After many Emails to Bennett and Udall all I get is this Crap

[wctriumph]

This is what I finally received from Udall, just another piece of political lying crap. Lets have a show of hands; how many NRA members on this forum support expanded back ground? Can we get even close to the 70% that Udall states?

Well, the results are in and Udall and progressives are spouting untruths. Only 1.35% of NRA members support expanded background checks for gun purchases. Thanks to all for participating in this poll, it is the most accurate poll I have ever seen on the subject.



Dear Fellow Coloradan,


The horror of the Newtown shooting, arriving on the heels of the mass shootings in Aurora, Columbine, Virginia Tech and Tucson, has appropriately reignited a national debate over gun violence. Sadly, this week even a bipartisan compromise to expand background checks to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, drafted by two conservative U.S. senators — Republican Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia — failed to pass the U.S. Senate, despite being supported by 90 percent of Americans and over 70 percent of NRA members.
Last week I met with the mothers and fathers of the children who were murdered in Newtown; although they told me about how thankful they were to the families and community of Aurora for their support, I know they are uniquely disappointed in the Senate's failure to pass meaningful gun-safety measures. This gulf between public support and congressional inaction cannot continue.






As with many issues, Colorado serves as a roadmap for the steps we must take: Our state closed the gun show loophole through a ballot initiative in 2000 and in March this year, Gov. John Hickenlooper signed into law several bills that require universal background checks for all gun purchases and limit high-capacity magazines. These actions mirror my votes in the U.S. Senate this week in favor of background checks, supporting a ban on high-capacity magazines, cracking down on illegal gun sales and trafficking, and improving mental health services.


The U.S. Senate also considered an assault weapons ban. And while I've previously called for an effectively crafted ban on military-style weapons, the specific ban we considered went much further than the 1994 assault weapons law and also would have banned legitimate hunting rifles and even some shotguns. I spoke to sportsmen from across Colorado and they voiced their concerns about how this ban would restrict their ability to hunt and responsibly practice their sport, which is an important part of our economy and way of life. I know some Coloradans may say that banning some legitimate hunting weapons is a small price to pay to keep other, more dangerous weapons off of our streets — especially for a state that has suffered mass gun tragedies. I can relate to that sentiment, but after years of seeking to find common ground on gun-safety issues, I also know that overreach can spur the backlash that we've seen undermine even the most common-sense solutions - like universal background checks.


But an assault weapons ban alone should not serve as a litmus test for people who want to reduce gun violence. Even if a perfectly drafted assault weapons ban were signed into law, we would still be left with easy access to millions of military-style weapons on our streets today - which is why it is so important to also ensure that a background check is conducted on every gun sale.


There are no easy answers, but we should all agree — and a large majority of NRA members do — that we must keep firearms of any kind out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill by requiring universal background checks. But loopholes — which the Manchin-Toomey proposal sought to correct — continue to prevent many of these background checks from occurring today. Disturbed individuals should not get a chance to fire even one round into their communities, let alone the 30 rounds a high-capacity magazine would allow. Together, background checks and a ban on high-capacity magazines achieve much of what an assault weapons ban seeks to — preventing the wrong people from having access to weapons that can inflict mass casualties in a matter of moments.


Coming from a state with a long and storied tradition of gun ownership that has also suffered through too many gun tragedies, I know we must simultaneously renew our commitment to keeping our children safe while safeguarding our Second Amendment rights. My friend Gabby Giffords, a survivor of the senseless violence in Tucson, knows too well how important this debate is and her strength has only affirmed my conviction that the status quo must change. I will keep fighting for Colorado's families and values. Our nation deserves nothing less.


Warm regards,

[ChuckNorris]

i just got the email from udall too. i then unsubscribed from his dumbass.

I did the same.

[mountainjenny]

i just got the email from udall too. i then unsubscribed from his dumbass.

I did the same thing!

[brutal]

I'm guessing they count all of us that have told him to pound sand, now on his spam list, as "supporting."

I most certainly do not.

Autocorrect courtesy of droid using tapatalk

[ferrum]

I did the same.


ditto

[Aardvark]

I got the same b.s. email. I'm tempted to write back, 'respectfully' of course, and demand that they provide the source(s) for that 90%, stating, respectfully, that if they can't or won't provide the source, they are liars. Respectfully. It would be better if we have sources available to quote on our side just how much of a liar they are.

