| Author | Message | ||
     J2blue |
A reply back to my Senator from Colorado: Dear Senator Bennet, After learning today of Colorado's own state level initiatives to infringe on the Second Amendment rights of all Americans I felt it was necessary to reply back to your own answer to me about what you support. I think the best way to do that is to use your own words to illustrate the combination of deception or ignorance that is guiding the call for action. First, let me say that as one of our State's representatives to Washington you have a special obligation to avoid irrational and emotionally charged calls for action, and I think you are failing in that regard. The recent events you refer to are singular and isolated events that make for great headlines, but after a year they fall neatly into a statistical pattern that contradicts the perception being manufactured by the news media and narrow interests trying to exploit these tragedies. You have your own motives for latching on to this mobs call to disarm law abiding citizens. To claim that "We must have a real discussion in this country about finding ways to stop these senseless shootings." insinuates there is an "unreal" discussion, though I'm sure you carefully avoided the word most gun control advocates wanted to say, and that is they want an "honest" discussion. In either case you are trying to force onto the table an issue that most Americans do not want to entertain, and that is a dishonest call for "restrictions on certain weapons intended for warfare". Anyone knowledgeable in firearms understands the dishonesty in that statement, even if they don't share a strict interpretation of the Second Amendment. The firearms you refer to are no more capable of warfare as the modern military understands it than a pop-gun is. Similarly, the limitation on magazine capacity has no connection with military tactics and abilities. Ultimately it isn't about a certain kind of firearm in the hands of law abiding citizens, it is about removing firearms from those citizens, and that is an infringement. You can parrot those talking points at this seemingly opportune time to do so, but they will be seen in the calmer light of tomorrow for their irrational and dishonest attempt to simply take guns away! The FBI already provide statistics that demonstrate the ineffectiveness of weapons bans to have any influence on the rate of gun violence. Those statistics will look the same a year from now, and twenty years from now. Your posterity is at stake, of course, but our rights as law abiding citizens, and our very status to remain law abiding is challenged by such misguided attempts. Let's face it, you are either in the camp of a very small minority that wants to remove the greater public's ability to resist tyranny(of a form they really want to impose) or you are in the camp of a slight majority of Americans who are emotionally upset, but not objectively aligned with action that doesn't challenge a basic constitutional right. I hope I would be wrong to think the former case is true. If you are in the latter category than I implore you to stop, think beyond the moment, and consider practical actions that do not have to jeopardize so much to so many. It would be easier to remain on the political train you are currently on, certainly it would be much less risky in the short term. Or you could forge a wiser, long term approach that does reach across the aisle and includes a vast majority of Americans and condemns the wicked plans of evil men. For my sake, let me state what efforts I do approve of. First and foremost we need to rebuild our mental healthcare network in this nation. I think we can see the failed attempts to "mainstream" individuals who are constitutionally incapable of functioning peacefully in society. We need to provide(at the state level) updated and secure institutions that improve the life of the afflicted and relieve their families of the impossible responsibility to keep society safe from their loved ones. We know our current approach does not work! And we can prove with statistical accuracy that these individuals are the true cause of mass violence in our society, not the inanimate objects they may recruit; these individuals are the weapon of mass destruction. In support of this prime directive for mental healthcare are improvements that can be made in the application to purchase and processing of background checks. Let me add here that I understand Colorado has one of the more thorough background check systems in the country, so I would be dubious of attempts to fix (what) clearly isn't broken. Also, there is another intentional deception by the smaller gun control advocacy groups that claim there is a "Gun Show Loophole", but that can easily be debunked. As for improvements in background checks, let