Who's written to their representatives today?

[dogbreath650]

I know a few people who took the time to write to their representatives once regarding their support for 2nd amendment rights which is great. However, they seemed to think that the job was done with that one effort. I read a post somewhere recently by an ex-staffer that inidcated that most of the correspondence received isn't read in any great detail, it was just read to get the position of the writer (for or against whatever) and then logged in a spreadsheet or something to give the representative a running total of constituents that are either for or against a piece of legislation.

It seems to me that with the pending anti-gun legislation in Colorado and the US we need to get as many tics on our side of the ledger as possible. So, I would encourage folks to send contact their representatives daily until this is behind us.


http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/takeAction.html

[enthusiast]

Thanks for reminding me. I just did it again.

[MarkCO]

I have been writing Daily.

[clworth22]

I try to send one email out a day. It's discouraging to continue to receive the scripted canned email, but I want to keep the pressure on these clowns and do my part for the 2A.

[osok-308]

Just wrote them again!

[gnihcraes]

Sent form letters again, just now. Reasonably easy with Auto-Fill in Google Chrome.

[belizejet]

I've written a few times this month. One thing is for sure, Hickenlooper is not our friend. Neither is DeGette or Benett.

[whitbaby]

I send in a couple every week. Usually get a F---You Very Much canned response which is only shows they have a wonderful grasp of the obvious and they're gonna do whatever Soros, the NYT and the rest of their liberal handlers tell them to do anyway.

[ChunkyMonkey]

I havent sent any this week... thanks for the reminder! Been busy at work.

[MarkCO]

I've written a few times this month. One thing is for sure, Hickenlooper is not our friend.

Upon what do you base your assertion? Have you spoken with him, met with him, read his positions published by his office?

[JVC]

After working in a Congressman's district office as an intern in my college days, I can confirm that letters from constituents are read to be tallied "for" or "against" an issue. That is exactly why I send emails several times per week to my representatives.

The responses I have received from Udall and Bennet are not encouraging. Their multi-paragraph position paper letters waffle around and generally describe their current stances as uncommitted. I don't like it, but that is a key reason to keep up the emails. As a practical matter, it looks like any move on an AWB doesn't have the votes in the Senate, and for sure not in the Republican-controlled House. But, you never know what kind of back room deals are going on, so it is no time to let up on the pressure.

The real fight is going to be in the state legislature. States like NY and CA have awful gun laws, and we do not want CO to follow in their footsteps. Ted Harvey, my rep in the Colorado State legislature, responded to my earlier email with this one-sentence reply: "Senator Harvey absolutely supports the second amendment and will vote no on ANY gun control legislation." Simple and effective!

It is somewhat ironic that Ruger is championing their "Take Action" campaign, since Bill Ruger was an advocate of the original AWB. However, Bill is gone and the company seems to be looking to make amends for this past mistake. They have a very easy to use online application to send an email to all of your federal and state lawmakers at one time: http://www.ruger.com/micros/advocacy/.



DeGette is a lost cause, but Hickenlooper can be influenced.

[low drag]

I'm going to see my rep Saturday.

[losttrail]

More emails (condensed) to Udall & Bennet already this morning. Not that it will do any good.

[dogbreath650]

It's better than doing nothing and your emails will show up in the totals. Can't hurt!

[Goodburbon]

Me

[USAFGopherMike]

I wrote to my representative and the governor of florida.

[low drag]

More emails (condensed) to Udall & Bennet already this morning. Not that it will do any good.

Keep contacting Bennett & Udall. Both will face a state wide election and Colorado is still pro gun. They can be influenced with enough contact from pro gun owners/fear of loosing their seats.

[hatidua]

I slacked and only wrote each of them twice today, I've been trying for at least 3X per day for the past two weeks. I know they don't read them, but it keeps their interns busy.

[osok-308]

Thanks to the link on this thread, I've been reminded to write these officials every day. I may not be old enough to have opposed the ban in 94 (Being a kid at the time), so I will fight twice as hard this time! I wonder if the availability of internet access and the increased access to gun FACTS will help us to fight this piece of excrement disguised as a bill.

[JVC]

Keep contacting Bennett & Udall. Both will face a state wide election and Colorado is still pro gun. They can be influenced with enough contact from pro gun owners/fear of loosing their seats.

EXACTLY!

If we don't write, then the risk is that one of these guys will stand at the podium with a stack of emails from gun control advocates and say, "My constituents are begging for gun control."

[low drag]

EXACTLY!

