personally took to defend this countries constitution? Are you not betraying the very ideals that give purpose to your agency?
You have a moral obligation to stop this regulation and to re-evaluate the values of your institution and see if they still serve this nations constitution or if they serve a political purpose that is contrary to the good, and the will of the people of this nation, and clearly against the intent of the founders of our country as clearly expressed in the Bill of Rights.
Firearms are some of the most highly regulated possessions in our land and yet are the only personal possession specifically mentioned in the Bill of Rights so what does that tell you about the importance of firearms to our nations founders? Please explain to me how your proposed regulation protects the one personal possession mentioned in the Bill of Rights? It is repugnant to the very ideals of the founding fathers that your Agency and its officers would even have considered such regulation.
Stop this proposed regulation now and put some serious thought into the oath you swore... Are you upholding the oath or your political beliefs? The regulation will change nothing for criminals, only for good and honest people who will be yet further limited in what firearms they can possess.