me state that what is acceptable for the States collectively to engage in is not acceptable on the Federal level. A national registry is far too great of a threat to our Second Amendment rights because it can easily be abused by appointed powers. There is nothing that a national registry can do that our States cannot accomplish on their own, while respecting the rights and privacy of their citizens. A far greater number of your constituents will forgive you for overlooking their emotional call for action of some kind when they see the responsibility you have taken on their behalf to stop senseless violence without alienating huge numbers of law abiding citizens. They will gratefully support and defend you against the charges of the elitist minority that thinks they know which firearms are acceptable for all free men. As I said above I hope you may be, only temporarily, of the camp that is caught up in the emotional trauma of recent events, meaning well but not yet able to see clearly the greater good. I have reason to believe you are sensible, responsible and willing to find the wiser course that I have laid out. Sincerely, ... (Message edited by j2blue on February 05, 2013) (Message edited by j2blue on February 05, 2013) | ||
| Kenm123t |
Bob I should have said Elected on the basis of Losing his command. The French were trying to hold their colonial power in French Indo China I had heard it involved Jackies family holdings. Kerry pulled the same thing with Iraq Teresa had major holding in Iraq through once again France She owns several French Banks Stroke liberal pestilance is to be spurned at every chance. To prevent the spread of the murderous and treasonous vermin | ||
| Rick_a |
Froggy, I know my kid. He needs no intervention. There is nothing stupid about it. | ||
| Froggy |
If you say so... | ||
| Rick_a |
I damn well do. His recommendation is based on hearsay, not anything he's observed. Just 'cause a young kid has some energy (any that aren't obese tend to) doesn't mean he's ADHD. I'm not one to blindly follow a health care provider. We'd probably all be medicated zombies. Do with your own what you will. Get off my case. | ||
| Nukeblue |
AMEN | ||
| Fireboltwillie |
J2blue, excellent letter to Bennet. Wish i had thought of it. | ||
| Gbackus |
I know several psychologists on the state board that believe that adhd medication is overprescribed, and that adhd is overdiagnosed. They are attempting to get revisions to the protocols currently used to diagnose adhd | ||
| S21125r |
J2 - let me know if Senator Bennet responds to your latest letter. I also received an "anti gun" response with the usual blather from my senator here in Michigan (Levin). I crafted up a respectful counter response but later $hit canned it before sending as I wasn't sure if it would really make a difference. Apparently Mr. Levin was a co-sponsor to the recent AWB bill and is a career politician so I think my case is a lost cause... | ||
| S21125r |
BTW - if anybody has any good websites to reference for Defensive Gun Use, please share. I know the NRA use to do this but can't find it on their site anymore. I did find this site a few weeks back: http://gunssavelives.net/ | ||
| Sifo |
Found this one... http://www.keepandbeararms.com/ | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The goal of Progressives and THIS administration has ALWAYS been to remove guns, all guns, from the hands of the citizenry: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embed ded&v=T_ANRgcvjkk | ||
| J2blue |
Thanks for kudos on my letter. I post it here for two reasons, the first is just to have an alternative public forum that it appears on. The other reason is to provide ideas and solicit critiques. No matter how hard I try there is usually some grammar or spelling mistake, and many times what I thought made sense in my head didn't really come out clearly in my sentences. Sharing in a like minded forum such as this helps refine our individual messages. I get the cynicism behind not bothering, and that is ok, who can say if a representative is reachable by general discourse or not. I decided to chance it with this senator, but I wouldn't waste my breath again on Feinstein. I've never considered even trying to communicate sensibly with congress critter Pelosi. I think we should all grill our elected reps and neighbors who seem so passionate about "taking action" to remove some guns from the general public. They have to be shown that either they are part of a diabolical plan, or they are ignorant about what they are trying to do. Most people I know are in the latter camp, there is hope for them. | ||
| S21125r |
