Here is waht my Congress man had to say about Gun control [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Here is waht my Congress man had to say about Gun control


4 glocks
01-03-2013, 10:18
NC


Thank you for contacting our office to share your views regarding the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. We appreciate hearing from you.



There is no remedy for an innocent life that has been taken by the misuse of a firearm. The tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School is a painful and saddening reminder about the very real threat that is posed by gun violence.



The Second Amendment clearly provides a constitutional right to keep and bear arms but that does not trump the authority of the government to maintain public safety, particularly for children. Although the federal government has an important role regulating the use of guns, most criminal statutes are imposed by state governments. Unfortunately, criminal statutes oftentimes are not enough to stop gun violence, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts have some of the strongest gun laws in the country, but they also experience high numbers of gun-related crimes.



I believe that the right to bear arms must be exercised responsibly and that the tragedy at Sandy Hook should not be overlooked. Federal and state governments should work together to develop comprehensive policies that will update the manner in which we address gun violence and mental illness. It's clear that stringent laws are not enough to eliminate gun violence, and at the same time, it is obvious that more regulations alone will not ensure our safety from gun violence in the future.




Once again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. We will be sure to keep them in mind should relevant legislation be considered. In the meantime, please feel free to contact our office if we may be of assistance in the future.

Sincerely,
http://coble.house.gov/UploadedFiles/coblesig.jpg
HOWARD COBLE
Member of Congress

NC

janice6
01-03-2013, 10:21
NC


Thank you for contacting our office to share your views regarding the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. We appreciate hearing from you.



There is no remedy for an innocent life that has been taken by the misuse of a firearm. The tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School is a painful and saddening reminder about the very real threat that is posed by gun violence.



The Second Amendment clearly provides a constitutional right to keep and bear arms but that does not trump the authority of the government to maintain public safety, particularly for children. Although the federal government has an important role regulating the use of guns, most criminal statutes are imposed by state governments. Unfortunately, criminal statutes oftentimes are not enough to stop gun violence, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts have some of the strongest gun laws in the country, but they also experience high numbers of gun-related crimes.



I believe that the right to bear arms must be exercised responsibly and that the tragedy at Sandy Hook should not be overlooked. Federal and state governments should work together to develop comprehensive policies that will update the manner in which we address gun violence and mental illness. It's clear that stringent laws are not enough to eliminate gun violence, and at the same time, it is obvious that more regulations alone will not ensure our safety from gun violence in the future.




Once again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. We will be sure to keep them in mind should relevant legislation be considered. In the meantime, please feel free to contact our office if we may be of assistance in the future.

Sincerely,
http://coble.house.gov/UploadedFiles/coblesig.jpg
HOWARD COBLE
Member of Congress

NC




But, it does...........

JBnTX
01-03-2013, 10:22
Sounds kind of wishy washy to me?
He could go either way.

I would keep writing him.

FL Airedale
01-03-2013, 10:31
I'm not in congress but I know this is wrong.

" The Second Amendment clearly provides a constitutional right to keep and bear arms but that does not trump the authority of the government to maintain public safety, particularly for children."

The constitution doesn't say anything about nullifying it if congress decides an amendment engangers children.

If congress wants to amend the constitution,they can.

The first method is for a bill to pass both houses of the legislature, by a two-thirds majority in each. Once the bill has passed both houses, it goes on to the states. This is the route taken by all current amendments. Because of some long outstanding amendments, such as the 27th, Congress will normally put a time limit (typically seven years) for the bill to be approved as an amendment (for example, see the 21st and 22nd).

The second method prescribed is for a Constitutional Convention to be called by two-thirds of the legislatures of the States, and for that Convention to propose one or more amendments. These amendments are then sent to the states to be approved by three-fourths of the legislatures or conventions.

4 glocks
01-03-2013, 10:41
Sounds kind of wishy washy to me?
He could go either way.

I would keep writing him.

I agree like a form letter, not to offend each side.

John Rambo
01-03-2013, 10:43
Actually, he is 100% correct.

