Email reply from Sen. Ben Sasse

[Lmbass14]

Mods, didn't know where to put this, so please move as needed.

Very piss poor reply.  Said absolutely nothing.  Received 9 identical emails.  But then again, I did have high expectation of the new Senators ( I know my fault).  Still haven't heard back from Sen. Fischer (this year) and Ashford.


 

Thank you for your email.  I appreciate you taking the time to contact me. I greatly benefit from hearing the views of my fellow Nebraskans, and I appreciate hearing your opinions on this issue.

 

As a newly elected senator, I am working on a system that will allow me to respond to your comments quickly and effectively.  I know that I have been sent as a representative of the people, and will do what I can to ensure that your opinions are heard. Please know that I appreciate your correspondence, and I will certainly take your thoughts into consideration.

 

I am honored to serve the people of Nebraska.  Please do not hesitate to contact me again should you have any further questions or concerns.

 




Sincerely,
 
Ben Sasse
United States Senator

[jFader]

what did you ask him?

[Lmbass14]

what did you ask him?

Justin, Wrote to him on various topics.  Mostly 2A and the M855 fiasco, along with some Veteran's issues.

[bkoenig]

Sounds like a typical politician.

[jFader]

Justin, Wrote to him on various topics.  Mostly 2A and the M855 fiasco, along with some Veteran's issues.

I am really hoping that this attempted ammo ban really wakes some people up....I have had several friends & co-workers who are gun owners but not at all involved or worried about their rights ask me about it...when i explained it briefly they were fairly concerned.

Are you going to make it down to Lincoln on the 19th Bernie?

[NE Bull]

From something I saw from the ATF was that it was a publishing error.....

[whatsit]

From something I saw from the ATF was that it was a publishing error.....

The way I understand it: The ATF published their exception / exemption list back in 2014 and it didn't have the M855 on it "by accident."

Fast-forward to today and they have apologized for that publishing mistake. As far as I know, they have not changed their intentions regarding the current (2015) ban on M855 ammo.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, please.

[Dan W]

The way I understand it: The ATF published their exception / exemption list back in 2014 and it didn't have the M855 on it "by accident."

Fast-forward to today and they have apologized for that publishing mistake. As far as I know, they have not changed their intentions regarding the current (2015) ban on M855 ammo.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, please.

That is correct by my understanding

[Lmbass14]

I am really hoping that this attempted ammo ban really wakes some people up....I have had several friends & co-workers who are gun owners but not at all involved or worried about their rights ask me about it...when i explained it briefly they were fairly concerned.

Are you going to make it down to Lincoln on the 19th Bernie?

I'm going to try and make this time.  To early to confirm.

[bkoenig]

That is correct by my understanding

Correct.  They still plan to move forward with the ban.

[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]

Justin, Wrote to him on various topics.  Mostly 2A and the M855 fiasco, along with some Veteran's issues.

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]

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.

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.