"...grill our elected reps and neighbors who seem so passionate about "taking action" to remove some guns..." J2 - Funny you should say that. I have a friend who claims to be a former gun owner and former hunter that says he supports the second amendment yet "couldn't sleep at night with one of those killing machines (any semi auto) in his house." I've tried to debate rationally with him but all I get is either emotion or... crickets... He has so much emotion and fear of firearms that I'm almost ready to call BS on all of this "former" nonsense. It's like someone saying they were formerly gay and then taking a homophobic stance. Just doesn't seem credible. | ||
| S21125r |
What the heck... Here is the reply I crafted up for Senator Levin and didn't send yet. Am I being a little harsh? Dear Senator Levin, Thank you for clarifying your position on current gun law initiatives. However I do disagree on several of those positions as they do not appear to be factual. First the Brady Law has not prevented 1.5 million firearm purchases. The 1.5 million statistic most likely doesn’t tell the whole story. The 2010 statistics show that of the 76,142 cases submitted to the ATF, 62 cases were prosecuted with only 13 guilty pleas. Hardly seems like overwhelming success. If you consider the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics for knifes, fists/feet, and blunt object use in Murders also went down at the same rate as handguns, rifles, and shotguns, it becomes pretty clear that the Brady Law had nothing to do with reducing crime rate. We simply became less violent as a society. Second, gun shows do not account for 40% of gun sales. It is actually 4% according to the DoJ survey from May 1997. You failed to account for transfers via friends, family, and acquaintances which make up a significant portion. I assume that survey is where you are getting your statistics as I’m unaware of any other study since then. Third, AR15s (or any semiautomatic rifle for that matter…) rifles do have a sporting purpose. It doesn’t matter much anyway since the 2nd amendment has nothing to do with sporting use according to recent SCOTUS rulings. As for the proposed ban, I am surprised that anyone would boast about taking credit for this pile of rubbish. The criteria are all based on visual cues that do not raise or lower their lethality. Pistol grips and barrel shrouds do not make the weapon any more dangerous than an equivalent firearm without these features. Furthermore, FBI Uniform Crime Statistics over the past 20 years show that ALL rifles account for 2-3% of homicides and the so called assault rifles are a subset of that. When comparing those statistics to shotgun use (which are more likely to be used by the way) both weapons classes showed a comparable downward trend before and after the previous assault weapon ban. This leads me to conclude that the previous ban had no bearing whatsoever on crime rates. As mentioned previously, even knives and fist/feet are more likely to be used than rifles and they also show equivalent decline over the same periods. One thing I think you grossly overlooked is the FBI crime statistics that show that gun crime rates in metropolitan areas over 250,000 are twice as high as the national average. If you goal is to reduce gun violence without affecting citizen’s rights, I would encourage you to look at where the majority of crimes are committed, what types of weapons are being used, and what motivates people to commit these crimes. In other words, figure out what will really work instead of trying to fix a non existing problem with uninspired legislation. In closing I’d like to state that I’m highly disappointed – I expected more out of an elected official of your stature. You are either misinformed on much of the gun control topic or you are being deceitful to I and the rest of your constituents. Neither of those are qualities that I wish to support further. Thank you for your time. | ||
| Hootowl |
"to I and" should be "to me and" Fix that, and send it! | ||
| Nukeblue |
good letter, send it! not too harsh & not threatening, not sure i could be so polite | ||
| Cowboy |
s21125 I like it Feel free to use my name with yours If you would like to. Wendell Wayne Kay Anacoc La. | ||
| Aesquire |