And I think his reply, if cryptic, is well-intentioned. Hes saying that existing gun laws are doing jack **** and just passing more of the same kinds of useless laws would do equally jack ****. But, at the same time, we have to try (as we ALWAYS have to do) to find ways to stop unlawful violence wherever possible.

Its no secret that this site is full of mostly extremists. This has been illustrated in a few threads I've created and the replies I've gotten about ways to stop criminals and ways to effectively stop guns from getting into their hands. You're the Yin to the absolute gun-grabber Yang. Neither of you are worth a damn, quite frankly. People like this congress critter, if his reply is honest, are the ones who we need to put our faith in.

2-8 Marine
01-03-2013, 10:44
Perfect reply for a member of congress . . . he's on both sides. :whistling:

OctoberRust
01-03-2013, 10:49
Actually, he is 100% correct.

And I think his reply, if cryptic, is well-intentioned. Hes saying that existing gun laws are doing jack **** and just passing more of the same kinds of useless laws would do equally jack ****. But, at the same time, we have to try (as we ALWAYS have to do) to find ways to stop unlawful violence wherever possible.

Its no secret that this site is full of mostly extremists. This has been illustrated in a few threads I've created and the replies I've gotten about ways to stop criminals and ways to effectively stop guns from getting into their hands. You're the Yin to the absolute gun-grabber Yang. Neither of you are worth a damn, quite frankly. People like this congress critter, if his reply is honest, are the ones who we need to put our faith in.

Well lets go to one extreme. And just make murder illegal. That should fix it right?... Doh!

Ok let's go to another extreme. Lets repeal the first, second, and fifth amendment, make government mental evaluations mandatory for everyone and whoever fails to measure up mentally must be locked away indefinitely. Oh that doesn't work either?

Oh ok, let's do something in between the two, because surely a mixture of both will work, right? :upeyes:

PAGunner
01-03-2013, 10:49
Sounds like a man who needs tO feel the heat from gun owners to "make up" his mInd.

My former congressman is Allen West, whom I took a pic with at the gunstore a few months back as we were both making a firearms purchase. Now I have Lois Frankel who is a complete wacktard, she stated her first line of business is the AWB... Having Obama win and losing West as a congressman for this idiot is like getting kicked in the crotch twice without recovering from the first kick.

John Rambo
01-03-2013, 10:52
Well lets go to one extreme. And just make murder illegal. That should fix it right?... Doh!

Ok let's go to another extreme. Lets repeal the first, second, and fifth amendment, make government mental evaluations mandatory for everyone and whoever fails to measure up mentally must be locked away indefinitely. Oh that doesn't work either?

Oh ok, let's do something in between the two, because surely a mixture of both will work, right? :upeyes:

Now, restate your satire as a straight statement, and consider how it compares to what the congress critter said.

Spoiler: You're both saying something very similar. :wavey:

Sharkey
01-03-2013, 10:56
But, it does...........

Yep. You and I understand that but most elected politicians don't seem to grasp the concept that that they actually took an oath to abide by the Constitution.

He like most others should be thrown out on his ass AND lose his retirement which they get after serving 1 term. What a bunch of morons.

OctoberRust
01-03-2013, 11:13
Now, restate your satire as a straight statement, and consider how it compares to what the congress critter said.

Spoiler: You're both saying something very similar. :wavey:

Nope. I just looked at the three ways to go regarding crime in a realistic way. You just don't have anything intelligent to add after, so you need to criticize the way I got my point through.

Nice cop out though. :wavey:

phil evans
01-03-2013, 11:14
just like a sleazy politician - what did he say?

John Rambo
01-03-2013, 11:22
Nope. I just looked at the three ways to go regarding crime in a realistic way. You just don't have anything intelligent to add after, so you need to criticize the way I got my point through.

Nice cop out though. :wavey:

What the hell are you talking about?

Who's criticizing?

Are we even discussing the same thing?

4 glocks
01-03-2013, 11:32
just like a sleazy politician - what did he say?


I agree he said nothing.

HalfHazzard
01-03-2013, 12:21
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I saw zero leadership oozing from that reply. Why do we elect them again?


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

mgs
01-03-2013, 12:31
Just another Mamby Pamby.

cowboywannabe
01-03-2013, 12:47
he used a lot of words to say hes on the fence.