[wctriumph]

I have sent many a "respectful" email and more than a few phone calls to both of out Senators and my representatives, I never get anything back except a frackin' form letter, I guess that they are busy fixing immigration and economic issues to respond to the gun control communications as only 4% of Americans think guns are a priority for Congress.

Frackin' liars all of them.

[wctriumph]

Well, one of us thinks we need more government oversight of our legal activities. A far cry from the 70% that the government liars continue to quote. I wonder if he is a NRA member?

[Hound]

I got the same b.s. email. I'm tempted to write back, 'respectfully' of course, and demand that they provide the source(s) for that 90%, stating, respectfully, that if they can't or won't provide the source, they are liars. Respectfully. It would be better if we have sources available to quote on our side just how much of a liar they are.

Seriously where did that 90% number come from? What is the stated source?

[strm_trpr]

Who the fuck said yes? Tar and feather them and run them off the site!

[82ndShooter]

I also received the same BS letter. These fuktards could care less about us and our constitutional rights.

[Dave]

Seriously where did that 90% number come from? What is the stated source?

An AP-GfK poll done a few weeks ago. Supposedly to about 1000 random numbers, not sure what the questions were or how they were stated.

http://ap-gfkpoll.com/featured/our-latest-poll-findings-22 is their website, no mention of the 90% favoring BGC's though.

[Jeffrey Lebowski]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuvCTZ9XtrM" target="_blank">
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuvCTZ9XtrMO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuvCTZ9XtrM)n 90%...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuvCTZ9XtrM

[brutal]

I Posted this on his FB page:

Senator Udall,


You are a liar.


I will retract my statement if you can provide a credible source for this oft cited bogus claim that Universal Background Checks are "...supported by 90 percent of Americans and over 70 percent of NRA members."



Are you aware that in a recent poll, 91% of Law Enforcement believe further restrictions against law abiding citizens will have no effect, or quite possibly, a negative effect on so called gun-crimes? That means MORE crime against honest, hard working, law abiding citizens when you strip our God given right to self preservation. http://www.policeone.com/corporate-profile/press-releases/6188461-PoliceOne-com-Releases-Survey-of-15-000-Law-Enforcement-Professionals-about-U-S-Gun-Control-Policies/

Among the results:


86 percent feel the currently proposed legislation would have no effect or a negative effect on improving officer safety
Similarly, 92 percent feel that banning semi-automatic firearms, or “assault weapons,” would have no effect or a negative effect on reducing violent crime
Demonstrating the opinion that the best way to combat gun crime is through harsher punishment, 91 percent said the use of a firearm while perpetrating a crime should lead to a stiff, mandatory sentence with no plea bargains. Likewise, 59 percent believe increasing punishment severity for unlicensed dealers would reduce crime
Respondents were more split on background checks, with 31 percent agreeing that mental health background checks in all gun sales would help reduce mass shootings, while 45 percent disagreed
71 percent support law enforcement leaders who have publicly refused to enforce more restrictive gun laws within their jurisdictions
82 percent believe gun buyback or turn-in programs are ineffective in reducing the level of gun violence
91 percent support the concealed carry of firearms by civilians who have not been convicted of a felony and/or have not been deemed psychologically incapable
Likewise, 80 percent feel that legally-armed citizens would likely have reduced the number of casualties in recent mass shooting incidents
38 percent believe the biggest cause of gun violence in the United States is the “decline in parenting and family values”. This was trailed by “overly lax parole and short sentencing standards” at 15 percent and “pop culture influence” (eg. violent movies and video games) at 14 percent



You are certainly aware that every Sheriff in Colorado, excepting the Denver County puppet of course, is vehemently opposed to more gun control. Even in our state legislature, the House and Senate members pay little attention to the will of the people or our elected law enforcement officials. How can anyone expect anything less from a politically based agenda from you and your party?




I DO NOT Support further anti-gun regulation or the stripping of our 2nd Amendment rights by those that do not understand the real issue or use FACTS to make decisions.

Your gun grabbing agenda will be stopped at the polls and only then will you realize that Americans and Coloradans alike cherish our rights and will not relinquish them to anyone.


Sincerely,


Xxxxx Xxxxx

Parker, Colorado

[drowe44]

The 90% figure comes from a Quinnipiac University poll (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/07/us-usa-guns-poll-idUSBRE9160LW20130207) . "The poll surveyed 1,772 registered voters from January 30 to February 4 and had a margin of error of plus or minus 2.3 percentage points, Quinnipiac said."

