Posted: 2/1/2013 7:59:27 PM EDT
|
Article on KLAS site
Heller met with Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie in Washington Thursday and said the sheriff is concerned about the amount of ammunition that can be loaded into extended magazine clips.
Heller said he will only accept a broad conversation about the causes of mass shootings. "I think the discussion has to be more than just about guns," Heller said. "I think guns should be on the table, but I also think mental health has to be part of that equation. I think the movie industry, the violence that we're seeing on TV and the theaters and also the violence we see on video games, I think we aught to have a broad discussion. If it's limited only to gun control, than it's political." Heller also expressed support for broader background checks, but said government should not limit private exchanges of firearms. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: I will be seeing him in person on the 10th.  Let him know Max and Julie from Lovelock echo your sentiments. And to expect to be getting even more messages from me, soon. The only gun issue that ought to be on the table is MORE freedom, not less. If he wants to propose or support the repeal of this "gun-free-zone" nonsense, that's a gun bill I can get behind. If he wants to repeal (or even just take a couple things out, we can get where we want incrementally, just like the statists) the NFA or GCA, I can get behind those bills too. But I will NEVER support him if he votes for any further restriction or government involvement. Not a procedural vote, not an amendment, nothing. |
|
The week's messages have gone out, with one message to both senators, and a totally different one to that asstard Horsford. Issue: GUN Message Subject: Proposed gun legislation Message Text: Representative Horsford, I have recently read your comments in regards to the President's proposed gun ban wish list, quoted as "I support the Second Amendment and the right of individuals to bear arms for recreation, hunting or self-defense. That does not mean we cannot have reasonable gun laws to keep military-designed weapons out of our neighborhoods and communities." You seem to have a fundamental unfamiliarity with both the purpose of the 2nd amendment, as well as many technical and factual aspects of modern firearms which I would be happy to correct. If you are interested in learning why the so-called "assault weapons" that Senator Feinstein villainizes are ideal for defensive purposes, among many other uses, I would be more than happy to discuss the matter with you. I also am quite prepared to speak to you on why standard capacity magazines (for most firearms that accept detachable magazines, 10 rounds is severely restricted below their standard capacity) can be quite critical to a person defending their home and family. Aside from technical and practical information, you lay a claim of supporting the second amendment, yet you say you are behind efforts to unconstitutionally infringe upon it, and I urge you to rethink your position. I cannot possibly support a representative that swears an oath to support and defend our foundational legal document, and who then takes actions in direct opposition to it. I look forward to hearing from you, and stand ready to share my knowledge on this matter with you. Note: It was originally in paragraphs, Horsford's site jacked it up after I sent it. I have attempted to rebreak it up. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I will be seeing him in person on the 10th. Let him know Max and Julie from Lovelock echo your sentiments. And to expect to be getting even more messages from me, soon. The only gun issue that ought to be on the table is MORE freedom, not less. If he wants to propose or support the repeal of this "gun-free-zone" nonsense, that's a gun bill I can get behind. If he wants to repeal (or even just take a couple things out, we can get where we want incrementally, just like the statists) the NFA or GCA, I can get behind those bills too. But I will NEVER support him if he votes for any further restriction or government involvement. Not a procedural vote, not an amendment, nothing. This. He needs to go on the offensive! Another amen here. He's gotten several letters from me, but it can't hurt to mention it face to face. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: I will be seeing him in person on the 10th. Let him know Max and Julie from Lovelock echo your sentiments. And to expect to be getting even more messages from me, soon. The only gun issue that ought to be on the table is MORE freedom, not less. If he wants to propose or support the repeal of this "gun-free-zone" nonsense, that's a gun bill I can get behind. If he wants to repeal (or even just take a couple things out, we can get where we want incrementally, just like the statists) the NFA or GCA, I can get behind those bills too. But I will NEVER support him if he votes for any further restriction or government involvement. Not a procedural vote, not an amendment, nothing. This. He needs to go on the offensive! Another amen here. He's gotten several letters from me, but it can't hurt to mention it face to face. I did broach the subject of those ideas in my last letters to him and Reid. |
|
Would have gone fine If I had not had to skip the dinner due to having the raging flu.
Nearly over it now, but that night I would have infected the whole room. Probably would have been arrested as a terrorist committing a viral attack on state and Fed. Gov. Org. I was able to send a short note to them via the event organizers. |
|
I've sent two handwritten letters to Heller and Reid and one to Horsford as well as several E-mails to each of them.
Replies from Heller look promising, Reids more resemble political double-talk. Nothing from Horseturd yet which is what I expected. I will continue to bombard them, but it grinds my ass to have to explain over and over the meaning of a simple two- sentence constitutional right . |