http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=105&load=7985 DHS subject training video discussed. ( ok, dissed. ) I know I've said this before, but I have informed my buddies in no uncertain terms never, ever, to prank me with some "scare tactics" bit where a ski masked lunatic with a chainsaw is running amok. I honestly can say I'm no decent hero in an action movie. Too old, too fat, too broken, too prone to hesitate, and certainly too ugly. However, my initial conditioned reflex in the "chain saw massacre" scenario is to pick up a table and slam the masked lunatic with it, preferably into a sturdy brick wall, until he breaks and drops the chainsaw. I'd feel terrible visiting the stunt man in the hospital if that was a prank. ( we'll skip the 20 years of hitting close personal friends with rattan sticks, then drinking beer with them as we bitch about the bruises... ) There's never a decent little league bat around when you need one... anyone who's seen the Movie "300", or one of those ancient weapons shows, knows what good an idea having a shield can be, and how deadly that "defensive" weapon can be in skilled hands. Hence the choice of table as panic weapon of choice. YMMV. ( In SCA full contact armored fighting, you are forbidden to use the shield as an offensive weapon, the only legal target for a shield blow is on another's shield. Why? Because a bistro table top sized slab of wood or metal can break bones or kill even in full 15th century plate armor.... I'ts WHY armored guys carried them. ) Just a random thought on the subject of Keep and Arm Bears. Sheep, wolves, sheepdogs. | ||
| Swampy |
S21125R, This is what I wrote to Levin. He is an old out of touch elitist that needs to surrender his office. Senator Levin, I am sorry but from what you wrote to me indicates that you are completely ignorant of the issues at hand concerning violence in America. I find it absolutely ridiculous for you to tell me that the best you can do to protect Americans is to ban firearms with pistol grips and barrel shrouds! A statement like that indicates how uneducated you about firearms. Please withdraw your support from the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. For you to sponsor such a draconian bill with your poor understanding of the underlying issues of violence in America would be detrimental to the well being of our country. To support such simplistic ideas such as gun bans would be dangerous to all of our citizens. I do support education, such as requiring firearm safety training in all public schools. In public schools we teach water safety, electrical safety, how to cross the street safely, how to brush your teeth and even how to have sex safely but firearms are a taboo subject in public schools. I also would support licensing of firearms owners, but not licensing of firearms. If a person passes a background check and passes some sort of a written exam the person would be issued a license with which to purchase and possess firearms. You would only be able to sell firearms to persons who held the license. No more complicated than that. The recent massacres that have occurred are not the fault of the firearm but that of the mentally ill person who used it. Our country provides woefully inadequate mental health care. Change that! The persons that committed these recent crimes by all accounts were in need of mental health care. Please Senator Levin I ask you to do the right thing and withdraw your support from this ill advised Assault Weapons ban of 2013. It would be a horrible thing to have you waste your valuable time making such a ban reality and to wake up the next morning to a massacre caused by a deranged person wielding a knife. Sincerely, I might have been a little too harsh for such an old man. I am probably on some list now but I just found letters from this crack pot from 20 years back where he is singing the same old song: I'm all for hunting but just don't hunt with anything but a stone axe! | ||
| Blake |
Patrick will like this... http://www.assaultweapon.info/ | ||
| Aesquire |
Thank you, that link is factually correct. Here in the Imperial State, they just made 75% of all guns illegal, ( or unable to operate without the included banned magazine ) as of next April. Unless we can get the law changed, close to a million New Yorkers are going to be felons. Because close to a Million New Yorkers are going to be quietly civil disobedient. The Occupy movement folks are posers fighting an imaginary enemy. | ||
| Bob_thompson |
This has been making the internet rounds at least here in the U.S. Do you agree?  | ||
| Blake |
This is shocking. Fascism alive and looking to take control in America. Does anyone have any doubt whatsoever of the political party affiliation of the would-be usurpers of our rights? http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/2013/02/09/councilma n-asks-man-to-turn-in-his-weapon-look-what-happens -next/?subscriber=1 City councilman, Rick Almberg, of Oak Harbor, WA has proved beyond any reasonable doubt that he cannot honor a simple oath of office if it might conflict with his anti-American ideology. Almberg ought to be impeached, removed from the council, and forbidden to hold ANY public office anywhere in America. We need zero tolerance for fascist would-be usurpers of our unalienable rights! These scum who would use political office to try to deny our rights are nothing but liars and traitors. This is not an issue of free speech; this is tyranny and treason. Almberg is free to speak, demonstrate and the like all he wants, but like the other traitors to their oath to uphold the Constitution, he is not free to coopt public office to violate our unalienable rights, or any of our constitutionally recognized rights. He ought to be facing prison time. If I were the mayor or sherif, I'd have had the fascist traitor cuffed and put in a jail cell. A public stockade has great merits. The other fascist scum who voted with Almberg ought to be excoriated too. | ||
