Write your reps!! it only takes a second

[alan]

The following is a copy and paste of thouights,comments, questions I sent my U.S. Senators and Member of The House.

Readers here are welcome to use my thoughts/comments, questions as a guide/template for whatever they might address to their own, "elected officials".



Reiteration of a few points regarding the fiasco that is Gun Control, lately Gun Safety:

1. On Expanded or Universal Background Checks: If such were to be enacted, I suspect that such "background checks" could easily morph into a system of Arms Registration and or Arms Owner Registration, ideas that The Congress has, repeatedly and wisely rejected in the past. Additionally, and it is a matter of historical fact, Registration Leads To Confiscation, such confiscation having taken place in this country, legally owned arms being confiscated from the law abiding. I was a witness to such goings on years ago, when I resided in New York City.

2. Re the banning of "assault weapons", note the following. Anything that one person attacks another person with, by virtue of it's use, is the proverbial "assault weapon", firearm or otherwise. As to the latest of Lady Dianne's legislative flights of fancy, yet another proposed ban on so-called "assault weapons", once again, she goes on and on over cosmetic features. The semiautomatic rifle was first offered in this country by Winchester and Remington prior to World War 1, think 1906-1908, more than 100 years ago. Over that period, they have been made in various calibers, with various magazine capacities. The term "assault weapon" is the product of The Anti Gun/Anti Gun Rights Lobby's rhetoric, aided and abetted by media "hypsters", who serve as Anti Gun Fellow Travelers, or The Useful Idiots of yore.

3. Assault Rifle is a proper military/technical term, which refers to the Selective Fire Rifle, that is a weapon capable of firing multiple shots with a single actuation of it's trigger, ala a machine gun. Such arms are not generally available to the private citizen in this country, see 80 year old federal law, The National Firearms Act of 1934. Additionally, some states forbid the private citizen from possession of such arms, others do not. In any case, the numerous restrictions of existing federal law apply.

4. As to other proposals, Anti Trafficking Legislation and Anti Straw Purchases proposals, such activity is currently violative of existing federal law, law that is, under the aegis of Obama et al, not much enforced, as a rule. As to why this is, I suggest that you ask the president, he might be able to explain, I'm left curious. You might also question the president about his administration's Operation Fast & Furious.

We now come to a couple of additional points:

A. "common sense gun laws" which describe constitutionally questionable proposals, proposals that were in the past tried and which failed to bring promised results, is an interesting exercise in semantics. To describe the ridiculous as "common sense", imparts nothing desirable to such proposals. We simply see another exercise in "lipsticking the pig", action that has perhaps caused Cover Girl and or L'OREAL line to go onto an extra production shift, but which otherwise accomplish nothing.

B. Re the advertising campaign put on by New York City's Mayor Blomberg, the following comes to mind. This morning, on one of the Sunday news shows, I saw this ad on Channel 4, ABC here in Pittsburgh.. It displayed the very worst examples of unsafe gun handling that I had ever seen on television, or most other venues. It is such garbage as this that solicits viewers to "call their senators". Fair enough, I'm doing just that. Ignore Blomberg's blandishments. You might also take note of a Letter To The Editor in 31 March Pgh. P-G Forum section, page B-2, submitted by John Ball of Baden. The letter is titled Mishandling guns, and I submit, speaks most eloquently, for itself. You might review this letter, it's not lengthy, but it does make important points. One of which is, re Blomberg's ad campaign, "consider the source", for Mayor Blomberg is an unindicted conspirator, he having been the originator of a conspiracy to violate existing federal gun laws. all for your own good, of course. I wonder however if, having performed as he did, would Joe and or Jane Every Person today be walking around, free as the proverbial bird, or would they have since been indicted, tried and possibly convicted of serious violations of the law.

In short sir, the often stated goal of The Anti Gun Lobby, there is one you know, is and remains the Total Proscription of Privately Owned Arms, end of story. Re this fact, the only thing that can or should be offered to the anti gunners is, as some Irish friends were wont to note is "the back of me hand to ye". for compromise of any sort only encourages demands for more. There is no compromise possible with such people, for anything offered is viewed as a sign of weakness, lack of resolve, which serves only to encourage further demands. Never Forget That. The Anti Gunners will put endless amounts of lipstick on the same old pig. It remains that all they have to offer is the same old pig, albeit adorned with a bit more lipstick. Never Forget That.

[Metal god]

Lets keep it going guys this week is a good time for your reps to here you .

