Letter to my Representative and Senators for what it's worth.

[Sky King]

I sent this letter to Representative Stephen Fincher, Seators Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander.  I know addressing Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander is probably wasted breath, time and postage as I have never viewed them as friends of The Second Amendment, but I have to let them know my feelings.   If anybody here wishes to use any of this letter to their representatives in Washington, feel free to do so.  I just ask that you edit it as necessary to make it from you.

 

Representative ,

 

I write today to address an issue that is of great importance in light of the recent tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown Connecticut.

 

This horrific tragedy has caused a great deal of knee jerk responses which history has proven to have no effect on addressing the real causes of these actions.

 

President Obama, Senator Feinstein and others have responded as expected and have proposed actions and legislation to re-impose bans on assault type weapons and large capacity magazines.  Such a ban had ten years to show whether or not it could be effective.  It was shown to have NO impact on crimes of this type.  The massacre at Columbine occurred during this ban.

 

Two events in China, where private ownership of ANY firearm is illegal also show that taking away firearms will not stop such tragedies.  In one event, over 20 school children were savagely attacked and injured by a knife wielding assailant.  In another, a person armed with axes killed several people.  Both of these events occurred this fall. 

 

President Obama’s offhand dismissal of the suggestion by the NRA for armed personnel in schools is typical of his long history of trying to undermine our rights protected by The Second Amendment.  This dismissal also ignores facts based on historical events, two VERY recently.

 

We rarely hear of these events in the liberal media because they do not help further an anti-gun agenda.  It should also be noted that President Obama’s children are protected at their school by Secret Service.    

 

A shooting at the Clackamas Town Center mall in Oregon was stopped when the attacker was confronted by an armed law abiding citizen with a concealed carry permit.  While two people were killed, the potential rampage ended when the “bad person with a gun” was confronted by a “good person with a gun”.

 

In San Antonio Texas, an event that could have mirrored the Aurora Colorado theater shooting, was stopped with no fatalities when the attacker was shot by an off-duty sheriff’s deputy.

The causes of these tragedies such as Sandy Hook certainly need addressing.  However when we choose to REVISIT FAILED strategies and overlook other KNOWN factors, all we are doing is producing a lot of smoke and mirrors in order to make it APPEAR that we are taking action.  Action that will do nothing to effectively reduce the potential of another event like Sandy Hook. 

 

The ONLY impact it will have is to impose further sanctions on the law abiding citizens who are NOT the people responsible for these atrocities.

 

To not address the entertainment and video game influences is turning a blind eye to REAL influences on young people who are impressionable.  These factors desensitize young people to the realities of death and killing.  In real life, when you die or get shot, you can not just hit a “reset” button and start over and everybody is alive again.

 

These influences are especially important when the person watching these movies or playing these games has mental issues or a person who feels a need to extract revenge due to his social environment.

 

President Obama has appointed Vice-President Biden to head a group to propose further restrictions on our Second Amendment rights.  That is the wrong task for this group.  They should be tasked with looking at the REAL root causes for these events and THEN formulating real-world suggestion on how to address them.  If this group DOES NOT consider the suggestions of the NRA, then it will only prove that this is just “window dressing” and will be used to justify President Obama’s actions to further his anti-Second Amendment agenda.

 

 

Thank you

[Guest Baron]

Thank you. We need as many of these as we can get. 

 

This is our line in the sand. This is where we fight.

Edited December 31, 2012 by Baron

[sigrug17]

thank you... sent mine in a few days ago but I figure I'll bother them some more :usa:

[LagerHead]

This is a well-written and thought out letter. The only problem I have with it is the end where it is suggested that the government can be part of the solution to any problem like this. If history has shown us anything it is that the least effective path to a solution goes through the government. 

[Sky King]

This is a well-written and thought out letter. The only problem I have with it is the end where it is suggested that the government can be part of the solution to any problem like this. If history has shown us anything it is that the least effective path to a solution goes through the government. 

Thank you for your remarks.  I agree with your assesment of the last paragraph.  A saying I am fond of describes the oxymoron that exists when the government tries to solve a problem, "I am from the government and I am here to help". 

