Letter re Sandy Hook and Legislation

This is a discussion on Letter re Sandy Hook and Legislation within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I sent this to my rep. All we can do is make our voice heard in a respectful manner. We are all moved by the ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
Like Tree19Likes

Thread: Letter re Sandy Hook and Legislation

  1. #1
    VIP Member
    Array PEF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,712

    Letter re Sandy Hook and Legislation

    I sent this to my rep. All we can do is make our voice heard in a respectful manner.

    We are all moved by the terrible evil that befell the victims of Sandy Hook shooting. Many will try to make sense of the actions of the gunman, but his motives are simply beyond comprehension and will never be understood by the decent men and women that now search for answers. The shootings are simply the manifestation of an unspeakable evil that dwelled within one man.

    The need to find a reason, especially in situations as tragic as Sandy Hook, is often so overwhelming that one is compelled to attribute some cause to the tragedy, even if that cause is so attenuated that it defies reason and shifts responsibility away from the actual perpetrator. And in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting, when our emotions are still raw, when we all grieve from the families of the victims, when we realize the images of those smiling children will no longer instill joy and hope but instead instill sorrow and fear, the focus has shifted from the actual evil of one man to the perceived evil of firearms.

    I ask you to resist the inevitable call for additional gun control legislation. As you know, we cannot legislate evil out of society; additional gun control laws will only serve to disarm law-abiding citizens and leave them at the mercy of the unmerciful.

    There are calls to ban “assault” style weapons and “high capacity” magazines. However, such bans may merely be the first step in disarming American citizens. Ammunition restrictions, taxes, licensing, and registration are just over the horizon – or perhaps such laws are already being drafted.

    Without vigilance, a steady accretion of restrictive firearm legislation will eventually extinguish the right to keep and bear arms. Do not be complicit in the demise of this uniquely American right and tradition.

    I also ask that you reconsider the efficacy of “gun free zones.” One must consider how many children would have been saved had the teachers or administrators of Sandy Hook been allowed to be armed. What purpose is served by laws that create “soft target” zones in which we concentrate our most vulnerable and innocent? What purpose is served by laws that ensure only the safety of the evil predators among us so that they may carry out unspeakable acts with impunity?

    There are no clear solutions in the wake of Sandy Hook, and resisting the call for additional gun control legislation will no doubt be difficult to defend. But you must defend the rights of your constituents. You must seek enabling solutions that enable law-abiding citizens to defend themselves instead of restrictions that leave our children and us defenseless.
    mprp, zacii, TX expat and 9 others like this.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member
    Array ppkheat's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    4,101
    Great letter, I've sent mine too, and I'll be sending them more.
    Turn the election's in 2014 to a "2A Revolution". It will serve as a 1994 refresher not to "infringe" on our Second Amendment. We know who they are now.........SEND 'EM HOME. Our success in this will be proportional to how hard we work to make it happen.

  4. #3
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,875

    Letter re Sandy Hook and Legislation

    I sent letters yesterday to my reps (no response yet). I politely stated that I oppose any new bans and restrictions and suggested that we instead focus on getting rid of GFZ's because they are targets and focus on improving the system to keep guns away from those with mental problems while correcting the lack of a rights restoration process.

  5. #4
    VIP Member Array Brad426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,838
    Well done, sir. You should be a lawyer.
    I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
    Clint Eastwood

  6. #5
    Moderator
    Array gasmitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Gilbert, AZ
    Posts
    10,398
    Nicely done.
    Smitty
    NRA Endowment Member

  7. #6
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,354
    Quote Originally Posted by Brad426 View Post
    Well done, sir. You should be a lawyer.
    Now, now... there was no cause to insult him...

    That was a great letter... More wordy than mine... hope it gets read.
    Lish, phreddy, Brad426 and 1 others like this.
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  8. #7
    VIP Member Array Brad426's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    3,838
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    Now, now... there was no cause to insult him...

    That was a great letter... More wordy than mine... hope it gets read.
    He IS a lawyer. My lawyer, actually... even if he doesn't know it.
    I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it.
    Clint Eastwood

  9. #8
    VIP Member Array mprp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,910
    Yes very well done PEF. Just make sure that you omit your avatar as part of the submission. Although they may think of you as a savant.
    Vietnam Vets, WELCOME HOME

    Crossman 760 BB/Pellet, Daisy Red Ryder, Crossman Wrist Rocket, 14 Steak Knives, 3 Fillet Knives, Rolling Pin-14", Various Hunting Knives, 2 Baseball Bats, 3 Big Dogs and a big American Flag flying in the yard. I have no firearms; Try the next house.

  10. #9
    Member Array nevanthewolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Jacksonville, NC
    Posts
    30
    Well done. I hope you don't mind reposting this text on my facebook as a guide to those who have yet to write a letter. I will be writing my own everyday since Obama's speech. Thanks again.

