U.S. Senator's Reply To A Constituent

[Captain Crunch]

I recently contacted my two U.S. Senators and asked them to oppose H.R. 297, The NICS Improvement Act of 2007, if this legislation ever reaches the Senate. (hopefully it never will and will die in the House). Here's Senator Tester's reply:

Dear Terry:

Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 297, the NICS Improvement Act of 2007. This legislation would require the heads of federal agencies to provide information for compilation in a National Instant Criminal Background Check System to see if any potential gun purchasers have a criminal history or have mental health records of concern.

As a custom butcher, I made my living with a gun for over twenty-five years. I know first hand that firearms play an important role in the heritage and the fabric of Montana. During my time as a State Senator in Helena, I consistently voted to protect the Second Amendment rights of Montanans. In the U.S. Senate, I will continue to support legislation allowing law abiding Americans to carry their firearms.

Current law already prohibits people committed to mental institutions or who are legally declared mentally deficient from purchasing firearms. We need to ensure that these laws are adequately enforced and the mental health information reaches the proper authorities.

Currently, H.R. 297 is being discussed in the House and there is no similar piece of legislation in the Senate. If this bill, or any other legislation regarding updating the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act comes before the Senate, I will keep your views in mind. Please do not hesitate to contact me again in the future if I can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,

Jon Tester
United States Senator, Montana

How's that for a noncommittal response?

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[dr_cmg]

Current law already prohibits people committed to mental institutions or who are legally declared mentally deficient from purchasing firearms. We need to ensure that these laws are adequately enforced and the mental health information reaches the proper authorities.

He's right there. And if they are enforced there is not need for any changes to any current law. Unfortunately his last paragraph leave wide open as to what he intends to do. It just drives me crazy that so many people including our elected official have the stupid idea that laws accomplish anything. He even knows they don't, but it appears from his response that in spite of knowing it he may support legislation just to make idiot feel good.

[peacefuljeffrey]

It sounds to me like he wants to support the bill on the presumption that it will do some good as far as preventing the mentally ill from acquiring (legal) guns by sharing information about their adjudicated mental state. It sounds to me like "I'll keep your views in mind" is his way of saying that he doesn't plan to vote the way you'd like him to.

I don't know enough about the provisions of the bill to comment at this time.


And you're right, it most certainly is a noncommittal response. It's the kind of doubletalk that is the hallmark of politicians, and one of the multitude of reasons why real men despise them. They don't even have the courage to simply state their own position.

[sailormnop]

And you're right, it most certainly is a noncommittal response. It's the kind of doubletalk that is the hallmark of politicians, and one of the multitude of reasons why real men despise them. They don't even have the courage to simply state their own position.

I'll second that.

[azchevy]

John Mccain's response to me was hardlined against any law that would affect my 2d ammendment rights.

[Free American]

He spoke in a complete circle, and it only took four paragraphs (I guess that would geometrically be a square but whatever). That is honestly impressive. Usually they ramble on forever before they say they will do whatever the lobbyist that bribes them the most wants.

[Redneck Repairs]

Well he is from Montana , and even our politicians are plain spoken ( when they duck the question ) out west . LOL .