Got a letter from Sen. Grassley

Got a letter from Sen. Grassley

This is a discussion on Got a letter from Sen. Grassley within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I'll just post this for everyone to read: Thank you for taking the time to contact me concerning the heartbreaking loss of life at Sandy ...

Results 1 to 15 of 15
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By Aquaman

Thread: Got a letter from Sen. Grassley

  1. #1
    Member Array J.Thompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    122

    Got a letter from Sen. Grassley

    I'll just post this for everyone to read:

    Thank you for taking the time to contact me concerning the heartbreaking loss of life at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. This tragic event reminds us of the fragility of life. I appreciate you writing in on such an important topic. As your Senator it is important that I hear your thoughts.



    First and foremost, our thoughts and prayers should be with the families in Newtown who have suffered an incredible loss. I am heartbroken by what happened in Newtown. Moving forward I believe that these mass shootings need to be studied and analyzed in order to comprehend why these tragedies happen. The debate on how to prevent these horrible actions needs to include all aspects and not focus solely on firearms. There must be serious and thoughtful discussion on mental health issues.



    I believe that overly restrictive gun control legislation does very little to deter criminals while imposing unnecessary burdens on law-abiding Americans who wish to own guns. Our crime reduction efforts must focus on criminals and criminal activity, not on gun control. More attention needs to be focused on the cause of crimes and not the tool used to commit the crimes. Those who use a firearm to commit a crime should serve the maximum sentence so they cannot pose a further threat to society.



    Again, thank you for contacting me. I urge you to continue to share your views with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me again with any questions or comments you may have in the future. Please keep in touch.



    Sincerely,

    Chuck
    I came into this world kicking and screaming, covered in someone else's blood; I'm fully prepared to go out the same way.


  2. #2
    Member Array Aquaman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    S.W. Iowa
    Posts
    240
    well I wish more people would look at it this way but they always seem to think we need more laws or ban this or ban that. I think we already have enough laws in place, if the panty waist judges and "persecuters" would just do thier jobs we wouldn't need to keep enacting laws.
    Ghost1958 likes this.

  3. #3
    Senior Member Array KoriBustard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    616
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Thompson View Post
    I'll just post this for everyone to read:
    Would you be willing to share the communication you sent to Sen. Grassley that prompted this response? The reason I ask is that I think it is helpful to all of us gun owners to see how others express their concerns. Thanks.
    NRA Member
    GOAL Member
    Certified NRA RSO
    EDC: M&P 9c

  4. #4
    Member Array novaX522's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    118
    That's why Senator Grassley is one of the best out there. Most politicians repulse me. Senator Grassley is the exception. He is a real genuine guy.

  5. #5
    Member Array J.Thompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by KoriBustard View Post
    Would you be willing to share the communication you sent to Sen. Grassley that prompted this response? The reason I ask is that I think it is helpful to all of us gun owners to see how others express their concerns. Thanks.
    I'll see if I can dig it up but it was sent through Popvox if I remember correctly. It's probably been a little over a month.
    I came into this world kicking and screaming, covered in someone else's blood; I'm fully prepared to go out the same way.

  6. #6
    Ex Member Array MJB_17's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    1,418
    Quote Originally Posted by novaX522 View Post
    That's why Senator Grassley is one of the best out there. Most politicians repulse me. Senator Grassley is the exception. He is a real genuine guy.
    He also is one of the more senior members of the Senate and holds significant influence.

  7. #7
    Member Array J.Thompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    122
    That's very true. I met Senator Grassley in Washington back in 1998. He took a couple hours to meet with myself and some of my classmates during our senior trip and I must say he's one of the few politicians I've met spoke with any amount of sincerity. He was in the Iowa House in the late 50's early 60's and if I remember right he went to the US House in '75. I'm not a supporter of career politicians as a whole but Chuck is one of the good guys. I don't always agree with him but at least he's honest about where he stands.
    I came into this world kicking and screaming, covered in someone else's blood; I'm fully prepared to go out the same way.