Bren
01-03-2013, 12:59
That is quite an artful job of saying, "I might be on your side...or the other side." In short, it means he didn't read your email, which is why he has a single form response that works whether you sent a pro-gun email or an anti-gun email. That way he doesn't make a mistake and accidentally loose a pro-gun - or anti-gun - vote.

NDCent
01-03-2013, 13:19
he used a lot of words to say hes on the fence.
This.

Sounds like he's worried more about another term than the subject at hand.

OctoberRust
01-03-2013, 13:21
What the hell are you talking about?

Who's criticizing?

Are we even discussing the same thing?

My argument and satire boiled down to you're either for liberty or not. The other variables the media tries to play are simply not there and brown out of proportion.

2bgop
01-03-2013, 13:23
I have never dealt with the man before, but that letter is a joke. I have written 1000s of those letters when I was a young staffer, I would have gotten my butt ripped off if I sent one with that tone.

The Fed
01-03-2013, 13:28
Typical reply from any congressperson. Completely non-committal. You got a FORM LETTER. Send another email or go into their local office and demand a personal reply, NOT A FORM LETTER FROM AN AIDE.

John Rambo
01-03-2013, 13:30
My argument and satire boiled down to you're either for liberty or not. The other variables the media tries to play are simply not there and brown out of proportion.

Liberty is not anarchy. Government oversight of our lives is permitted by the constitution. The government's ability to maintain public safety or, to put it another way, "to insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare..." is enumerated in its powers. The second amendment does not trump this. Nor does this trump the second amendment. They do not have a subordinate/superior relationship to one another.

johnd
01-03-2013, 13:33
he is a politician, they go to college to learn how to talk to both sides without taking sides. He will go with the flow, they always do, everyone of them.

Fox
01-03-2013, 15:19
Yep. You and I understand that but most elected politicians don't seem to grasp the concept that that they actually took an oath to abide by the Constitution.


What politicians understand is getting elected. The last election went very well for the anti-gun urban liberal Democrats.

You can rant and rage about what your rights might be. But if our side can't win elections, if the urban Democrats keep winning elections, then we don't have any rights because we don't have power, nor influence.

If you really want to preserve our RTKBA then put in some effort into winning elections.

John Watson
01-03-2013, 15:23
Here is the response I received from Congressman John Carter of Texas

Quote:

Thank you for contacting me to express your concerns regarding the tragic shootings at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. My deepest condolences go out to the family and friends of the victims of this horrific event, and I appreciate your input on this important issue.



First and foremost, no words or actions can alleviate the loss of innocent lives. This tragedy has greatly afflicted our nation. As a father of four, one of which is a public school teacher, I understand the apprehension that many Americans felt when they first heard of this horrific event. We must stop and pray for all those impacted by this tragedy and for a full recovery for those left injured.



Americans of all political stripes can agree that weapons should never be accessible to those who are mentally ill. Americans have a constitutional right to keep and bear arms; however, with that right comes an obligation to make sure those weapons are securely stored and not available to anyone without the owner's express permission and supervision. We do not need to pass a law to start this reform; we simply need every gun owner, gun store, and shooting organization to take action today to better secure our firearms.



I believe federal controls often create burdens for law-abiding citizens and infringe upon constitutional rights provided by the Second Amendment. In my view, protecting the rights of citizens and providing for their security against foreign enemies and domestic criminals is the most important duty of government. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution recognizes the right to possess and carry weapons. Law abiding citizens have a fundamental right to protect themselves and their families.



I am hopeful that this tragedy will highlight our country's need for greater awareness of mental illness. The causes of violence in our country are deeper and more complex than just firearms. We must continue to address the gaps in our mental health system and drugs and violence in our culture.



Please rest assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind as Congress begins the 113th session and legislation is introduced to address these issues. Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. I appreciate having the opportunity to represent you in the U.S. House of Representatives. Please feel free to visit my website (www.house.gov/carter) or contact me with any future concerns.