| Chauly |
Scott Dudley for reelection! | ||
| Blake |
More on the above: http://mynorthwest.com/76/2195666/Exclusive-Oak-Ha rbor-Coucilman-Rick-Almberg-stands-by-attempted-gu n-ban These fascist traitors cannot grasp the simple fact that prisons and court rooms present compelling special circumstance security situations, have full time armed security, and are not in the realm of a "public square". A public park and council meeting on the other hand are exactly in the realm of public square. How ludicrous is it to be intimidated by the presences of weapons when in fact you have no idea if people are carrying any? The fascist had to ask if Mr. Yonkman was carrying a firearm. Now when confronted for his traitorous tyrannical misuse of political office and blatant attempt to violate our constitutionally recognized right to bear arms, he pleads a purely emotional case that people might be intimidated in the presence of citizens bearing arms, conveniently ignoring the fact that to be so-intimidated one would need to know that others are indeed carrying firearms. Lying, deceiving, fascist scum! But of course it's ok for govt appointees to have their guns. No one has ever been intimidated by police or military personnel bearing arms.  Kudos to the sheriff who made it clear that he does not answer to the city council, but to the law. | ||
| Blake |
http://kiroradio.com/listen/9951979# Fascist deceiver exposed! | ||
| Sifo |
This has been making the internet rounds at least here in the U.S. Do you agree? I couldn't agree more. My wife and I had this discussion with another couple 2 weeks ago. Myself and the wife in the other couple are dead set on that. My wife and the other husband have more of the mindset that you can't do anything about it when they come for your guns. It was a great talk for a couple of hours. By the end, both spouses that thought you can't do anything were far more convinced that there are ways to fight back beyond a suicidal act. There may be a time when guns have to be put well out of reach to keep them protected. The time will come when they need to come back from hiding. Of course, it would be great if none of that comes to be. I still have some hope, but the current trajectory doesn't look promising. | ||
| Xbimmer |
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2013/02/foghorn/l ist-of-proposed-california-gun-control-measures-50 0-round-max-no-grandfathering-no-detachable-mags-m andatory-license/ | ||
| Aesquire |
I note that there is no grandfathering. Possession of a magazine holding more than 10 rounds is to be illegal. "Felony if you keep one." In New York you are required to sell your magazines, or "assault weapons" OUT OF STATE, since it is illegal to give, or sell one of these horrific things to a Citizen of the United States, who is also a Subject OF the Imperial State. You must do so within a year, or you will be a felon. The Peoples Republic Of California, and the Imperial State Of New York lead the nation in many things. Welfare transfer of wealth from working people to the State. ( and some to the poorer folk in our State, but most goes to the State ) Pollution laws that are unattainable goals, and severely restrict your ability to use or purchase energy. Highest utility costs in the US. Restrictions on Constitutional rights. We also, In New York, have the "next President of the United States" as Governor. ( at least that's what he seems to hear when introduced ) Cuomo pushed the New York SAFE Act through with no debate allowed in the Senate, and without the New York Constitution mandated comment period. Voted and passed without allowing the public to see or know what was in the Act, or that the Act had, while still in committee, provision to confiscate legally owned weapons. ( removed, and denied at the last minute. Someone in the Legislature didn't want to be killed...... figuratively, of course, in the next election ) Don't get complacent. New York, and California set the tone for restricting the Citizens freedoms and rights. We lead the way to a perfect utopia, where elected officials need not worry about re-election or being deposed by the subjects they rule. Oh..... and we got snow here in NY. Sucks to be us. gee, good thing I gave away all my guns for Christmas. Glad I don't have to worry about this stuff. I wonder when they get to Bows? |