 

The reality of our situation as the law abiding gun owners of this country is that our government is likely going to do SOMETHING.  No matter what they do, it will not be in keeping with The Second Amendment.  I have no doubt that if Obama doesn't get all the "control" he wants, he will just issue another executive order to achieve his goal.  As much as this will rub a lot of the readers of this forum the wrong way, it rubs me wrong too but if the major pro-gun lobby groups are not represented on this panel we can be sure of REAL problems.  Their presence in these discussion is needed to maintain if nothing else, damage control not to help them achieve their goals.

 

In all fairness, I also believe, as I state in the last paragraph, this panel in reality is only being formed to produce "solutions" that we all know they will arrive at.  It is a foregone conclusion and will only serve to provide Obama with the justification he wants to push the gun control legislation he wants. Obama wants the appearance of studying the issue when in fact, his mind is already made up.

 

I am not saying all this to sound as though I am giving up or throwing in the towel.  Those who know me know that I would never do either.  But reality is reality.  The best we can hope for is that this all blows over and the public's memory is short as it often is.  But be assured, Feinstein, Shumer and Obama are going to do their best to keep this pot stirred.

Edited December 31, 2012 by Sky King

[DaveTN]

Here is my rough draft for what its worth. I tried to keep it short......

 

 

I am a former Police Officer and have seen firsthand the damage criminals will do. I am not a hunter and do not kill animals for sport. I do however have firearms to protect my family and my community against criminals.

 

As a Police Officer I was usually reactive; not proactive. By the time the Police get to an active shooter it is usually over. The only way to stop an illegal active shooter is with a legal active shooter. Please do not take part in legislating away our rights to protect ourselves, our families, and potentially your family.

 

The recent massacre in Connecticut was a mental health issue; not a gun issue. The devil himself walked into that classroom and all the gun bans in the world would not have stopped him. What might have stopped him (other than a mental health professional being proactive) is a legally armed citizen; unfortunately those aren’t allowed in schools so all those small children had to die.

 

As private citizens we are generally the only hope victims will have. Please don’t disarm us by voting for gun control legislation.

 

Also, please don’t put our Police Officers in the position of having to choose between enforcing laws they do not believe in or abandoning their law enforcement careers.

[Dennis1209]

Not as long as the Op but. I did my part emailing Fincher myself. I encourage everyone who cares about their freedoms to take a moment and write the people who write and vote on the laws. Once it's gone, it's so very hard to get it back.

[Guest Wildogre]

My draft, will work on polishing it tomorrow. I have already called.

 

Note this is loooooooooooooooooooong

 

 

 

 

President Obama has called for a National dialog in the wake of the awful tragedy at Sandy Hook.

 

I wish to be part of that dialog and hope that you will read this letter and take the actions that I will recommend. As I was taught, never bring a problem to light unless you have some solutions.

 

Some background on myself. I have been shooting since the age of 12 and was on my school rifle team in Jr. High. That fact really dates me.

 

I have also served as an Army Intelligence Officer and took an oath very similar to the one you have taken and I have no reason to doubt that you take yours just as seriously as I take mine. My Commission is one of the few things that I have on my walls.

 

Before I get started just like in any debate or conversation I would like to state a few facts.

 

“The following summary of police statistical surveys is excerpted from Kopel, David B, Rational Basis Analysis of "Assault Weapon" Prohibition. (Kopel's paper contains the citations for these surveys and lists a few more studies as well.)

• California. In 1990, "assault weapons" comprised thirty-six of the 963 firearms involved in homicide or aggravated assault and analyzed by police crime laboratories, according to a report prepared by the California Department of Justice, and based on data from police firearms laboratories throughout the state. The report concluded that "assault weapons play a very small role in assault and homicide firearm cases." Of the 1,979 guns seized from California narcotics dealers in 1990, fifty-eight were "assault weapons."

• Chicago. From 1985 through 1989, only one homicide was perpetrated with a military caliber rifle. Of the 17,144 guns seized by the Chicago police in 1989, 175 were "military style weapons."