[patrick0685]

i got that email as well and i dont even live there anymore

[UrbanWolf]

Dear Fellow Coloradan, The horror of the Newtown shooting, arriving on the heels of the mass shootings in Aurora, Columbine, Virginia Tech and Tucson, has appropriately reignited a national debate over gun violence. Sadly, this week even a bipartisan compromise to expand background checks to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, drafted by two conservative U.S. senators — Republican Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia — failed to pass the U.S. Senate, despite being supported by 90 percent of Americans and over 70 percent of NRA members. Last week I met with the mothers and fathers of the children who were murdered in Newtown; although they told me about how thankful they were to the families and community of Aurora for their support, I know they are uniquely disappointed in the Senate's failure to pass meaningful gun-safety measures. This gulf between public support and congressional inaction cannot continue.

As with many issues, Colorado serves as a roadmap for the steps we must take: Our state closed the gun show loophole through a ballot initiative in 2000 and in March this year, Gov. John Hickenlooper signed into law several bills that require universal background checks for all gun purchases and limit high-capacity magazines. These actions mirror my votes in the U.S. Senate this week in favor of background checks, supporting a ban on high-capacity magazines, cracking down on illegal gun sales and trafficking, and improving mental health services.
The U.S. Senate also considered an assault weapons ban. And while I've previously called for an effectively crafted ban on military-style weapons, the specific ban we considered went much further than the 1994 assault weapons law and also would have banned legitimate hunting rifles and even some shotguns. I spoke to sportsmen from across Colorado and they voiced their concerns about how this ban would restrict their ability to hunt and responsibly practice their sport, which is an important part of our economy and way of life. I know some Coloradans may say that banning some legitimate hunting weapons is a small price to pay to keep other, more dangerous weapons off of our streets — especially for a state that has suffered mass gun tragedies. I can relate to that sentiment, but after years of seeking to find common ground on gun-safety issues, I also know that overreach can spur the backlash that we've seen undermine even the most common-sense solutions - like universal background checks.
But an assault weapons ban alone should not serve as a litmus test for people who want to reduce gun violence. Even if a perfectly drafted assault weapons ban were signed into law, we would still be left with easy access to millions of military-style weapons on our streets today - which is why it is so important to also ensure that a background check is conducted on every gun sale.
There are no easy answers, but we should all agree — and a large majority of NRA members do — that we must keep firearms of any kind out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill by requiring universal background checks. But loopholes — which the Manchin-Toomey proposal sought to correct — continue to prevent many of these background checks from occurring today. Disturbed individuals should not get a chance to fire even one round into their communities, let alone the 30 rounds a high-capacity magazine would allow. Together, background checks and a ban on high-capacity magazines achieve much of what an assault weapons ban seeks to — preventing the wrong people from having access to weapons that can inflict mass casualties in a matter of moments.
Coming from a state with a long and storied tradition of gun ownership that has also suffered through too many gun tragedies, I know we must simultaneously renew our commitment to keeping our children safe while safeguarding our Second Amendment rights. My friend Gabby Giffords, a survivor of the senseless violence in Tucson, knows too well how important this debate is and her strength has only affirmed my conviction that the status quo must change. I will keep fighting for Colorado's families and values. Our nation deserves nothing less.


Warm regards,

Mark Udall

[Cylinder Head]

Rage.

[sellersm]

Also a repost. We've all received the same rhetoric from him.


Sent from my fat fingers using Tapatalk

[BPTactical]

Quit wasting time emailing them. Call them.
Be polite but let them no on no uncertain terms their bullshit is unacceptable.

[Mtn.man]

Same old same old.

And when I call never get a person. They don't care.

[sniper7]

I sent a response to that one. Pissed me right off.

[blm28]

I sent a response also.

[mtnhack]

Fucktard spewing lies and BS.

[45XD]

I've emailed him and Bennet multiple times- the same old bullshit responses each time. Just spouting the party lines...

[theGinsue]

Merged threads

[muddywings]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuvCTZ9XtrM" target="_blank">
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuvCTZ9XtrMO (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuvCTZ9XtrM)n 90%...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuvCTZ9XtrM

I like this guy more and more!!!


Who the fuck said yes? Tar and feather them and run them off the site!

