General Categories > Laws and Legislation

Email reply from Sen. Ben Sasse

<< < (3/3)

depserv:
The only good thing about the pending ban is that it's a litmus test, that allows those we send to Washington to define themselves as either a patriot or a political whore, or in the case of someone like Brad Ashford, a willing accomplice of traitors.

AAllen:

--- Quote from: Lmbass14 on March 09, 2015, 10:00:38 AM ---Justin, Wrote to him on various topics.  Mostly 2A and the M855 fiasco, along with some Veteran's issues.


--- End quote ---

Ok not trying to be a pain but I think I can explain why you received a generic response that really said nothing.  When writing our elected officials please only write on one issue, if its the M855 ban only discuss that not also gun control in general, support for CCW reciprocity, taxes, or any other issue of the day.  I'm certain we all know that very few of the emails, faxes, phone calls, and letters we send actually get to the elected official, those staffers who handle these things need to place your letter into a basket (what that communication was about).  When you are all over the place it is impossible for them to do that and it goes into the "this person is all over the place, give them a polite  noncommittal response" basket.  When you write about one specific issue you will get a response about that issue, it may take some time because the elected official may not have taken a stance yet and may not until the bill comes before their committee or is voted on the floor; so they don't really know what to say.  But know that your letter puts a mark as this constituent supports or opposes this, and when they have multiple constituents that contact them about the same issue and there is a large discrepancy between those that support and those that oppose, it has an effect on forming their position.

So remember, good letter writing is single issue only and if you have many issue to discuss send multiple letters.  Your communication will have more meaning and have a higher chance of actually getting seen by the elected official when forming their opinion and responses.

Lmbass14:

--- Quote from: AAllen on March 10, 2015, 10:04:58 AM ---Ok not trying to be a pain but I think I can explain why you received a generic response that really said nothing.  When writing our elected officials please only write on one issue, if its the M855 ban only discuss that not also gun control in general, support for CCW reciprocity, taxes, or any other issue of the day.  I'm certain we all know that very few of the emails, faxes, phone calls, and letters we send actually get to the elected official, those staffers who handle these things need to place your letter into a basket (what that communication was about).  When you are all over the place it is impossible for them to do that and it goes into the "this person is all over the place, give them a polite  noncommittal response" basket.  When you write about one specific issue you will get a response about that issue, it may take some time because the elected official may not have taken a stance yet and may not until the bill comes before their committee or is voted on the floor; so they don't really know what to say.  But know that your letter puts a mark as this constituent supports or opposes this, and when they have multiple constituents that contact them about the same issue and there is a large discrepancy between those that support and those that oppose, it has an effect on forming their position.

So remember, good letter writing is single issue only and if you have many issue to discuss send multiple letters.  Your communication will have more meaning and have a higher chance of actually getting seen by the elected official when forming their opinion and responses.

--- End quote ---

AA, you are 100% correct.  Learned that a couple of years ago.  That is why I have written at least 9 different letters to our representatives.  Well thought out letters with one topic is the best method that I know of anyway. 

whatsit:
I wrote him about the M855 ban *only* and got the exact same email template sent back to me. I think part of it is he's new and he's trying to figure out how to handle the influx of communication -- understandable. However, it does tend to put a bad taste in your mouth.

FarmerRick:
http://www.grassley.senate.gov/news/news-releases/grassley-52-senators-condemn-atf-framework-limiting-sporting-ammo
Grassley, 52 Senators Condemn ATF Framework Limiting Sporting Ammo

WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, today led 52 colleagues in expressing concern for a new proposal that would severely limit access to rifle ammunition primarily used for sporting purposes. This class of ammunition is protected from prohibition under a 1986 Law Enforcement Officer Protection Act exemption. The framework, proposed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), would set arbitrary guidelines for determining whether certain ammunition meets the 1986 law’s “sporting purposes” exemption. As a result, access to rifle ammunition long considered to be primarily used for activities such as target shooting and hunting could be limited.

In a letter to ATF Director Todd Jones, the senators charge that the new framework defies the intent of Congress when it passed the 1986 law. They also question ATF’s authority to establish such a framework and express concern for its impact on Second Amendment rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

“Second Amendment rights require not only access to firearms but to bullets. If law-abiding gun owners cannot obtain rifle ammunition, or face substantial difficulty in finding ammunition available and at reasonable prices because government entities are banning such ammunition, then the Second Amendment is at risk,” the senators wrote.

Senators Fischer and Sasse were among those who signed it.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page