  11. #10
    Member Array Dave James's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Tidewater,VIrginia
    Posts
    302
    Here's another one good for all

    Senator "," I want to write to you in the hopes that you will oppose any future assault weapons ban, such as that being discussed by Senator Feinstein. Although I am not aware of any specific proposals yet, it is likely that any new assault weapons ban (AWB) will be similar to the last, implemented under President Clinton.

    Assuming the goal is to actually reduce the number of homicides and mass murders in this country, a new AWB will be nothing more than a wasted opportunity. The last ban had restrictions on the capacity of new magazines, restricting them to no more than ten rounds, and any new proposal will likely contain this as well. The tragic shooting at Columbine Highschool took place while the previous AWB was in effect. The shooters, instead of modifying their magazines to carry additional rounds (something remarkably easy to do, especially considering the shooters were able to illegally shorten their shotgun below the legal length), decided to bring with them thirteen, ten-round magazines. Clearly, magazine restrictions did not stop crime, nor will they in the future.

    The second, main prong of the previous AWB was a restriction on various cosmetic features of rifles, for instance, flash suppressors and bayonet mounts. I understand that many deem these to be military accouterments with little to no civilian purpose, but that does not make these features inherently dangerous, nor does it make a rifle sporting such features any more lethal. In fact, the Department of Justice concluded, in a study of the previous assault weapons ban (accessible here Untitled Document), that these provisions “target…a relatively small number of weapons based on features that have little to do with the weapons’ operation, and removing those features is sufficient to make the weapon legal.” What’s more, the Justice Department concluded that, viewed as a whole, a reinstatement of the AWB would have such a miniscule effect on crime as to be “too small for measurement.”

    I implore you to please show vigorous opposition to any new AWB. It is a wasted opportunity to take real action in reducing gun violence. Strengthen the background check system by requiring stronger reporting from universities (which may have caught the V-Tech killer, as he was diagnosed by his school with mental illness and charged by the school with harassment and stalking) and mental health institutions; require background checks on private gun sales, or allow private individuals to perform checks on the buyer without having to transfer the firearm through a licensed dealer; most importantly, strengthen the mental health system to provide better care upfront to those members of society who fall through the cracks of our understaffed and overworked mental health system. I know that reasonable measures can be reached; reasonable in that the second amendment and the individual right to own and carry a gun is protected (something extremely important to me and many other North Carolinians), and yet reasonable in that steps to reduce unnecessary and preventable gun violence are taken. I hope that you will pray over this issue, and carefully consider an appropriate response to these continuing tragedies. I would love to hear back from you about this issue, whether through a public statement on gun control or a private message to me. Thank you for your service Senator.

  12. #11
    Distinguished Member Array noway2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    1,875
    I have two things to follow up on regarding this thread:
    One, as I mentioned I contacted my representatives. I received an email reply from one of them. The gist of the reply is that he affirmed the principles of the 2nd, while stating that there is still a duty to maintain public safety. Mentioned that the Federal govt has a role to play, but firearm regulations and criminal statutes are largely state driven. Recognized that criminals do not obey laws and strict regulations do not equate to low crime or safety. Stated that we need to focus on responsibility in exercising 2nd amendment rights, proactively deal with mental health issues, and understand that more regulation alone won't stop the violence.

    Two, in yesterday's newspaper (High Point Enterprise, Dec 18th 2012 Sections A1-A2), my areas state representatives had the following to say (paraphrased but not directly quoted below):

    Mel Watt, in reference to the two SCOTUS rulings and the ruling by the 7th. said that "It was already politically difficult. Now it is both politically and constitutionally difficult",
    Howard Coble said that ultimately he doesn't see that there will be any great changes to the current laws and that the contact from constituents has focused more on the need to address mental health issues than on gun control.
    Kay Hagan said that we need debate on comprehensive looks at access to guns, mental health care, and violent video games(*) and that we need to find ways to improve the safety of the community without restricting the rights of responsible gun owners.
    Richard Burr said that the incidents highlight the need to provide treatment for those with mental health issues and the unstable and that we need to work to find ways to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous individuals and that we need to community support of law enforcement, teachers, and mental health professionals.

    Overall, I think that while this is still political speak, it was a positive acknowledgement of where we need to work to address the problems and recognition that bans as called for by some legislators are not the solution. (*) I think that the violent video games is essentially an excuse, but it partially represents what I see as a culture change that has occured over the last 30 years to one that embraces violence and denounces personal responsibility and that this is reflected in most popular media today.

  13. #12
    Distinguished Member Array brocktice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    1,273
    Thanks, this is what I was hoping to do with my thread. I'll base my letter loosely on the ones posted here.

  14. #13
    Senior Moderator
    Array HotGuns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,893
    You are all assuming that the gun banners care enough to read what you write and that they are rational human beings.