Off with his head!!!! [guillotine]

[wctriumph]

OK, I sent off an email to my reps and senators correcting their inaccuracies about who supports background checks and the other gun control proposals and so far only Udhall has responded with another form letter that shows positively that he and other Colorado legislators ARE NOT LISTENING to what THE PEOPLE are saying. I called his office in Denver and asked to speak with him and was told that he will not be available to speak to me on issues regarding the second amendment so would I please write him a letter or email and he will reply. See below the reply (it is long read);

Dear Wayne,

Thank you for contacting me regarding the SecondAmendment. I appreciate that you took the time to write on this importanttopic.
Responsible gun ownership is an integral part ofour Western heritage. The Second Amendment provides for an individualright, and I am dedicated to protecting the rights of citizens to own firearmsfor personal protection, hunting, collecting or for other legal purposes. That said, I think we can all agree that the horrors of the Newtown shootingand the tragedies that occurred at places such as Columbine High School,Virginia Tech, Aurora and Tucson should concern us all and we must doeverything we can to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals, the mentallyill and those who would turn them against their community.
As you know, the U.S. Senate recently consideredthe Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013 (S.649). Specifically,this bill would increase the accuracy of the National Instant CriminalBackground Check System (NICS), make "straw purchases" a federalcrime, and strengthen penalties for illegal gun trafficking. In an effortto make our children safer, this piece of legislation also would providecritical federal funding to the Secure our Schools grant program, so that oureducators can install locks, reinforced doors and other measures to deterviolence in our schools.
A limited number of amendments to this bill wereallowed. I proudly voted in favor of the central part of the legislationrequiring universal background checks on gun purchases. I also voted foramendments such as limiting high-capacity magazines, cracking down on illegalgun sales and trafficking and improving mental health services. Unfortunately, a bipartisan compromise to expand background checks to keepfirearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill, drafted by twoconservative U.S. senators - Republican Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and DemocratJoe Manchin of West Virginia - did not garner the requisite 60 votes to passthe U.S. Senate, despite being supported by 90 percent of Americans and over 70percent of NRA members. It was a sad day when a minority of senatorschose to ignore the overwhelming consensus of opinion, as well as common-sensepolicy.
The Senate also considered an assault weaponsban. While I've previously called for a ban on military-style assaultweapons, the specific ban we considered went much further than the 1994 assaultweapons by banning legitimate hunting rifles and shotguns that are usedresponsibly by many hunters and sportsmen in Colorado. I spoke tosportsmen from across Colorado and they voiced their concerns about how thisban would restrict their ability to hunt and responsibly practice their sport,which is an important part of our economy and way of life. Unfortunately,there wasn't an opportunity for me to improve this ban with amendedlanguage. I know some Coloradans may say that banning some legitimatehunting weapons is a small price to pay to keep other, more dangerous weaponsoff of our streets - especially for a state that has suffered mass guntragedies. I can relate to that sentiment, but after years of seeking tofind common ground on gun-safety issues, I also know that overreach can spurthe backlash that we've seen undermine even the most common-sense solutions -like universal background checks.
But an assault weapons ban alone should not serveas a litmus test for people who want to reduce gun violence. Even if aperfectly drafted assault weapons ban were signed into law, we would still beleft with easy access to millions of military-style weapons on our streetstoday - which is why it is so important to also ensure that a background checkis conducted on every gun sale.
There are no easy answers, but we should all agree- and a large majority of NRA members do - that we must keep firearms of anykind out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill by requiring universalbackground checks. But loopholes - which the Manchin-Toomey proposalsought to correct - continue to prevent many of these background checks fromoccurring today. Disturbed individuals should not get a chance to fireeven one round into their communities, let alone the 30 rounds a high-capacitymagazine would allow. Together, background checks and a ban onhigh-capacity magazines achieve much of what an assault weapons ban seeks to -preventing the wrong people from having access to weapons that can inflict masscasualties in a matter of moments.
Coming from a state with a long and storiedtradition of gun ownership that has also suffered through too many guntragedies, I know we must simultaneously renew our commitment to keeping ourchildren safe while safeguarding our Second Amendment rights. My friendGabby Giffords, a survivor of the senseless violence in Tucson, knows too wellhow important this debate is and her strength has only affirmed my convictionthat the status quo must change. I will keep fighting for Colorado's familiesand values. Our nation deserves nothing less.
I will continue to listen closely to what you andother Coloradans have to say about matters before Congress, the concerns of ourcommunities, and the issues facing Colorado and the nation. My job is notmerely about supporting or opposing legislation, but also about bridging thedivide that has paralyzed our nation's politics. For more informationabout my positions and to learn how my office can assist you, please visit mywebsite at www.markudall.senate.gov (http://www.markudall.senate.gov).


I will continue to send emails and make calls, I will not be deterred. Never Give Up, Never Surrender, Just Reload! I know, I know but it expresses my feelings.