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,414

    Re: Got a letter from Sen. Grassley

    My letter from Chuck left the door ajar onUBCs... I'll post it tomorrow. Virtually the same, but not quite.
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  9. #9
    Moderator
    Array RETSUPT99's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    44,793
    Sen. Grassley...
    The last Blood Moon Tetrad for this millennium starts in April 2014 and ends in September 2015...according to NASA.

    ***********************************
    Certified Glock Armorer
    NRA Life Member[/B]

  10. #10
    Ex Member Array autogateman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Thompson View Post
    I'll just post this for everyone to read:
    So I take it you lost a child/family member to the Sandy Hook shooting? Sorry for your loss

  11. #11
    VIP Member Array SmokinFool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,297
    Quote Originally Posted by J.Thompson View Post
    I'll just post this for everyone to read:


    Thank you for taking the time to contact me concerning the heartbreaking loss of life at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. This tragic event reminds us of the fragility of life. I appreciate you writing in on such an important topic. As your Senator it is important that I hear your thoughts.



    First and foremost, our thoughts and prayers should be with the families in Newtown who have suffered an incredible loss. I am heartbroken by what happened in Newtown. Moving forward I believe that these mass shootings need to be studied and analyzed in order to comprehend why these tragedies happen. The debate on how to prevent these horrible actions needs to include all aspects and not focus solely on firearms. There must be serious and thoughtful discussion on mental health issues.



    I believe that overly restrictive gun control legislation does very little to deter criminals while imposing unnecessary burdens on law-abiding Americans who wish to own guns. Our crime reduction efforts must focus on criminals and criminal activity, not on gun control. More attention needs to be focused on the cause of crimes and not the tool used to commit the crimes. Those who use a firearm to commit a crime should serve the maximum sentence so they cannot pose a further threat to society.



    Again, thank you for contacting me. I urge you to continue to share your views with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me again with any questions or comments you may have in the future. Please keep in touch.

    Sincerely,

    Chuck
    This letter seems to keep some anti gun options open. He says he does not want to focus solely on firearms. That seems to say he could agree to including some gun restrictions as long as there are other components to the approach as well.

    Also, I am curious what he would consider "overly restrictive gun control legislation." I want to know where his line in the sand is.

  12. #12
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    7,414
    Here's the letter I got from Chuck:

    Thank you for taking the time to contact me with your opposition to S. 150, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this piece of legislation.

    As you know, Senator Feinstein introduced S. 150 on January 30, 2013. This legislation would amend the federal criminal code to ban the import, sale, manufacture, transfer, or possession of a semiautomatic assault weapon. The legislation additionally bans pistols that can accept magazines with a capacity higher than 10 rounds, pistols that have threaded barrels, and any semiautomatic firearm with a pistol grip, detachable stocks, or folding telescopes.

    Even though the events in Newtown, Aurora, and Tucson are tragic, they cannot be used as an excuse to enact every piece of gun control legislation that has been around for years. I have concerns with passing legislation that bans guns based on their appearance. For instance, limiting magazine capacity can be circumvented by carrying multiple guns and/or magazines. The 1994 assault weapons ban did not stop Columbine and has been found ineffective by the Department of Justice.

    Overly restrictive gun control legislation does very little to deter criminals. It does, however, do a great deal to limit the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves. Our crime reduction efforts must focus on criminals and criminal activity, not on gun control. Those who use a firearm to commit a crime should serve the maximum sentence so they cannot pose a further threat to society. You can be sure that any bill that seeks to restrict or restrain our Second Amendment rights will be given the strictest scrutiny and I will fight to ensure that no new limitations are placed upon our Constitutional rights to bear arms.

    I welcome renewed discussion on how to prevent these violent crimes. However, this discussion cannot solely be about guns. The problem is greater than guns alone and we need to focus on the cause of these events rather than the instrument used to carry out such terrible acts. Congress must include a complete reexamination of mental health as it relates to these shootings.

    Additionally, society has changed. There are too many video games that celebrate mass killing of innocent people. These games find their way into children’s hands. Our society in general has become less civil.

