I am going to kick this one back up to the top.
The canned message may not say it all but we should all be flooding our government with our concerns over gun control. We can not sit silent and hope it works out. Some conclusions have already been created and THEY ARE WRONG.
I received a response from Deb Fischer yesterday...regarding Government Spending (
)
That's right, got a response to my gun control concerns in the form of a Government Spending canned letter. Things are off to a good start, mistakes right out of the blocks.
This is my letter to correct the error:
Feburary 8, 2013 I received an email letter from your office regarding Government spending.
To be clear, I did not contact your office regarding spending. I did however contact your office regarding Gun Control. The confusion is somewhat dissapointing. I am sending this again to ensure my message has been received and would appreciate a reply to my concerns.
Although recent unfortunate events have brought concern to gun control, I feel the current atmosphere of proposed increased law against responsible and law-abiding citizens is misguided. President Obama's recent to "act quickly" shows typical disregard to preperation and good judgement. Quick action is likely to result in loss of freedoms, hard feelings, increased spending and little decernable results in reducing violent crime.
The "Assault Weapons Ban" of 1994 clearly demonstrated how federal law failed to impact violent crime and was a classic example of wasted time, effort and money.
Firearm bans in other countries (e.g. United Kingdom) demonstrate how eliminating legal firearm ownership simply places more people victim of criminals who continue to obtain guns illegally. Predators have nothing to fear preying on defensless victims.
If there is great concern for Government spending, notice how President Obama neatly tied about $5 billion into his recent Executive Action and proposals. Who gets this money exactly? Who decided this is the correct amount of money to produce any certain measurable amount?
I continue to hear how government officials have sworn to uphold and believe in the 2nd Ammendment, but cut that right by limiting choice of firearm or the amount of rounds that firearm can hold. They desire to create registration through a "universal background check" which is a historical path to dictatorship. There is proposal to add mental health condition to this background check that could create a haunting problem for innocent people requiring loss or great personal expense to legally remedy. All proposals currently planned to create gun control will be at greater national expense (spending) with little effort spent on enforcing a plethora of laws.
"Military style" is a misleading term for modern firearms. Products we use everyday evolve to different appearance and improved function. A semi-automatic firearm in any form still only fires once for every trigger pull. Semi-automatic firearms are based on over 100 year technology and nothing new or more likely to cause violence. There is instead an problem with mentally disturbed and criminal individuals victimizing innocent people by what ever means they choose. Banning a style of weapon will simply push criminals to a different weapon.
I am a responsible firearm owner and enjoy sport target shooting and understand the right to defend myself. I am a productive and law abiding individual. I enjoy community service and I am a volunteer firefighter. It is clear by decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that my defense is not guaranteed. This makes my 2nd Ammendment rights very important to me. Limiting my choice of firearms or number of rounds my firearms can hold places me legally less defensive against individuals who choose to not follow the law. It does not make even basic common sense to take away from those who follow the law to only become victim to those who will not follow the law.
These issues are important enough to me as to determine my future decisions for support and voting of elected officials.
To be clear, I do not support any kind of firearm control or ban. I do not support any laws that limit ammunition capacity of firearm magazines (incorrectly referred to as "clips"). I do not support any "universal background" check that leads to registration or limits private sales. I do not support creating records of mental health applied to police record that doesn't require due process to maintain individual right. I do not support Government spending towards gun control.