If we don't write, then the risk is that one of these guys will stand at the podium with a stack of emails from gun control advocates and say, "My constituents are begging for gun control."
I just meet with Perlmutter today. Clearly he does not agree with us. I did get his attention on the 'need' for an AR (my post Katrina example), he could not refute it but I did not change his mind. I did say 'the system' failed regarding the Aurora shooter who was clearly under the care of a mental health professional yet was able to purchase guns despite the little check box on the background check form. I also told him I have already compromised on my presumption of innocents due to background checks. He told me that only applied to a court room, my return expression called that BS, (probable cause anyone?) and smirked, I didn't bother shutting him down and he knew it.

I also told him I'm very uncomfortable with registration on the grounds of who knows what will happen 10, 20 or 50 years from now. I gave him my example of 1913. Who in their right mind would have predicted the rise of Hitler a short 20 years later?

Basically he was very nice but he's not going to update his opinion.

[USAFGopherMike]

I didn't like Bennett's response either. It stank of supporting the AWB or some version of it.

[low drag]

I forgot to mention in my last post that Perlmutter does not think a new AWB will pass the House. That rings true and made me settle down a bit.

Sadly I forgot to tell him I'm prepared to engage in peaceful civil disobedience over this issue.

[dogbreath650]

Just sent off my emails for today...

[hatidua]

3X today. -aiming to do better tomorrow.

[JVC]

Perlmutter is a political opportunist, like most politicians! I admire you bringing the discussion directly to him, thank you. No, he won't change his vote, because he is squarely in the liberal wing of the Democratic camp and supporting an AWB or registration is how he can move up. That said, if ALOT of like-minded people show up to challenge his stance, then that can make a difference over time.

You are correct, in that the House will not pass an AWB. There may be some movement on a version of a universal background check, but we shall see. The gun control issue makes for strange bedfellows. For example, the NRA's statement that they have been behind a universal background check for two decades, but it has been the mental health lobby that up to this point has squashed putting the names of patients and those who got treatement for mental illness into a database.

As time passes, we have to keep writing our reps, showing up in their offices and when called, show-up at functions and rallies.

[dogbreath650]

Can't believe more folks aren't writing to their elected representatives, especially in light of the CO anti-gun proposals...

[tw4]

Here is Hickenloopers email - tell him what you think I did.
http://www.colorado.gov/govhdir/

[Bailey Guns]

I am so sick of stupid liberals and their do-nothing "common sense" bullshit.


To: Senator John Morse


"The bill will hold gun manufacturers, sellers, owners and possessors strictly liable for 100 percent of the damage done by these military style assault weapons," said Senate President John Morse.



Are you out of your fucking mind? You - nor you idiot liberal friends - don't know an "assault rifle" from a pop tart. I see your statement says nothing about the criminals that might use a gun to commit a crime. How typically liberal. Punish the law-abiding citizen, coddle the criminal.

Go ahead with your gun-hating, anti-American agenda. I suspect many democrats will be paying for their short-sighted stupidity in the near future. What ever happened to remaining true to the oath you took? I'm ashamed to know you once wore a badge, as I did for 15 years, in this once great state.

I VOTE, I'm the NRA, and I WILL make sure gun owners remember you in the next election.

Moron.

Carl Sxxxx
PO Box xx
Bailey CO 80421
720-xxx-xxxx

[low drag]

I am so sick of stupid liberals and their do-nothing "common sense" bullshit.

Ask to have a bill introduced that holds marijuana growers liable for the crimes committed by those who purchase the product.

[BPTactical]

One thing to mention in your correspondence-as far as holding a manufacturer/seller liable.
In 2005 Bush signed the "Protection of Lawful Commerce of Arms Act" into law. It holds a manufacturer/seller harmles if a (lawfully transferred firearm) is misused or used in commision of a crime. To the best of my knowledge it has not been repealed.
One of the biggest opponents to this legislation in 2005 was BHO.
Any elected official who endorses the Colorado proposal is endorsing the violation of Federal law.

[Bailey Guns]

I can't even be civil to these assholes any longer. Doesn't work anyway.

[The Rat]

Here's what I wrote and sent to some of our legislators and governor this morning. Feel free to share and plagiarize at will.