The U.S. Senate has announced that anti-gun legislation will be heard on the floor next week. While that could change at any time, right now it means that your Second Amendment freedoms are on the chopping block, and you need to take immediate action to save them.

Senators are scheduled to vote on a so-called "universal background check" bill being pushed by lifelong anti-gun zealot, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y). Schumer's bill--S. 374, the "Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013"-- would criminalize virtually all private firearm sales, even temporary transfers, making you a criminal if you simply transfer a firearm to an aunt, uncle, cousin or lifelong friend without the federal government's approval. Even worse, President Barack Obama's Justice Department says that Schumer's bill will only be effective if it's coupled with mandatory gun registration.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein's (D-Calif.) gun and magazine ban legislation (S. 150) will not be a part of the Senate's base gun control bill, but the Senate previously announced that Feinstein will be allowed to offer her legislation as an amendment.

[Vermonter]

TTT and all that jazz.

I am doing it now.

Regards, Vermonter

[dakota.potts]

I called my senator today. Senator Marco Rubio. Of course, he's already joined the Paul filibuster so it's almost redundant. But no time to lose our guard.

[Tom Servo]

Of course, he's already joined the Paul filibuster so it's almost redundant.

But not pointless. It'll do him good to hear from his constituents that he's doing the right thing.

[alancac98]

I make frequent phone calls to my Senator and Congressmen (nearly everyday). My Congressmen's secretary now says, Hi, Chris when she hears my name (I don't even have to tell her!) Oh, and I have spoken to him on two occasions!

[dajowi]

As of today I've sent 117 emails regarding the 12 House and Senate Bills presented to the Oregon State legislature since January. Five have responded, some are read, many are deleted without even opening.

I'm fed up with our state legislators.

[Vermonter]

They can ignore our voices but they can't ignore our votes. Let them know what you think.

Regards, Vermonter

[Metal god]

Well I finally got a email back from Feinstein .

Thank you for contacting me to share your response to the tragic shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. I appreciate the time you took to share your views, and I welcome this opportunity to respond.



I was horrified and profoundly saddened by the senseless shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012. As you know, the shooting left 26 people dead, including 20 children.



Like you, I believe strong and comprehensive action must be taken to prevent further mass shootings. Such an approach should include a focus on treating those with mental illness. I also firmly believe that we must take reasonable steps to get military-style assault weapons off our streets.



On January 24, 2013, I introduced the "Assault Weapons Ban of 2013" (S. 150). This legislation would prohibit the manufacture, sale, transfer, or importation of semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity ammunition magazines. The Bushmaster assault rifle used in the Newtown shooting would be prohibited by name under my legislation, along with 156 additional specifically-named weapons.



In addition, I believe that individuals with mental health disorders should have access to quality care. I have voted in favor of legislation that prohibits insurance companies from discriminating against those who need mental health services by charging prohibitive co-pays for such treatments. In addition, I support federal research programs designed to improve our understanding of, and identify new treatments for, a variety of mental illnesses including schizophrenia, borderline personality disorder, and anxiety disorders.



Please know that as I continue to work with my colleagues to enact measures designed to prevent senseless gun violence, I will be sure to keep your thoughts in mind. I hope you will continue to write to me on issues of importance to you. You may call my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841 or visit my website at http://feinstein.senate.gov to share your views with me. Best regards.




Sincerely yours,


Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

[alan]

Metal god:

You did better than I did, I never got any kind of response, not even a canned email. Oh well, life is full of disappointments

[Metal god]

I got another one from Feinstein

Thank you for contacting me to share your opposition to assault weapons legislation. I respect your opinion on this important issue and welcome the opportunity to provide my point of view.



Mass shootings are a serious problem in our country, and I have watched this problem get worse and worse over the 40 years I have been in public life. From the 1966 shooting rampage at the University of Texas that killed 14 people and wounded 32 others, to the Newtown massacre that killed 20 children and 6 school teachers and faculty, I have seen more and more of these killings. I have had families tell me that they no longer feel safe in a mall, in a movie theater, in their business, and in other public places, because these deadly weapons are so readily available. These assault weapons too often fall into the hands of grievance killers, juveniles, gangs, and the deranged.



I recognize that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to bear arms, but I do not believe that right is unlimited or that it precludes taking action to prevent mass shootings. Indeed, in the same Supreme Court decision that recognized the individual right to bear arms, District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court also held that this right, like other constitutional rights, is not unlimited. That is why assault weapons bans have consistently been upheld in the courts, both before and after the Heller decision. I believe regulation of these weapons is appropriate.