• Florida. Florida Department of Law Enforcement Uniform Crime Reports for 1989 indicate that rifles of all types accounted for 2.6% of the weapons used in Florida homicides. The Florida Assault Weapons Commission found that "assault weapons" were used in 17 of 7,500 gun crimes for the years 1986-1989.

• Los Angeles. Of the more than 4,000 guns seized by police during one year, only about 3% were "assault weapons."

• Maryland. In 1989-90, there was only one death involving a "semiautomatic assault rifle" in all twenty-four counties of the State of Maryland.

• Massachusetts. Of 161 fatal shootings in Massachusetts in 1988, three involved "semiautomatic assault rifles." From 1985 to 1991, the guns were involved in 0.7% of all shootings.

• Miami. The Miami police seized 18,702 firearms from January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1993. Of these, 3.13% were "assault weapons."

• New Jersey. According to the Deputy Chief Joseph Constance of the Trenton New Jersey Police Department, in 1989, there was not a single murder involving any rifle, much less a "semiautomatic assault rifle," in the State of New Jersey. No person in New Jersey was killed with an "assault weapon" in 1988. Nevertheless, in 1990 the New Jersey legislature enacted an "assault weapon" ban that included low-power .22 rifles, and even BB guns. Based on the legislature's broad definition of "assault weapons," in 1991, such guns were used in five of 410 murders in New Jersey; in forty-seven of 22,728 armed robberies; and in twenty-three of 23,720 aggravated assaults committed in New Jersey.

• New York City. Of 12,138 crime guns seized by New York City police in 1988, eighty were "assault-type" firearms.

• New York State. Semiautomatic "assault rifles" were used in twenty of the 2,394 murders in New York State in 1992.

• San Diego. Of the 3,000 firearms seized by the San Diego police in 1988-90, nine were "assault weapons" under the California definition.

• San Francisco. Only 2.2% of the firearms confiscated in 1988 were military-style semiautomatics.

• Virginia. Of the 1,171 weapons analyzed in state forensics laboratories in 1992, 3.3% were "assault weapons."

• National statistics. Less than four percent of all homicides in the United States involve any type of rifle. No more than .8% of homicides are perpetrated with rifles using military calibers. (And not all rifles using such calibers are usually considered "assault weapons.") Overall, the number of persons killed with rifles of any type in 1990 was lower than the number in any year in the 1980s.

  (http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcassaul.html)”

 

Now I will grant you that these statistics are a bit dated and that there are to paraphrase the saying “white lies, lies and then there are statistics” but please bear with me as I quote something more recent from the Sacramento Bee.

“California gun sales jump; gun injuries, deaths fall By Phillip Reese
preese@sacbee.com Published: Thursday, Dec. 27, 2012 - 7:11 pm Last Modified: Friday, Dec. 28, 2012 - 9:13 am Gun deaths and injuries have dropped sharply in California, even as the number of guns sold in the state has risen, according to new state data. Dealers sold 600,000 guns in California last year, up from 350,000 in 2002, according to records of sale tallied by the California Attorney General's office. During that same period, the number of California hospitalizations due to gun injuries declined from about 4,000 annually to 2,800, a roughly 25 percent drop, according to hospital records collected by the California Department of Public Health. Firearm-related deaths fell from about 3,200 annually to about 2,800, an 11 percent drop, state health figures show. Most of the drop in firearm-related injuries and deaths can be explained by a well-documented, nationwide drop in violent crime.”

So from these two sources we can see that “Assault Weapons” are used in less than 1% of all crimes and overall the crime rate is dropping as gun sales increase. (If the numbers for California are comparable to the rest of the country.)

 

Now to the issue of Active Shooters.

 

John Lott has covered this in detail in his paper. “Multiple Victim Public Shootings, Bombings, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handgun Laws:Contrasting Private and Public Law Enforcement” I would recommend that one of your staff read this report.

 

In my own limited research what I have discovered is that all but one of these with four or more deaths have occurred in a “Gun Free Zones” and that exception is that of Gabby Giffords. In each of these cases the shooter only stopped when confronted with deadly force.

