My latest letter to politicians
I started this going to Sen. Udall but will simply change the names as necessary. It's formatted better in Word.
Sen. Udall,
I, my family and friends, all find the acts of the obviously disturbed people in Newtown, CT, Aurora, CO and anywhere else that take the lives of innocents, to be condemnable.
However, let those that would condemn the tool pause and use reason and logic in a time that emotions tend to override.
When a drunk driver causes the death of an innocent child or family, is there a demand to outlaw cars or trucks? Is there a call to ban certain types of cars with certain body style, number of seats, speed capabilities, number of cylinders, horsepower?
No. The blame is placed upon the drunk driver and his/her responsibility for his/her actions. The vehicle is NOT demonized or given a name like “urban assault vehicle”. The rights of the masses are not threatened, restricted nor removed for the actions of a few. There are already sensible laws in place banning drunk driving, yet it still happens. At last count nearly 11,000 people die each year due to alcohol related vehicle incidents. Yet there is no outcry to ban Americans their ‘privilege’ to drive.
That’s right, driving is a privilege, not a right. Driving is NOT a right given to us by God or our Constitution. My children do not have the right to drive; they have the privilege of driving, earned by passing drivers training, tests, maintaining good grades and showing responsibility.
Let me show you something that you may have either, forgotten, never read or maybe never fully understood:
“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” - 2nd Amendment
This is the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America, a document that you gave a solemn oath to. Please remember this:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
This is the oath that United States senators voluntarily give when taking office to represent those that elected them. I urge you strongly to re-read both of these. Please pay attention to this phrase: “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Merriam-Webster defines “infringe” as follows:
1: to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another <infringe a patent>
2: obsolete: defeat, frustrate
Medieval Latin infringere, from Latin, to break, crush, from in- + frangere to break
Thus, to take away or limit firearms ownership of the majority based upon the acts of a few, is infringement, violating the law (the Constitution) and violating the rights of millions of law abiding gun owners.
Looking at the Latin roots let me ask you this: Do you in tend to vote to break and crush the Second amendment?
Let us look at this from another angle, that of government protocol.
Recently the Department of Homeland Security requested an order for 7,000, 5.56x45mm NATO “personal defense weapons” (PDW). These are select fire (both semi-automatic and full automatic) weapons that civilians are prohibited from owning (unless very specific NFA regulations, background checks and registrations are completed). In addition an unspecified number of 30-round magazine are being requested.
DHS states in their request that, “…they are “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.”
If DHS recognizes that a firearm capable of both semi-auto and full-auto is “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.”, then why is it that a similar firearm capable of only semi-automatic fire is viewed as and “assault weapon” and the target of banishment and possible confiscation from the citizenry? Many on the Democrat side claim, inaccurately, that an AR-15 is a weapon for the “battlefield”. This is either from a lack of knowledge or a lie. Having served in the U.S. Army, I know that AR-15’s are NOT a part of battlefield issue.
The type of weapon that DHS is requesting IS the type of “battlefield” issue. So I pose these questions:
Please tell us how much time on the battlefield are DHS employees planning on serving?
Keeping OPSEC in mind, could you please inform the American public (who, by the way pay for all of your salary and benefits, the 7,000 “PDW’s” and 30-round magazines and the DHS salaries and benefits), when and which theater of operations these DHS employees will be serving; Afghanistan? Iraq?
It was my understanding that DHS is supposed to provide security for the “homeland”, so please tell us all, what battlefield is DHS planning for?
I would also appreciate clarification as to the variance in terminology. Why is a battlefield ready firearm classified as “suitable for personal defense use in close quarters.”, when requested by the Department of Homeland Security, yet a lesser weapon without full-automatic capability, that is NOT battlefield compatible, classified as an “assault weapon” when owned by civilians?
It appears to me, many of my friends and I’m sure most American gun owners, that there is serious duplicity at work here. I find this exceedingly disturbing that our elected “representatives” would be taking such serious stands against our Constitution and our rights, that our “representatives” swore to uphold.
I would also like to point out that criminals do not obey laws. That is why they are labeled criminals.
Take the recently passed “gun control” laws in New York. What percentage of criminals, are going to voluntarily turn in or get rid of their magazine over 7-round capacity? How many criminals are going to surrender their “assault weapons” just because a new law says they are now illegal?
Gun control only works against law abiding citizens. Gun control laws only skew the balance of power in favor of the criminals.
Vice President Joe Biden was recently interviewed and admitted that “assault weapons” are not the problem and are not that deadly. He admits that “assault weapons” are used in less than 1% of violent crimes. He admits that a shotgun is much more deadly than an “assault weapon” because an “assault weapon” is so much harder to use and aim.
VP Biden makes the point of the “assault weapon” and/or magazine capacity ban being that it will take more time to swap magazines and thus could save “one life”.
The video can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCWYuxo01lM
This is insane. We should be concerned with saving each and every life. We should NOT have “gun free zones” that set up our citizens as defenseless targets for deranged lunatics. We should allow teachers the ability to carry concealed if they desire, in our schools, with proper training.
Look at how many of these acts of cowardice have taken place in “gun free zones”, where these monsters know they will have little or no armed opposition.
We should not have our elected “representatives” giving us double talk and misdirection of: “If it saves just one life, isn’t it worth it?”.
We should be enabling our citizens to defend themselves and sending the message to these monsters that we are not sheep, we do not need to wait 15, 30 or more minutes for them to wreak havoc until the police arrive.
I have to ask, what is the purpose of “gun control”? Why all the disinformation and misinformation? What is the purpose of all the inaccuracies and lies form the media and certain politicians?
Is it truly the good of the people or is it a desire and movement to control the people?
The vast majority of Americans cannot afford the armed security that our elected “representatives”, pop culture celebrities and wealthy citizen enjoy. We are left to our own designs, yet we have a government that is trying to erode and confiscate our ability to defend ourselves from those that would do evil against us. Why?
Why is Mayor Michael Bloomberg so interested in the gun laws of Colorado that he is funding millions of dollars worth of “gun control” ads and political contributions in Colorado?
Why is it that the “Fast and Furious” program received so little attention from Congress? Why is it that illegally selling weapons to known felons and Mexican aliens by our own government, resulting in the deaths of an American Border Patrol agent and others, received so little scrutiny?
As an American, I would hope that these questions alone would cause you to pause and questions what the motives are of our elected “representatives”.
As an American senator, I would expect you to take action to find the answers and do your duty to your fellow American citizens. Look through the manipulation, inaccuracies, lies and misinformation. Do not take any action regarding an “assault weapon” or magazine capacity ban until honest, forthright, clear answers are obtained.
And always keep these thoughts in mind:
I am here as a representative of the American and Colorado citizens.
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
“A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” - 2nd Amendment
Thank you for your time.
Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums
Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by losttrail