Once again, thank you for your letter. Although we may disagree, I appreciate hearing from you and will be mindful of your thoughts as the debate on this issue continues. If you have any additional comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841.




Sincerely yours,


Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

I then wrote her back and used one of her quotes

I recognize that the Second Amendment provides an individual right to bear arms, but I do not believe that right is unlimited

I stated that she was correct in this statement . I believe that when the SCOTUS used the wording ( not unlimited ) they were confirming that we could not own tanks , fighter jets , rockets , C4 , full auto small arms etc etc . It did not mean that she could keep taking and taking . I also wrote in my letter that I believed the SCOTUS had to put the ( not unlimited ) wording in there decision or it would have reversed all gun restrictions that were law to date and it was not an invitation to add more gun laws on to the books

[alan]

Metal God:

At the possible risk of being impolite, the senator's response is full of double-talk. Her or the words therein do not match the senator's deeds, or so it seems to me. Of course, I might be "bitter", possibly I expect to much from an "elected official".

[Metal god]

Oh yes she is two faced at best .

[Vermonter]

Keep it up folks I just sent another one. We absolutly have to keep after this. Everyone on TFL has time to write a post. Please do us a favor write one less post and one more email or letter if time is that much of the essence. To everyone who is writing on a regular basis thank you. Make sound arguments with sound logic and we will be fine. Please do not threaten or bully. If you intend to vote a politican out based on gun votes let them know it!

Thank You all so much, Vermonter

[cvc944]

I called my senator today. Senator Marco Rubio. Of course, he's already joined the Paul filibuster so it's almost redundant. But no time to lose our guard.

But it's not redundant. Here in Pennsylvania, we never thought even a few months ago that Senator Toomey would turn his back on us, but he did. Same thing that Senator Arlen Specter did to us with the first assault weapons ban in the early '90s. I don't know Marco Rubio well enough to gamble on him not turning either. I don't trust a single one of them. Schumer is an arm twister, and ALL the other Senators and Congressmen need to hear from all of us. Thank you for writing, even when you thought there was no need.

[Metal god]

I wrote again the other day using the Ruger act now auto send . Do you guys have the link to the NRA one . If I remember it sends the letter to all your reps as well. The difference between the Ruger and NRA one was you could edit or even delete there message and write your own . I cant seem to find the NRA one any more .

I've been trying to use there ( nra ) web site but I get errors on the page and can't continue

[Dalek]

Well, the sock puppets we have here in CO, Bennet and Udall are...forgive my language, tools.

Pretty much the same letter as Di Di everytime I write to them in opposition to the recent flood of gun control schemes as well as other matters before them.

All fluff and thank you with a pat on my head for taking the time to annoy one of their staffers. However, pixels coast nothing and I regularly send off E-mails to them both as well as my Rep.

[Metal god]

Found it . This is the NRA auto write your reps . All you need to do is fill out the first page then submit . On the next page it will ask you to sign and review what will be sent . You can delete there message and write your own . I like this cus you don't have to write 5 or 6 emails . Just one and it sends it to all your reps .
http://www.nraila.org/get-involved-l...your-reps.aspx

[Vermonter]

keep it up ladies and gentlemen.

With all the political scandal these days they could try to slip something in the back door.

Regards, Vermonter

[kilimanjaro]

I've been doing this once a week since January, and will continue for the remainder of the year.

A lot of junk bills have been defeated this spring, it's working.

[Vermonter]

Please take a second and do this everyone who reads this thread or this board should send one of these a day or once a week.

Nice work everyone let's keep it up!

[alan]

Perhaps a little off point re specifics, but aside from maintaining contact with our elected employees on firearms related matters, obviously important, and then there is the current argument about government "snooping", which might or might not be abusive, there is the following, and if you think this is not arms related, think again.

While government might be abusive, Corporate America, The Private Sector sure in blazes is respecting the way they collect, trade, sell the personal data that individuals seemingly rush to surrender, for what are paltry rewards. The Private Sector's abuse of the individual carries on too with respect to their unacceptablyy sloppy ways of handling the data with which they are entrusted.

By the way, those Opt Outs, if you can find them, buried somewhere in the maze of corporate Mouse Print are less than mitigating. So when next you hear one of your elected employees running their mouths about government abuses, they are part and parcel thereof, ask the following question. How come a large nothing is heard from these people respecting curbing the abusiveness of Corporate America, The Private Sector, or is the fact of Corporate Campaign Contributions and the possible loss or reduction thereof the obvious answer to why their silence.