Sincerely,

John Carter
Member of Congress

fx77
01-03-2013, 16:16
He carefully sits on the fence..Therefore he is not to be trusted.

concretefuzzynuts
01-03-2013, 16:39
This is my congressman's response to my first letter regarding my concern about the impending gun control I knew was soon to come. This response was before the Sandy Hook school shooting.

I'm waiting to hear back from my second letter after the school shooting. Lets see if they are different.





November 9, 2012



Dear Mr. (redacted),

Thank you very much for contacting me to express your views on gun ownership and gun control legislation. I value and give careful consideration to the good counsel that I receive from you and all those whom I have the privilege to represent in Congress. I refer to that good counsel as the "wisdom of the district."

As you know, the Second Amendment of the Constitution grants Americans the right to bear arms. Our Founding Fathers firmly believed in the principle that citizens must be able to defend themselves and their country when called upon to do so. The Constitution has served our nation well for over two hundred years and I oppose any attempt to infringe on this fundamental right. For this reason I cannot support attempts to limit an individual's right to gun ownership.

With that said, I believe gun owners have a responsibility to themselves and our community to promote gun safety education. By promoting gun safety we can cut down on the mishandling of firearms that contributes to accidental shootings. Similarly, by ensuring we fully enforce our current gun laws we can keep guns out of the hands of criminals and reduce violent crime.

It is important to me that I keep you fully informed regarding how I am representing you in Congress, so please visit my website Rigell.house.gov and sign up for my e-newsletter, "The Rigell Report." I also encourage you to join me on Facebook at facebook.com/RepScottRigell. Both sites feature timely updates on the votes I am taking on the House floor.

In closing, please know that I consider it a high honor to serve and represent you and your family in Congress.

Mindful that I work for you, I remain

Yours in Freedom,

Scott Rigell
Member of Congress

NEVRL8T
01-03-2013, 16:44
I am curious about something. How long did it take to get a response? I emailed mine and haven't heard back.

Dalton Wayne
01-03-2013, 16:49
I've e-mailed everyone and not got an answer, hopefully it's because they are flooded with e-mails

Malike
01-03-2013, 16:50
Mine said this

Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control legislation. Like you, I believe the right to bear arms is guaranteed by the Constitutionís Second Amendment. The recent Supreme Court decisions reinforced this fact, but I believed that this was the case prior to those decisions.

While I certainly respect the Second Amendment to the Constitution, I believe that we have a collective interest in keeping guns out of the hands of those who want to harm the innocent. I believe it is possible to strike a reasonable balance. I have long advocated for faster and more accurate background checks so legal purchasers can receive their guns quickly while ensuring criminals do not illegally purchase and possess firearms. In 2011, I proposed S. 436, the Fix Gun Checks Act to provide more funding to states to compile required background data for the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). This legislation builds on the National Rifle Association-supported NICS Improvements Amendment Act, passed by Congress in 2007. Ensuring that this information is comprehensive and up to date will protect law enforcement from criminals with illegally obtained weapons while speeding up the process for purchasing legal firearms.

You may also be pleased to know that I have successfully fought to create new opportunities for law abiding citizens to exercise their right to use guns. For example, in the 109th Congress, I secured federal money to expand the scarce hunting grounds in New York State by creating a financial incentive for private landowners to allow hunters access to their property.

Thank you for contacting me about this important issue. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future if I can ever be of assistance to you on this, or any other matter.

Sincerely,

Charles E. Schumer United States Senator NY

nursetim
01-03-2013, 17:35
Howard coble is a flaming liberal if my memory serves.

spcwes
01-03-2013, 17:43
Its very nice to see some of these replies. Some felt to the point of " I will not support more gun legislation but will support making changes to further identify and restrict people who are criminal or have mental issues from buying weapons."

PAGunner
01-03-2013, 18:46
Its very nice to see some of these replies. Some felt to the point of " I will not support more gun legislation but will support making changes to further identify and restrict people who are criminal or have mental issues from buying weapons."

Which probably means "the gun show loophole" will be closed and perhaps a national database for mentally Ill... Both of which can open a pandora's box for us down the road. In a perfect world that pandora's box would never be opened, but with socialists running things, all bets are off.