 

An excellent example is the recent case that occurred this December in Oklahoma where someone opened fire in a shopping mall and was confronted by a civilian with what in Tennessee would be a Handgun Carry Permit. This armed citizen aimed his weapon at the shooter but did not “take the shot” because there were innocents in the line of fire. However the active shooter on seeing the weapon aimed at him, shot himself.

 

Therefore we can see that an Assault Weapon ban of any type would not accomplish the goal of preventing more Sandy Hooks and that “Gun Free Zones” are not effective, and that the only thing that stops an active shooter is the threat or employment of deadly force.

 

So what is the solution? The sad thing is that there may be no solution. There are several things that we can do.

• Tennessee has resource officers in most schools and has for years. As long as I can recall, only going back to 1991, Tennessee has not had an Active Shooter in any of its schools.

• The arming of Teachers should also be considered. Utah has allowed qualified teachers to carry in schools. Once again there have been no active shooters in Utah schools and no events regarding firearms that a Teacher was caring in schools have been recorded that I can find. You can confirm this by talking to a member of the Utah delegation.

• Teachers should also be better trained on what to do in these situations. Homeland Security does have a video on this but I do not think it goes far enough. Brandon Webb on his site sofrep.com also has several tips. The main one that could be implemented immediately and that is simply using high powered flashlights. There is also the LaserDazzler (http://www.laserdazzler.net/) which would be much more effective but would also be much more expensive.

• We also need to improve the reporting of individuals with mental health problems that would prohibit them from possession of firearms to NCIS. The Virginia Tech shooter is an excellent example.

• The overall Mental Health system in the United States needs improvement.

• We also need to stop publishing the names of the Active Shooter.

It is my fervent desire that all of the above will enacted first before the consideration of any Assault Weapons ban that would only be a “feel good” act. Whose passage would do nothing to attack the real problem of mad men shooting innocents.

 

If you or any one from your staff would like to discuss this please contact me. Fridays are the best days for meetings for me.
 

Thank you for your consideration in reading this long letter.

 

[sgjay]

I too wrote long emails to Senators Corker & Alexander as well as Rep. Blackburn. I believe that Blackburn will fight the good fight but our senators are probly a lost cause, unless they truely take their job as representing the will of the people seriously. Having written Corker before about the "online ammunition sales ban", the reply his office sent me was less than friendly to our cause. Also, just thinking, could Tennessee pass laws allowing the ownership and use of banned weapons the way that other states have passed laws allowing the possession of marijuana? Same principal right?!

[DaveTN]

I too wrote long emails to Senators Corker & Alexander as well as Rep. Blackburn. I believe that Blackburn will fight the good fight but our senators are probly a lost cause, unless they truely take their job as representing the will of the people seriously. Having written Corker before about the "online ammunition sales ban", the reply his office sent me was less than friendly to our cause. Also, just thinking, could Tennessee pass laws allowing the ownership and use of banned weapons the way that other states have passed laws allowing the possession of marijuana? Same principal right?!

The Feds are busting people for possession in those states are they not?

States can do anything they want, but when Tennessee passed the Firearms Freedom act I got a letter from the ATF stating it was unlawful. As far as I know it hasn’t been tested.

The big test will would be when these weapon bans, if they pass, (which I don’t think they will) would go to the SCOTUS. They have already ruled you have a right to own guns, the state will control where and when you will bear them, and suggested that an outright gun ban would not be allowed. But some seem to think an “Assault Weapons Ban” would stand. Yes, I know the whole thing about the term “assault weapon” but we all know what they mean.

[sgjay]

The Feds are busting people for possession in those states are they not?

States can do anything they want, but when Tennessee passed the Firearms Freedom act I got a letter from the ATF stating it was unlawful. As far as I know it hasn’t been tested.

The big test will would be when these weapon bans, if they pass, (which I don’t think they will) would go to the SCOTUS. They have already ruled you have a right to own guns, the state will control where and when you will bear them, and suggested that an outright gun ban would not be allowed. But some seem to think an “Assault Weapons Ban” would stand. Yes, I know the whole thing about the term “assault weapon” but we all know what they mean.

