Response from Rep. Coffman

[Teufelhund]

Received this from Rep. Mike Coffman (R-CO 6th) today. I'm not entirely sure what to make of it, as it does not state how he will vote. It looks to me like the Republicans are going to roll over and support further infringement of our Rights, as they have done in the past with the Second, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments.

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is not a privilege; I do not need a permission slip from my master to exercise it in any form. "Come and Take Them," in my mind, is becoming, "Not One More Inch."

Dear Mr. XXXXX:

Thank you for contacting me about Senator Diane Feinstein's assault weapons ban proposal. This issue is of great importance to me as well, so I appreciate hearing your thoughts and the opportunity to respond to your concerns.

As you are aware, Senator Diane Feinstein has proposed legislation to prohibit the sale, importation, transfer, and manufacturing of all assault weapons and high capacity ammunition-feeding devices. This federal mandate would outlaw the purchase, ownership, and use of hundreds of firearms and would limit magazine capacity to 10 rounds for semiautomatic rifles and handguns. As a member of the House of the Representatives, I will not vote on this legislation unless it is passed by the Senate and scheduled for a vote in the House.

Representative Diana DeGette has introduced House Resolution 138, the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act. As a companion bill to Senator Feinstein's legislation, H.R. 138 would likewise ban the transfer and possession of large capacity ammunition feeding devices. I believe that states should continue to implement these standards. It would not be wise for Congress to establish an arbitrary national standard, provided that each state is composed of different demographics, crime rates, and local culture. The Colorado General Assembly will be having this debate during this session of the legislature. I do not doubt Senator Feinstein's and Rep. DeGette's sincerity, but I believe these standards are best left to state and local governments. However, I am in favor of improving the federal gun registration database system and legislation that would strengthen the screening process for people who have a record of past criminal activities or mental illness.

Thank you again, XXXXX, for taking the time to contact me. For more information on my work in Congress on your behalf, please sign up for my newsletter at https://forms.house.gov/coffman/webforms/enews.html.

What say you?

[Ronin13]

Got the same email about 30min ago... did he just say he's in favor of federal registration?

[Teufelhund]

I think so, Ronin.

He also said he won't vote on a new AWB or magazine-capacity limit unless it passes the Senate and comes to the House. . . no fucking kidding, idiot? Is that because you're a Rep and not a Senator? Thanks for sharing that informative little Schoolhouse Rock tidbit and refraining from stating how you'll vote on it.

[ChunkyMonkey]

Got the same email about 30min ago... did he just say he's in favor of federal registration?

I believe he refers to the NCIS.. which is a federal database of criminals etc. I would shoot a response asking for clarification.

[Teufelhund]

I believe he refers to the NCIS.. which is a federal database of criminals etc. I would shoot a response asking for clarification.

It says "I am in favor of improving the federal gun registration database system. . ." I didn't know we even had one of these, but I think that's a pretty clear statement.

[ChunkyMonkey]

It says "I am in favor of improving the federal gun registration database system. . ." I didn't know we even had one of these, but I think that's a pretty clear statement.

Exactly, the fact that there is no such thing, there is nothing to improve upon. That's just my assumption. Many politicians call NCIS as federal registration.

[Teufelhund]

I replied to Mr. Coffman requesting some clarification:

Mr. Coffman,

What exactly do you mean by ". . .improving the federal gun registration database system?" You should be well aware that the maintaining of such a database is illegal. According to the Firearm Owners Protection Act (Federal Law 18 U.S.C. 926):


No such rule or regulation prescribed [by the Attorney General] after the date of the enactment of the Firearms Owners Protection Act may require that records required to be maintained under this chapter or any portion of the contents of such records, be recorded at or transferred to a facility owned, managed, or controlled by the United States or any State or any political subdivision thereof, nor that any system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or disposition be established. Nothing in this section expands or restricts the Secretary's authority to inquire into the disposition of any firearm in the course of a criminal investigation.

Please provide some clarification. Do you support "improving" an illegally-maintained database and are thereby admitting its existence in violation of Federal Law, or do you support the registration of firearms and gun owners, and the creation of such database via repeal of the Firearm Owners Protection Act?


Sincerely,
XXXXX

[ChunkyMonkey]

^ I think I am going to do the same on my lunch time. Thanks for doing this.

[Ronin13]

Eh, forget writing- Every time I do I get a machined response... Nope, this time, because I want some answers dammit, I'm going to call, and like was said by CO Rep Chris Holbert, and ask "How will you vote?" And I'll also ask for clarity. I'm tired of getting canned, vague responses. We're fast approaching the end of actual "representation"- and if I feel we as a group aren't being represented by those elected to do so, they gotta go!

[Aloha_Shooter]

I believe he refers to the NCIS.. which is a federal database of criminals etc. I would shoot a response asking for clarification.

I thought the NCIS was Leroy Jethro Gibbs and company ...