2-8 Marine
01-04-2013, 06:13
Which probably means "the gun show loophole" will be closed and perhaps a national database for mentally Ill... Both of which can open a pandora's box for us down the road. In a perfect world that pandora's box would never be opened, but with socialists running things, all bets are off.

Alright! That'll give that NY newspaper that outed gun owners something else to print. :whistling:

HauntedAlabama
01-04-2013, 07:34
I haven't received a response from anyone either and I wrote most of my reps right after Sandy Hook. One of my senators, Richard Shelby, said on tv there will be no new laws passed. My wife wrote him yesterday and expressed her concern over any Republicans flipping. She asked him to use his influence to keep the GOP on the right side of the fence. I am really interested in his response to her lol.

High Altitude
01-04-2013, 12:49
Response that I received.

Thank you for contacting me concerning the heartbreaking tragedy that took place at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut , where 20 children and six adults were murdered.



This was one of the most horrific events that ha s ever occurred in th is Country. It touched almost everyone in a deeply moving and personal way.



I have always believed that the worst thing that can happen to anyone is to outlive one of their children. My wife and I can easily remember when our children were the ages of those who were killed in Newtown, and we now have five grandchildren, from ages three to nine, with one more due in late February.



While many more people were killed on 9/11, almost all were adults. The only comparable events in the U.S. when many children were killed are the bombing of the federal building in Oklahoma City and the deaths of the children at the Branch Davidian Compound in Waco, Texas.



No one will ever know for sure why this killer committed theses horrible shootings. Pastor John Wood said in his sermon at Cedar Springs Presbyterian Church on December 16th that he believed many young people have been desensitized to killing by years of watching violent video games, movies, and TV shows.



Other factors may also play a part in these terrible incidents. Almost all school shooters for many years have come from broken homes and apparently have been deeply hurt by divorce. Most have also been young men and boys who have been on anti-depressant medications.



There have been many calls to tighten up our gun laws and greatly increase security at our schools. However, news reports have said that the Connecticut killer shot his way into the Newtown school, which was considered very secure, and there is no practical way to ban all guns in this Country.



These terrible killings in Connecticut were apparently caused by deep-seated psychological problems. As much as some people hate to admit it, guns have prevented many thousands of crimes and saved untold thousands of lives each year.



If some deranged person is determined to kill, he can find a way. The children killed in Oklahoma City and Waco were not killed by hand guns or assault weapons.



It would be a mistake to make a rush to judgment based primarily on emotion. We need to study the tragedy in Connecticut and all the other school shootings over the years. I am open to considering something new or different in trying to prevent a similar incident in the future.



One suggestion I heard on the Sean Hannity radio program was to hire retired police officers, or some with minor disabilities, and make sure there is an armed guard at every school in this Country.



I am open to similar suggestions, and I hope with all my heart nothing like this ever happens again.



I really cannot imagine the pain of the parents of these little children, especially occurring just before what is supposed to be the happiest time of year.



My heart goes out to them. I have prayed for them and hope there is more that we can do in a reasonable, responsible way.




With kindest regards, I am


Yours truly,

JOHN J. DUNCAN, JR.
Member of Congress

Fear Night
01-04-2013, 14:10
I haven't received a response from anyone either and I wrote most of my reps right after Sandy Hook. One of my senators, Richard Shelby, said on tv there will be no new laws passed. My wife wrote him yesterday and expressed her concern over any Republicans flipping. She asked him to use his influence to keep the GOP on the right side of the fence. I am really interested in his response to her lol.
I have written them twice since Sandy Hook. Shelby and Sessions are normally pretty good to reply back, so I'm guessing they are getting swamped. My House rep is Spencer Bachus, no word from him yet either.

I did get a reply from my AL House rep, he said he is with me and opposes any state gun control legislation.

Leigh
01-04-2013, 14:27
Thankfully, I don't worry about my congressman; he is 100% PRO-GUN and I've had the chance to shoot enough of his NFA firearms to believe it.

UZI SMG? Check. Swedish K? Check. M60? Check. M2 Browning? Check. The list goes on.