    I can assure you that they are not. Their minds are already made up and they are going to use this tragedy to their utmost advantage.

    It's not often that something like this plays into their hand and you'd better beleive that they will take advantage of it. No amount of words will cause them to reconsider.

    Perhaps a visual aid would make them more perceptive..something like a bullseye with the center shot out of it as a healthy reminder not to mess with gun rights.
    zacii likes this.
    I would rather stand against the cannons of the wicked than against the prayers of the righteous.


    AR. CHL Instr. 07/02 FFL
    Like custom guns and stuff? Check this out...
    http://bobbailey1959.wordpress.com/

  15. #14
    Distinguished Member Array brocktice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    1,273
    Quote Originally Posted by HotGuns View Post
    You are all assuming that the gun banners care enough to read what you write and that they are rational human beings.

    I can assure you that they are not. Their minds are already made up and they are going to use this tragedy to their utmost advantage.

    It's not often that something like this plays into their hand and you'd better beleive that they will take advantage of it. No amount of words will cause them to reconsider.

    Perhaps a visual aid would make them more perceptive..something like a bullseye with the center shot out of it as a healthy reminder not to mess with gun rights.
    I have a democrat rep that is pro-2A, I want to make sure he sticks to his guns.

  16. #15
    Distinguished Member Array brocktice's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    New Mexico, USA
    Posts
    1,273
    I combined those and edited a bit. I'm a Buddhist and we're not theistic nor do we pray, so I axed that part.

    Senator "," I want to write to you in the hopes that you will oppose any future assault weapons ban, such as that being discussed by Senator Feinstein. Although I am not aware of any specific proposals yet, it is likely that any new assault weapons ban (AWB) will be similar to the last, implemented under President Clinton.

    Assuming the goal is to actually reduce the number of homicides and mass murders in this country, a new AWB will be nothing more than a wasted opportunity. The last ban had restrictions on the capacity of new magazines, restricting them to no more than ten rounds, and any new proposal will likely contain this as well. The tragic shooting at Columbine Highschool took place while the previous AWB was in effect. The shooters, instead of modifying their magazines to carry additional rounds (something remarkably easy to do, especially considering the shooters were able to illegally shorten their shotgun below the legal length), decided to bring with them thirteen, ten-round magazines. Clearly, magazine restrictions did not stop crime, nor will they in the future.

    The second, main prong of the previous AWB was a restriction on various cosmetic features of rifles, for instance, flash suppressors and bayonet mounts. I understand that many deem these to be military accoutrements with little to no civilian purpose, but that does not make these features inherently dangerous, nor does it make a rifle sporting such features any more lethal. In fact, the Department of Justice concluded, in two studies (one included with this letter) of the previous assault weapons ban that these provisions “target…a relatively small number of weapons based on features that have little to do with the weapons’ operation, and removing those features is sufficient to make the weapon legal.” What’s more, the Justice Department concluded that, viewed as a whole, a reinstatement of the AWB would have such a miniscule effect on crime as to be “too small for measurement.”

    I implore you to please show vigorous opposition to any new AWB. It is a wasted opportunity to take real action in reducing gun violence. Strengthen the background check system by requiring stronger reporting from universities (which may have caught the V-Tech killer, as he was diagnosed by his school with mental illness and charged by the school with harassment and stalking) and mental health institutions; require background checks on private gun sales, or allow private individuals to perform checks on the buyer without having to transfer the firearm through a licensed dealer; most importantly, strengthen the mental health system to provide better care upfront to those members of society who fall through the cracks of our understaffed and overworked mental health system. I would even support mandatory safety education and licensing, say every four years, to be allowed to purchase firearms. We cannot make people store their weapons safely, but we can give them the knowledge required.

    I also ask that you reconsider the efficacy of “gun free zones.” One must consider how many children would have been saved had the teachers or administrators of Sandy Hook been allowed to be armed. What purpose is served by laws that create “soft target” zones in which we concentrate our most vulnerable and innocent? So many of the recent public mass shootings have occurred in places were either legally or nominally banned. Criminals do not respect gun-free zones, only law abiding citizens, by definition, do.

    I know that reasonable measures can be reached; reasonable in that the second amendment and the individual right to own and carry a gun is protected (something extremely important to me and many other New Mexicans), and yet reasonable in that steps to reduce unnecessary and preventable gun violence are taken. I hope that you will carefully consider an appropriate response to these continuing tragedies. I would love to hear back from you about this issue, whether through a public statement on gun control or a private message to me. Thank you for your service.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

powered by mybb health magazine

,

powered by mybb on writing

,

powered by mybb the positive effects of video games on mental health

,

powered by mybb write a letter

,

powered by mybb writing process

,

what purpose is served by laws

Click on a term to search for related topics.