    As Congress looks to prevent future tragedies similar to Newtown, I will keep your thoughts in mind on proposed gun control legislation during the 113th Congress. I urge you to continue to raise questions and share your views with me. For democracy to function there has to be two way communication between Americans and their elected representatives. By contacting me, Iowans play a vital role in this process. I am glad to have the benefit of your views. Please keep in touch.

    Sincerely,
    Chuck
    This seems to be a response to an earlier letter from me to him... It mentions Frankenstein's bill.. It's a little less "flexible" than I thought.... But Chuck's a politician...

    And, like other pests found in nature, politicians don't need much "wiggle room" to do harm. I trust Chuck more than I do the others, though.
    Rats!
    It could be worse!
    I suppose

  13. #13
    Member Array J.Thompson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Des Moines, IA
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by autogateman View Post
    So I take it you lost a child/family member to the Sandy Hook shooting? Sorry for your loss
    I don't have any family in Connecticut. But I referenced the shooting, along with the Aurora shooting, in several letters I've written to various representatives.
    I came into this world kicking and screaming, covered in someone else's blood; I'm fully prepared to go out the same way.

  14. #14
    Member Array firehawkv8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Pinellas Park
    Posts
    22
    Its a cookie cutter letter, almost exactly like the ones I received from Marco Rubio, Bill Young and Bill Nelson.

  15. #15
    VIP Member Array pipedream's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Iowa
    Posts
    2,255
    The response to the latest letter I have written to Sen. Grassley.
    S54

    Thank you for taking the time to contact me with your concerns regarding gun control legislation. I am grateful for the opportunity to hear the concerns of Iowans.

    I understand you have concerns with S. 54, the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013, that was reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 7 as amended. I too, shared your concerns with the original bill that Senator Leahy introduced. I expressed those concerns to Chairman Leahy before the Judiciary Committee meeting.

    One of the concerns I raised with the original bill would have made it a federal crime to transport two or more guns if that person knew that the result would be a violation of state or local law. It would have created for the first time a situation in which violation of a state criminal law was an element of a federal offense. The legislation that was reported out of committee on March 7 eliminated all references to state and local laws. In addition, it does not contain provisions pertaining to mental health examination.

    Other changes that were made to the bill at my urging were to clarify that intent is necessary to commit the crime, change the gift exception, and harmonize the bill’s various penalties. Compared to when S. 54 was originally introduced, it is now directed only at illegal straw purchasers, not all transfers on behalf of another. This allows people to buy for people as part of a legitimate business, or legal private sales. These changes protect the rights of law-abiding citizens, in ways that were not protected in the original legislation.

    Additionally I submitted an amendment to S. 54 that was adopted by the committee. My amendment requires the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General, or Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division to sign off on law enforcement operations where Federal Firearm Licensees (FLL) are directed or enticed into selling firearms to individuals the Justice Department believes are purchasing guns on behalf of another for illegal purposes. The amendment also required that in these instances, the Justice Department have a plan that includes sufficient safeguards to prevent firearms from being transferred to third parties without reasonable steps for law enforcement to interdict the firearms.

    This amendment is a direct response to the Department’s failed operation Fast and Furious. We all know the fatally flawed operation allowed nearly 2,000 firearms to fall in to the hands of criminals and the drug cartels. Some of these weapons have been found at crime scenes, including at the murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.

    Unfortunately, these firearms will continue to surface at crime scenes for years to come and will take the lives of countless individuals. Fast and Furious is a black mark on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) and the Justice Department for decades.

    While investigating, we learned that the tactics used by ATF in this flawed operation were disclosed to the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division as part of wiretap applications. Those applications contained a detailed description of these flawed tactics of letting guns walk from gun dealers, into the hands of known or suspected straw purchasers. My amendment will ensure better oversight by requiring explicit written authorization for these types of tactics.

    While working on the investigation of Fast and Furious, several whistleblowers expressed their concern of the gap in the federal criminal code to enforce gun trafficking. I have a strong belief in law abiding Americans’ Constitutional right to possess firearms. However, it is important that people who have forfeited their right with criminal acts and violence not be allowed to possess firearms.

