Diana Degette explanation on why a ban for high capacity mags

[Irving]

Even though I shouldn't be, I am astounded, amazed, astonished (Sexy Beast) at the complete lack of logic involved here. Obviously, the rate of fire, and capacity are unrelated to each other, yet even the dem guy's email does not even bring up the specific, and simple way that she is wrong.

[Byte Stryke]

In light of your decision to place blame squarely on the weapons used, might I remind you that criminals and those with evil intent have absolutely no regard to whatever laws you might pass. This is evident by the fact that both Murder and felony assault are illegal in Colorado, Suspect did them anyway.
My Adult Son was in that theater as well, this wasn't a "friend of a friend", this is Flesh and Blood that has trained with Members of the Littleton police department, And your legislation Disarmed him and Forced him to be a Victim. Anti-gun and Gun Control legislation only works to disarm those that are disinclined to break the laws leaving them at the mercy of those that are not. This is evident by the fact that all of these mass shooting sprees occur in "Gun Free zones".
I will be voting against everyone using this crime to further their political careers and everyone that wishes to impose their Utopian views on my family.We live in a world where it takes police almost 4 minutes to respond from the Lobby and the carnage was over in less than 2.

[HoneyBadger]

I just sent her this:

Rep. DeGette,

I am thankful that you came forward to speak about the tragic murders at the Century 16 Theater in Aurora last week. I agree that there are some legislative changes that should be made, such as allowing Colorado residents to protect themselves with a concealed weapon without needing a permit and lengthy investigation which does nothing to curtail crime, however I find it very unnerving how little you know about the legislation you call for.

First things first: You wrote in your statement “Yes, the second amendment grants Americans the right to own a gun. But the second amendment does NOT grant people the right to walk into a theater with a high-capacity ammunition clip and kill or maim scores of their fellow Americans." Do we not already have laws that prohibit murder? Assault? Those laws are very effective at stopping murderers and assaulters, aren't they? I'm sure they made Mr. Holmes reconsider his actions.

Or perhaps he just missed the sign at the entrance to the theater that advertised it as a "gun free zone". Maybe the correct solution is to pass legislation that would force any business who wants to create a gun free zone to post the signs on their emergency exits as well. This could have prevented the whole incident, right? Please try to understand that legislation only restricts upstanding Americans who follow the law to begin with. Someone intent on a heinous crime is certainly not going to abide by a law restricting the sale or use of a larger capacity magazine.

Credibility. Let’s talk about credibility. You talk a lot about the “100 round clip.” I have never seen or heard of a clip that holds 100 rounds. Perhaps you were referencing a magazine that can hold 100 rounds, but either way, your terminology is incorrect and really diminishes your credibility. Furthermore, in your counter-argument to the possibility of an armed citizen carrying a concealed weapon for their defense, you stated that Mr. Holmes, the alleged murderer, assaulted the theater with tear gas and was wearing “head to toe bulletproof protection”. While there was initially a great deal of confusion about both of these elements, there is little to no evidence that he either had tear gas, nor “head to toe bulletproof protection”. If you have evidence to the contrary that is admissible in court, I would love to hear about it so I can stop spreading misinformation the way you do.

You close your statement by reassuring Americans everywhere that you believe in the second amendment, but quickly reverse course to say that it is personally your duty to protect every American from being massacred. Where were you when Timothy McVeigh murdered 168 people in Oklahoma City? What about the Virginia Tech murders when Seung Hui Cho murdered 32 people and wounded 17 more with two handguns? Were those “assault handguns”? Our ancient ancestors used to kill each other with rocks. Were those “assault rocks”? I hope you see my point. You have committed a basic logical flaw by placing the blame for this horrific massacre on an inanimate object, instead of the person who committed the murderous act. Magazines, regardless of their size, are no more guilty of murder than gasoline is guilty of arson or computers are guilty of hacking. If you were correct on this, then we should limit the amount of gas a person is legally allowed to carry in their vehicle at once, since cars are responsible for so many deaths annually and cars with large gas tanks are even more deadly.

Ma’am, although we may not agree on your poor attempt at policy change, everyone can certainly agree on two things. One, you do not know what you are talking about and you are trying to create legislation that will harm the liberty of every American. Two, you will not be receiving my support and the support of many liberty-loving Americans, come the next election cycle.
I would appreciate a response via the email address I left for you.

Respectfully yours,

David Anonymous
Registered voter

My writing skills aren't the best, so please give me some feedback folks!

[kanekutter05]

I'm glad there are such well spoken people such as HoneyBadger and Rucker. I started to write a letter to Degette...but I think I used the term "dumb bitch" a few too many times. I decided I better cool off for a bit

[Rucker61]

I just sent her this:




My writing skills aren't the best, so please give me some feedback folks!

I think you did a wonderful job. I especially liked your "stop spreading misinformation" comment. Very nice turn of phrase.

[battle_sight_zero]

Feedback, you did a great job. Now instead of a magazine and so called evil rifle ban how about using the laws we have on the book. I also suspect that CU knew about Holmes and his potential danger to the public. They are sure circling the wagons. What about the notebook? Was it really sitting in the mail room since July 12 th a full 8 days before the shooting? I also read somewhere that Holmes had 2 roommates living with him up until May- June. How about a law that holds Government accountable when they don't invetigate suspicious actions activity that eventually hurts someone. Quite frankly I belive Diane and the other politicians need to wait to see how and why this happened.

[tmckay2]

Well even though it goes against my basic principles I would actually consider limiting magazines to 20 rounds if they take all the restrictions ad tax stamps away associated with suppressors and sbrs. When's the last time you heard of those being used in a crime? Plus the 20 rounders would save me money on ammo.

[battle_sight_zero]

Well even though it goes against my basic principles I would actually consider limiting magazines to 20 rounds if they take all the restrictions ad tax stamps away associated with suppressors and sbrs. When's the last time you heard of those being used in a crime? Plus the 20 rounders would save me money on ammo.

I personally appreciate your thoughts, but enough is enough. No comprimise. You notice how all these political clowns say hunters dont need that and this? That came from 1994 ban when gun rights were based on the needs of hunters. Well i am Hunter but i also enjoy shooting sports which requires other rifles. Personally a line is drawn in the sand for me and that is that we have existing criminal laws that should be used to hold criminals accountable , please use those laws. Give politicians and inch they will take a mile. That 20 round mag will soon be eliminated to where we are loading our AR rifles like bolt rifles because the 10 or even 5 round mag has to be permanently attached to the lower. I don't want to be like California people who allowed the line to be crossed.

[Rucker61]

Well even though it goes against my basic principles I would actually consider limiting magazines to 20 rounds if they take all the restrictions ad tax stamps away associated with suppressors and sbrs. When's the last time you heard of those being used in a crime? Plus the 20 rounders would save me money on ammo.

If you can afford suppressors and SBRs, you don't need to rob anyone. What if you could only buy large capacity mags in a storefront, not via online sales?

[flan7211]

If you can afford suppressors and SBRs, you don't need to rob anyone. What if you could only buy large capacity mags in a storefront, not via online sales?

No damnit, not one more curb of our rights. This is not about what can be used in a crime, or hunters, or anything other than the principles of our constitution. We are a people based on popular sovereignty do not take away any of the their insurance against tyranny.