Screw our RINOS and thank God for Tea Party patriots like Thomas Massie (4th Congressional District, Kentucky)!

jgeng
01-04-2013, 14:43
Here is the reply I received from Howard Coble:

Thank you for contacting our office to share your views regarding gun control. We appreciate hearing from you.

Gun control issues can be very emotional, and while I recognize the need to ensure public safety, the Second Amendment clearly provides a constitutional right to keep and bear arms. Simply creating new gun regulations does little to curb violent crime in our country. Criminals will still have access to guns, while responsible citizens may be put in harm's way without the ability to defend themselves.

At the same time, I also believe that the right to bear arms must be exercised responsibly. Congress can do its part by carefully monitoring crime and updating our criminal laws where change is deemed appropriate. Although these changes should be reflected in our firearm laws, they should not be used as a guise to diminish the Second Amendment.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. We will be sure to keep them in mind should relevant legislation come before Congress. In the meantime, please feel free to contact our office if we may be of assistance in the future.

Sincerely,
http://coble.house.gov/UploadedFiles/coblesig.jpg

CarryTexas
01-04-2013, 15:20
Here is the response I got from my Congressman:


Dear {Redacted}:



Thank you for contacting me about renewed interests in gun control following the events at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter.



I, like many Americans, was saddened by the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School, where 20 children and 6 adults were killed by a gunman who ultimately took his own life. As a father of two teachers, my thoughts and prayers go out to all who were affected by this unspeakable tragedy. Although the investigation is still ongoing, initial reports suggest that the gunman was deeply disturbed and intent on leaving a wake of destruction.



As a physician, I believe that mental illness, which afflicts an estimated one in ten children and adolescents in the United States to the point of causing some impairment, is a serious health problem that cannot be ignored. The federal government has programs specifically designed to assist local schools to promoting mental health development in children and adolescents.



I mmediately following these events in Connecticut, I reached out to most of the superintendents of the area independent school d istricts to ensure proper safety measures are in place to protect our children in school to the extent possible. You may be interested to know , that one program that are available to schools are the School Resource Officers (SRO ) . SROs are individuals that directly improve the safety for students, teachers, and administrators in primary and secondary schools throughout our district. You may also be interested to know that over the past two decades, the 26 th District of Texas has received over $ 40 million from the federal COPS grant program to assist local law enforcement agencies. COPS grant have funded 378 additional police officers and sheriff's deputies to engage in community policing activities, including crime prevention, in the 26 th D istrict. Within the COPS program, an additional $2 million has been provided to the SRO program



An example of how the SRO program is specifically benefiting the 26 th District is in Denton School District, t he SRO program is a mutually beneficial partnership between the Denton Police Department and the Denton Independent School District. SROs perform a variety of law enforcement functions at Denton ISD schools. However, t he primary purpose of school resource officers is to reduce and prevent crime by and against students, committed primarily in or in connection with area schools.



There is no denying that this event is indeed tragic; however, this event has not changed my position on the issue of gun control. I am strongly opposed to any limitations on the United States Constitution's Second Amendment rights of law-abiding gun owners. While no one condones the purchase and use of guns by felons or other high-risk individuals to perpetrate any crime, we must not improperly hamper the right of law-abiding citizens to bear or purchase arms. If we are to honor and uphold our nation's Constitution, this right cannot be infringed.



The key to curbing the unlawful use of firearms is the stricter enforcement of existing laws. There are about 20,000 firearms laws already on the books in this country. To prevent crime, we must fully enforce those laws already on the books. I am disappointed to see the proposals currently being discussed by Members of Congress are merely an attempt to make people feel more secure without providing any real security. Someone who is truly intent on using a gun to commit a crime will find a way to obtain one regardless of what laws are imposed. We cannot erode our constitutional rights in the name of crime prevention, and I will oppose any legislation that seeks to do so.



Please be assured that I will continue to pay very close attention to the continuing debate on gun ownership rights and the mental health issues. As these developments continue, you may be assured that I will keep your views in mind should legislation relating to gun rights and mental health be considered by the full House.



Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. I appreciate having the opportunity to represent you in the U.S. House of Representatives. Please feel free to visit my website (www.house.gov/burgess) or contact me with any future concerns.