    S. 54, as reported out of the Judiciary Committee, would amend the United States Code to make it a federal offense to knowingly purchase a firearm for, on behalf of, or with intent to transfer it to any person who is prohibited by federal law from possessing a firearm. The prohibition shall not apply to any firearm that is legally purchased by a person to be given as a gift or to be given to a winner of an auction, raffle, or contest that is in compliance with federal laws.

    The bill only applies to people whose conduct is already illegal under current law. It has no effect on anyone who obeys existing laws and no effect on their Second Amendment rights. Section 922(d) of Title 18 of the United States Code already makes it a federal criminal offense “for any person to sell or otherwise dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or have reasonable cause to believe that such person” falls within one of nine categories of people who are prohibited from owning guns. Under current law, the person who provides the gun to the prohibited person must “know or have reasonable cause to believe” the person is a prohibited person. Currently, section 922(g) provides that it is unlawful for the same group of prohibited people to ship, transport, or possess a firearm or ammunition. Nothing in S.54 changes that existing legal standard.

    On trafficking, the bill provides that if someone provides two or more guns (currently, it is one) to someone they “know or ha[ve] reasonable cause to believe” is a prohibited person under federal law, they commit gun trafficking. Similarly, if a person prohibited under federal law receives two or more guns, “knowing or hav[ing] reason to know” that the receipt of the guns violates federal law, they commit the crime of gun trafficking. Thus, the bill simply raises the penalties for already prohibited transfers and receipts where more than one gun is involved.

    The straw purchasing part of the bill also tracks current law. Section 922(c) of Title 18 currently prohibits a licensed firearms dealer from selling a “firearm to a person who does not appear in person at the licensee’s business premises….” And the bill provides that a person cannot knowingly purchase or attempt to purchase a firearm from a licensed dealer on behalf of another person, that is, for someone who does not appear in person at the dealer.

    The straw purchasing part of the bill that applies to private sales also tracks current law. The bill prohibits straw purchases by people with clean records on behalf of people who are already prohibited from owning guns under federal law. The sale must be made “knowing or having reasonable cause to believe” the person is prohibited, which is the same standard as current law. The bill does add one new category of prohibited person, selling to a person who intends to use or sell the gun in furtherance of a violent crime or a drug crime, or who intends to sell the gun to another prohibited person. That is what straw purchasing is, and only criminals, not law-abiding gun owners, engage in it. Again, the bill contains no provisions at all on the subject of mental health examinations.

    Some of my colleagues still believe the bill needs more work to resolve outstanding issues between now and when the bill goes to the floor. That is something I hope will happen. I expressly conditioned my vote to allow the bill to proceed to the floor on assurances that work would continue on the bill. By reporting the legislation out of committee we can have the opportunity to have a larger debate and address concerns with the bill. I will not vote on the bill when the full Senate considers it unless I am completely assured that no innocent conduct would be criminalized.

    With the adoption of my amendment and the changes to the original legislation I believe this legislation can reduce illegal trafficking of firearms and prevent crimes being performed with illegal firearms.

    Due to my strong conviction to the Second Amendment I oppose Senator Feinstein’s Assault Weapons Ban. The legislation raises constitutional concerns that arise in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. Additionally, I oppose the universal background check bill. Recently, the Deputy Director of the National Institute of Justice wrote that universal background checks can be enforced only if there is gun registration. I oppose gun registration and believe expanded background checks would not deter prohibited persons who now avoid background checks.

    Again, I want to thank you for taking the time to contact me with your concerns with gun control legislation. I want to reaffirm my commitment to honoring the Second Amendment and protecting law-abiding Americans’ right to purchase and own firearms. I agree that overly restrictive gun control does very little to deter criminals. It does however, do a great deal to limit the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves. I am committed to making sure that people who illegally use firearms to commit a crime cannot have access to firearms and serve the maximum sentence so they cannot pose a threat to society.

    Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future with any questions or comments you may have.

    Sincerely,
    Chuck
    NRA Patron Member
    GOA Life Member
    Never look down on anybody, unless you're helping them up.

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

senator grassley

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors