Well, after at least a dozen letters sent over the last 3-4 years, my "honorable" Congressperson (actually a hard core leftist Democrat) has finally seen fit to grace me with a response. I guess she took lessons from Chuckie Schumer in what it means to "support the 2nd. Amendment to the United States Constitution".  

Thank you for contacting me to express your opposition to a renewal of the semi-automatic assault weapons ban. I appreciate having the benefit of your views. Like you, I support the 2nd. Amendment to the United States Constitution which acknowledges the right to keep and bear arms. However, I also believe that the U.S. Congress should support sensible & reasonable steps to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and children. As you know, the federal law banning the sale of semi-automatic assault weapons, known as the federal assault ban was passed as part of the Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. The assault weapons ban will "sunset" unless Congress passes legislation renewing the law. Under the assault weapons ban, domestic gun manufacturers are required to stop production of semi-automatic weapons and ammunition clips that hold more than 10 rounds, except for military or police use. Assault weapons and ammunition clips that hold more than 10 rounds produced prior to September 13, 1994 can still be possessed and sold. I appreciate your concerns that this law specifically targets firearms that are only involved in a small percentage of crimes and are more widely used by individuals who hunt. However, under the provisions of this law, assault weapons are defined very specifically. Only semi-automatic guns with multiple assault features are banned under the current law. The law provides specific exemption to 670 types of hunting rifles and shotguns that continue to be manufactured nine years later. I appreciate having the benefit of your views. Please do not hesitate to contact me again if I can help you in any way. Sincerely, Nita M. Lowey

It's interesting to note however, that even the avowed gun grabbers like Lowey are trying to portray themselves as supporters of the RKBA. This tells me that the Democrats realize that gun control is a losing issue for them in the upcoming elections.

In other words, we are on the offensive! We have momentum on our side & we need to press this advantage home for the next 10 months!!!

Haven't written your elected reps.? Do it!  What's that... you have already written them? Well write them again!  Make those phone calls! Send those faxes! Hell, try dropping by your Congressman or Senator's local office & submit your views in person!!!

To this end, I remind you of The Essential "End the AW Ban" Contact List & Sample Letter Thread

We get one crack at this fight folks. Let's not blow it!
     

Wow! She didn't say anything! She said absolutely nothing in that letter. Very impressive. You should see the letter I got from my congressman. It was enough for me to go to his open house and give him hell. I am now actively involved with my states Republican party. All because of his letter that pissed me off so very badly.


Dear 2IDdoc,

Thank you for contacting me to express your support for the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.  I appreciate your taking the time to share your views with me.

The Second Amendment states, in full, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."  The framers of the Constitution clearly intended that this Amendment be directed towards the new country's national defense and that gun ownership for the specific purpose of maintaining, in modern parlance, a strong national defense with well equipped Armed Forces.  The Second Amendment is silent on the regulation of gun ownership beyond the maintenance of a "well regulated Militia."

I believe the Founding Fathers got it right:  we do need to maintain a strong and well equipped national defense.  On the matter of gun ownership generally, I believe a reasonable degree of regulation is necessary and justified under the Second Amendment to help keep guns out of the hands of criminals and away from children.

While we may not agree on the interpretation of the Second Amendment, I respect your opinions and hope you will never hesitate to share them with me.  Please do not hesitate to let me know whenever I may be of service to you.

Sincerely,

Chris Van Hollen
Member of Congress


This asshat thinks.......I get sooo mad when I read this I want to .....Well FUCK him! I'm doing everything in my power to get him out of office. MAN this made me hot.

The lady doesn't even know what the hell it is that is and what isn't banned,  do you realize that???






This is a lie and a false hood.  The magazines can't be produced for civilian use but the rifles themselves still can be produced and sold to civilians.

What an ignorant response if you ask me.

You have a winner there when compared to my little idiot....

[img]http://photos.ar15.com/ImageGallery/Attachments/DownloadAttach.asp?iImageUnq=19479[/img]

[img]home.wi.rr.com/antigov/feinscum.GIF[/img]

check out that first sentance


ya think they pulled this one out of the "gun nut" box or what


really "represents" me fucking faggot

I received a very nice letter from Scott McInnis (R) Colorado:

Dear Quib:

Thank you for taking the time to contact me regarding the Assault Weapons Ban, which is scheduled to expire in September of 2004. I appreciate hearing your thoughts on this issue.

I have long been a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and my votes on this issue are specific. The only individuals who are hampered by gun-control legislation are law-abiding citizens. I voted in opposition to the AWB in 1994. Additionally, I voted in favor of repealing the AWB in 1996. While it is not clear that an extension or expansion of the AWB or semi-auto and magazine ban will be voted on in the House of Representatives, [b]should there be such a vote I plan to oppose any such extension or expansion.[/b] I believe that there are more effective ways to stop crime by targeting criminals and putting them where they belong - prison.

Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me on this important issue. I am committed to seeking the input of the people of Colorado and appreciate your role in that process.

Sincerely,
Scott McInnis
Member of Congress


The portion in bold was exactly that way in the original. He definately lets you know where he stands.

My letter from Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell was not so positive, but not completely negative either. He pretty much said that the AWB's effect on crime is still up for debate. He did not state which way he would vote.

Saw Lowey on CSPAN recently. Couldn't tell if it was her facing the camera or a dog walking away from it.

Yeah, she is kinda hard on the eyes.....[puke]

I grabbed her one Memorial Day at the veterans' section of the local cemetary and informed her that those in civilian clothing, especially non-veterans and ESPECIALLY left-wing, anti-military-except-when-it-suits-their-purposes non-veteran politicians, should NOT render a military hand salute to the flag. [}:D]They should place their right hands over their heart like kids reciting the pledge of allegiance.

Stupid b*tch, you should have seen the look from her and the smirks from the dignitary/vets on the podium. [:D]

NYPatriot - if she reps you then you must be in my area....when will you come to one of the NY Crew shoots? [:)]

Edited to korect spelling.

[ROFL2] BWAAAHAHAHAHAAA!! Oh man that's great! Thanks for your service.

I'd ask this dipshit to read this:



Then ask him WITF he was taught to read.

Excellent!

Lowey is my rep also and I sent a letter to her twice this year without a response thus far. I was beginning to think that our rep was attempting to shy away from answering our tough questions concerning the AWB and other 2nd Ammendment issues. Her response to you gives me hope that they are at the very least reading the letters we send. Lowey's answer to you, while ill informed, seems to be genuine. I will write my next letter in a more comprehensible way, carefully explaining the facts as she clearly does not understand. BTW, which address did you send the letter to? White Plains or DC? Thanks.

"Assault Features"? [>:/]

Oneshot1kill...


At first blush, it would appear that way. The funny part however, is that I never made the "assault weapons are just scary looking guns that are suitable for hunting & other sporting purposes" argument in any of the letters that I sent her, nor did I ever mention that "assault weapons" account for a statistically insignificant number of the guns used in the commission of crime (both valid points, BTW).

I almost always argue on the basis of our RKBA being a God given, unalienable right that is acknowledged by TBOR, and as such, it is incumbent upon our elected reps. that they respect their oaths to uphold & defend the Constitution. I just went back in my files, and sure enough, all my letters to Lowey thus far are based on philosophical & political arguments.

So... it would appear that her office staff either mixed up my correspondence with someone else’s, & I got their reply, or (& much more likely, IMO) she is sending out form letters regarding the AW ban.

[i]***None of this should be construed as a reason not to write our reps. Trust me... our message is getting through!***[/i]

BTW, here is where I send all my letters...

Congressperson Nita M. Lowey
U.S. House of Representatives
2329 Rayburn House Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515

bull crap, stupid politicians must take classes on how to decieve the masses before entering the political field

I tell you what.  I watch Scott regularly on CSPAN, and all I can say is, he is my hero.

Anybody tried to get a response from Feinstein? I would write her but I don't think I could keep it civil.

CW

Does anybody know who coined this phrase - that "assault weapons" are designed for "killing large numbers of people quickly".  I'd like to punch every person in the face who says that.

These types of responses that we're seeing concern me a great deal.  They are obviously cleverly calculated to give the perception that the Gunbanning scumbag is actually supportive of the second amendment and are Pro-Gun.  What they don't say is that to them the second amendment means some "collective right" bullshit that actually means you can't really own a gun and the Pro-gun part means that they will allow hunters to keep their guns...for the moment.  Disturbing lies.  

The problem as I see it and from what I've read is that most of these politicians really do believe that a law will stop a criminal from commiting a crime. Don't they understand that a criminal is a criminal because he has no reguard for the law? All their stupid laws do is make it harder for law biding citizens to own firearms that would be suitable for use against criminals. Look at the L.A. riots, how many store owners were able to keep looters at bey because they had hi-cap, semi-auto firearms at their disposal? I'll bet a lot more stores would have been looted if they were not allowed to defend those stores with the fire power offered by "assualt weapons".
The day of the "professional politician" is over. We need to kick these jerks out of office and elect people that work for a living.

Ben Switchhorse Campbell voted for the original ban. But he was a Democrat then. After he switched sides he said it was a mistake and that the ban had little to no effect on crime.

Simply put, I don't trust the bastard.

are you freakin kidding me? just the fact alone that they say "ammunition clips" instead of magazines is pure and blatant proof that they know didly about what they are talking about.

didly squat.

[lol] YOU ARE MY HERO! [ROFL2]