Sincerely,

Michael C. Burgess, M.D.
Member of Congress

spcwes
01-04-2013, 16:25
Which probably means "the gun show loophole" will be closed and perhaps a national database for mentally Ill... Both of which can open a pandora's box for us down the road. In a perfect world that pandora's box would never be opened, but with socialists running things, all bets are off.


Oh I understand that and agree. I can attest to a big issue to the mentally ill and not keeping them in places that protect everyone else from them. In my county and an adjoining county we had 2 mental health institutes that also had large areas for dangerous mental health issues and they are now apartment buildings.

This goes largely unseen and shouldn't. Most of the mental health issues are being seen and diagnosed today, it is done in schools before they are even adults and can be monitored much better now.

F350
01-04-2013, 16:41
NC


Thank you for contacting our office to share your views regarding the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting. We appreciate hearing from you.



There is no remedy for an innocent life that has been taken by the misuse of a firearm. The tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School is a painful and saddening reminder about the very real threat that is posed by gun violence.



The Second Amendment clearly provides a constitutional right to keep and bear arms but that does not trump the authority of the government to maintain public safety, particularly for children. Although the federal government has an important role regulating the use of guns, most criminal statutes are imposed by state governments. Unfortunately, criminal statutes oftentimes are not enough to stop gun violence, New York, New Jersey and Massachusetts have some of the strongest gun laws in the country, but they also experience high numbers of gun-related crimes.



I believe that the right to bear arms must be exercised responsibly and that the tragedy at Sandy Hook should not be overlooked. Federal and state governments should work together to develop comprehensive policies that will update the manner in which we address gun violence and mental illness. It's clear that stringent laws are not enough to eliminate gun violence, and at the same time, it is obvious that more regulations alone will not ensure our safety from gun violence in the future.




Once again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts. We will be sure to keep them in mind should relevant legislation be considered. In the meantime, please feel free to contact our office if we may be of assistance in the future.

Sincerely,
http://coble.house.gov/UploadedFiles/coblesig.jpg
HOWARD COBLE
Member of Congress

NC


You just got told to "F___ OFF".

JackMac
01-05-2013, 15:29
Sharky, you don't know Congressman Coble. I do. He has never participated in the Congressional Retirement System. He served in the military. He is a Patriot in every sense of the word. He is a conservative, Presbyterian, and supporter of our Constitution and Second Amendment. The NRA has given him endorsements over many years including 2012. He will vote the right way. We need more like Howard in Congress. Factually, his letter is correct.

vikingsoftpaw
01-05-2013, 18:02
Basically, it says nothing. A fence-sitters response.

THEPOPE
01-05-2013, 18:20
All of the responses have a certain tone, and pattern to them, along with the obligatory ' please contact us if we can be of more help...'

Typical D.C. double-talk from the masters of it....while I can appreciate that maybe some of the responders are sincere in their quest to maintain a semblance of care, I am doubting whether ANY of those letters saw the eyes of any of the reps...

I am out.....:cool:

Fungunner
01-06-2013, 12:52
I just hope we can muster the same rage from like-minded voters, as we got following Clinton's AWB.

But, we are in an age now, where people are into all the "free" stuff the government is going to give them and a vast number of voters who are more interested in what their favorite star is up to or wearing, than about government policy that will reduce our freedoms and the number of jobs.

ilgunguygt
01-06-2013, 13:12
Actually, he is 100% correct.

And I think his reply, if cryptic, is well-intentioned. Hes saying that existing gun laws are doing jack **** and just passing more of the same kinds of useless laws would do equally jack ****. But, at the same time, we have to try (as we ALWAYS have to do) to find ways to stop unlawful violence wherever possible.

Its no secret that this site is full of mostly extremists. This has been illustrated in a few threads I've created and the replies I've gotten about ways to stop criminals and ways to effectively stop guns from getting into their hands. You're the Yin to the absolute gun-grabber Yang. Neither of you are worth a damn, quite frankly. People like this congress critter, if his reply is honest, are the ones who we need to put our faith in.
You never fail to amaze me:faint:

There is no compromise because it wont stop there. Your posts dont instill a lot of confidence in your mental capacity anyway so it really doesnt matter.