By federal law they should be busting people BUT, Obama said that he would not go after marijuana users in Washington and Colorado. (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/12/14/obama-will-not-go-after-states-where-pot-is-legal/) Would it not be hypocritical to send in the ATF to bust gun ban violators in a state that has made owning "assault weapons"

leagle and then not send in the DEA to bust pot smokers in states where it is leagle under state law? We would either get to keep our guns or the hippies would lose their weed. But only if life was fair!

[Guest Bassman17SC]

I sent both written letters and e-mails.  I already have the robotic responses from Cooper and Corker to my e-mails.  

 

I believe I have been banned from Alexander's office since I schooled him on global warming 4 years ago.  He hasn't responded to any of my correspondence since then.

 

We need to find a conservative candidate to replace him.  On the other hand, I believe he is going to retire after this term and work for the Chinese or something.

[Keyless]

   For the first time in my life , I sent letters as well. I have never thought it does much good because it always seemd they vote how they want to and not how those who elected them want them to vote.  I tried to keep it as short as possible and to the point. I remember the last ban and no one thought it would happen .

 

  With the internet , it is much easier to stay informed and voice our opinions to our congress members ( staffers is who will be actually reading them at best ). Do all you can, our freedoms are fading away everyday .

[MississippiBoy]

When writing these letters perhaps the 1997back shooting at Pearl High school in Mississippi should be given as an example of a school shooting that was halted in part by a person with a firearm. Luke Woodham was detained by the assistant principal after the AP had retrieved a pistol from his vehicle. Woodham used a Marlin 336 to kill 2 students and wound several others. He also beat his mother to death.

For more information just Google Luke Woodham.

[Sky King]

When writing these letters perhaps the 1997back shooting at Pearl High school in Mississippi should be given as an example of a school shooting that was halted in part by a person with a firearm. Luke Woodham was detained by the assistant principal after the AP had retrieved a pistol from his vehicle. Woodham used a Marlin 336 to kill 2 students and wound several others. He also beat his mother to death.

For more information just Google Luke Woodham.

Yes, that would have been a good example to list.  But in reality, there are many.  In fact, I believe it is John Lott's information that states that firearms are used almost 2.5 million times a year to deter a crime where a shot is NEVER fired but again, we never hear of this in the liberal press.  It doesn't further their anti-gun agenda and "if it doesn't bleed, it doesn't lead". 

[Wheelgunner]

Also, just thinking, could Tennessee pass laws allowing the ownership and use of banned weapons the way that other states have passed laws allowing the possession of marijuana? Same principal right?!

Yes, Tennessee could do this.  It's called "nullification" and States have used the same technique in the past to check federal power.  The reality is that while the federal law enforcement apparatus is massive, still its resources are finite.  If enough States nullify a federal law, then the federal government will be overburdened with workload and will be unable to enforce that law effectively.  Nullification requires strong State level leaders, though, and consequently is unlikely today.

[Hozzie]

This was my email to all of them.  I figure they have heard enough "statistics".  I was specific to what matters.  You vote for this, I will never vote for you again.

 

 

Dear Senator Corker,

 

I write you today to express my vehement opposition to the highly publicized push for restrictions on not only sporting weapons, but also magazines. I am not going to quote a bunch of statistics that show neither of these restrictions will make a difference as it has already been shown as fact, time and time again.

 

What I am going to say is quite simple.  I believe that it is my right as an American to keep and bear arms.  I am a law abiding citizen and it is not the governments purpose, nor charter to regulate and dictate what is a right provided to me in the constitution of the United States of America.  

 

There are bad people in this world and they will do bad things, but we cannot infringe upon the rights of all Americans for acts committed by a few.  You cannot legislate safety and you should not legislate limitations to my ability to protect myself, regardless of if you think personally that these types of weapons and magazines are necessary or not.

 

I say without prejudice or uncertainty, that if you or any other representative of mine, in this great State of Tennessee, vote for such a restriction on my rights, I will never vote for you, or them, again.  I voted for you this last election expecting that you as a Republican will uphold the constitution of this great nation.

 

Now it is time for you to decide.

 

Thank you for your time and service.

 

Edited January 3, 2013 by Hozzie