__________,

I am writing to you today as a response to the newly announced gun control measures being introduced, as reported by the Denver Post. ( http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_22523196/colorado-democrats-roll-out-tougher-gun-proposals-tuesday )

I understand that these measures are a response to the recent tragedies in Sandy Hook and Aurora. Like any sane human, I found those shootings to be horrible and reprehensible. I understand people's reaction of looking for something to blame, but that doesn't make such a reaction correct or worthwhile. I am very firmly opposed to the measures being proposed, and here is why:

Limiting magazine capacity to an arbitrary number will not only have no impact on crime, but it will hinder legal gun owners in self-defense situations. Both the Virginia Tech and Columbine madmen had low-capacity magazines, but they carried plenty of spares, in a backpack or in their pockets. It was no hindrance to them to reload (an act which takes anywhere from 2-4 seconds, if that) when faced with unarmed victims who would not fight back.
By contrast, the lack of readily available rounds will make a significant difference in a self-defense situation. For instance, in such a situation, what if a legal gun owner is forced to defend himself from multiple assailants? What if the assailants take many shots to cease being a threat? No one can say that a fixed number of rounds will stop a threat, after all. What if the shots do not stop the assailant, and he continues undeterred? What if the assailant is on some mind-altering substance? It is also highly impractical carry multiple spares throughout my daily routine, and in my home. Standard capacity magazines make a difference here. If my life and the lives of my loved ones are potentially at stake, I do not want my ability to defend them arbitrarily limited. There are already millions of magazines already in circulation; limiting them will only limit those who do not yet own them, while giving the criminals free reign.

Fees on background checks for legal gun buyers is a punishment to people who have not done anything. Given that the majority of guns used in crimes are illegally acquired, it will do nothing to prevent crime either.

Universal background checks for gun sales is one of those things that's a nice idea, but completely unenforceable. Criminals will still acquire their guns illegally, and when they come to justice, having skipped a background check is only going to be another charge on top of whatever other crimes they've already committed. Meanwhile it is a hindrance to legal gun owners who, for example, want to sell a gun to a relative.

Banning concealed carry on college campuses is a terrible idea. People with concealed carry permits have a much lower crime rate than the general populace, and given that you need to be 21 or older to apply for a permit, it wouldn't affect that much of the student populace anyways. I certainly don't want to be defenseless if some armed maniac came into the classroom, undeterred by law or sanity. When people cry out for the potential hazard from a person with a legal concealed carry permit on campus, I find that their efforts are very much misguided. If they want to save lives, they should be focused on the much largest hazard to college students: alcohol. No one has been killed on a Colorado campus because of someone legally. carrying concealed.

Holding makers and sellers of weapons liable for the actions of criminals does not make sense, any more than it makes sense to sue alcohol companies or car companies anytime that a drunk driver crashes and kills someone. Not only that, but it flies in the face of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act that was signed into law by President Bush in 2005. It is far too extreme and effectively destroys people's ability to purchase weapons for self-defense.

Making draconian new laws is not the answer. We need to enforce our existing gun laws to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals, laws that are sadly left at the wayside much of the time. These newly proposed laws will penalize and criminalize hundreds of thousands for the horrible actions of a tiny, tiny minority.

If you would do not have any experience or knowledge of modern weaponry, would like to have some hands-on time and are willing to look at things with an open mind, I invite you to a range session.

I am one of your constituents, born and raised in Colorado, and I vote. Please represent me.

Where do you stand on this issue?

Respectfully,
___________

[DOC]

I wrote Hickinlooper and since it seemed like the comments section was just there for no reason after filling out for or against choice I just said I am against gun control and I vote. Thanks for your time. Loved you when you played a real person before becoming mayor in those commercials where you paid for parking meters. Its back up to .25 for 8 minutes. Thanks for nothing.

OK maybe all of that wasn't included but I did want to call him a sellout puppet.

[mdflem51]

Bennet,Udall and Polis? WTF for? All Barry`s lap dogs. Colorado is lost..never been a defeatist in all my 60+ yrs. Just living in "realityville" as of the very late. Read Adam Schrager and Wittwer`s book. The money folks here will get their way.. I`m headed to Texas.

[Yo Dude]

There are several excellent letters written by others on here.

This is what I sent, to be fairly brief and cogent:



Dear [Senator/Representative name],

I am strongly opposed to any gun control law that would deprive innocent and law-abiding citizens of
their constitutional rights, while giving further advantage to predatory criminals and psychotic lunatics.

If enacted, all recent gun control proposals in the Colorado legislature would serve only to aid and abet
criminals. They would undermine the ability of innocent citizens to defend themselves and resist violence,
and thus, ensure that more helpless victims come to suffer more atrocious injuries and death.

Frankly, I am shocked that the elected representatives of the people of Colorado would not immediately
dismiss such destructive proposals.

As your constituent, I respectfully request that you honor your oath of office, to uphold the constitution of
the United States and the constitution of the state of Colorado.

And for the sake of those most vulnerable and innocent, I implore you to faithfully represent the interests
of law-abiding citizens of the state of Colorado.

Thank you, and sincerely,

[Name
Address
Phone number]

[tonantius]

All, please at least email your state and federal representatives at least once per week. Believe me if they get enough negative responses they will cave.