Assault weapon (courtesy libertyzone.wordpress.com)

TTAG’s Armed Intelligentsia are not the most passive of pro-gun partisans. They’ve reacted to the post-Sandy Hook gun-grabbing hysteria by commenting on the site (thanks for that) and unleashing a veritable blizzard of emails to their local, state and federal representatives. We know this because you guys are cc’ing us your handiwork. Unfortunately, we don’t have the brand bandwidth to publish them all. Or the responses from elected officials. Rest assured we read every email; we’ve yet to come across a polemic that was less than perfect. Seriously. We will post examples from time to time so you can see what arguments your fellow AI use to remind their reps to defend their Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. At the risk of wandering over the borderline from blog to pro-gun activism, keep up the good work! Over to you Dr. Sheets . . .

Senator Cruz/Cornyn,

I urge you in the strongest possible sense to leverage any and all power you have to stop the proposed Feinstein AWB and McCarthy Magazine Capacity Limits bills.

I can not find the exact wording of the Feinstein AWB nor the list of exempted firearms, however, the reports I read indicate she wishes to ban anything with a detachable magazine.  To be clear, the percentage of current day firearms that possess detachable magazines is greater than 80% of all firearms manufactured today.  Thus such a ban would restrict gun owners to less than 20% of firearms.  In no possible way can this be viewed as sensible legislation and not infringe on the right to keep and bear arms.

The need assessment applied in debate is not applicable to Second Amendment rights of firearm selection.  Regardless, I will provide some fodder for your future debates.

• Modern sporting rifles offer modern materials with high tensile strength and light overall weight.

• Lightweight materials are ideal for hunters who must carry their firearm long distances.

• These modern materials are extremely rugged and handle significant abuse without damage to the weapon.

• Many women are truly gaining momentum in shooting sports due to the light-weight nature of these modern rifles.

• A final supporting fact for the ‘need’ of an AR-15 style rifle is modularity.

• This platform is built with an automotive-manufacturing-style interchangeable parts system.

• This allows owners to customize their gun for their own shooting style or purpose.

• Varmint hunters use longer heavier barrels

• Distance shooters choose different caliber ammunition

• Adjustable stocks suit more than one person using it or different clothing options of the user (aka why belts have more than one hole, or bras have more than one clasp)

• A pistol grip is ergonomic and more comfortable than traditional straight grips

• Modularity is also a reason why it is nearly impossible to define the weapon, thus the current call for a single feature test.

The loudly proclaimed fact that these are the weapons of choice for mass murderers is deceptive.  Statistical probability shows that the most common item is probably the item to be used.  In other words, the single most common rifle in the US today is the AR-15 style rifle.

Thus, it has the highest probability of being used by the criminally minded.  Banning the most common weapon only makes another weapon the most common and statistical probability predicts that the newest common weapon will then be the weapon of choice for criminals.  Take this to the extreme in England where firearms are extremely scarce and you find higher incidences of bladed weapons being used.

I am led to believe that the Feinstein AWB leaves good ol’ fashioned shotguns alone, so as to further divide gun owners between modern spotters and classic hunters.  The Cumbria, England shootings of 2010 demonstrate that even with extremely strict gun control, a madman armed with a shotgun can kill 12 and injure 25.  It is simple, banning firearms doesn’t stop this kind of event.  This also serves to refute Senator McCarthy’s concept of restricting magazine capacity, as the shotgun did not hold greater than 10 rounds.

When such measures are clearly ineffective at the publicly-stated intention of reducing mass shootings, it becomes obvious that the only reason behind these bills are the sponsors’ own fear of firearms (or worse, the ability to control the populace by disarming civilians).  Restricting rights of lawful citizens to reduce sensation of fear and project a false sense of security lacks the “common sense” so often lauded by the anti-Second Amendment politicians and media.

To enable the ramrodding of this legislation, Senator Reid has negotiated a change to the senate rules with Senator McConnell.  The trade off is the ability to propose 2 amendments to a bill.  This is not a benefit, as the majority also get to propose 2 amendments and Senator Reid gets to decide what is valid and will be included.  This a lose-lose proposition for the senate minority.

I strongly urge you to oppose this and force the Democratic majority to vote on the ‘nuclear option’.  In debate you can kindly remind them how the American people felt previously about ramrodding legislation and how Democrats were quickly and decisively replaced after passing anti-Second Amendment legislation.  When that happens they will be the minority and subject to these new senate rules.  In other words they will be powerless to stop anything Republicans wish to pass after 2014.

I would like to leave you with a quote to rebuff the needs argument.  “No one needs a military-style firearm anymore than Rosa Parks needed to sit in the front of the bus.”  This is about Constitutional Rights and the expression of those rights.

Sincerely,

Dr. Kristopher Sheets

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

69 COMMENTS

  1. I feel like my emails are going to your spam filter or you’ve blocked me. I’ve sent at least a couple good leads over the past two weeks and not seen them here.

    Does anyone else care that LA County school police officers are being issued AR-15s?

  2. “I am led to believe that the Feinstein AWB leaves good ol’ fashioned shotguns alone, so as to further divide gun owners between modern >spotters< and classic hunters."

    Typo? Possibly Sporters or Sportsters or Sportsmen?

    • And, it is incorrect. Semi-auto shotguns are definitely subject to a 5-round limit (i.e., no mag extensions, most Benelli M2 and other 3-gun shotguns with extended mags are now banned); pumps are “exempt” but are they subject to the round limit? Wording is vague. Is my Benelli SuperNova pump with a +2 mag ext legal or not?

      Point taken, however, that the approach here is definitely to divide and conquer – get the Elmer Fudds on board against these young whipersnapers with their “assault rifles” just because their O/U clay shooters and pappy’s bolt gun aren’t illegal (yet)

      • I shudder every time I see an image of that hag, and my heart goes out to the innocent rifle that’s got her claws wrapped around it. If we can save one rifle…

      • I don’t know RF, both make me shudder..
        I need to eat seeing her face starring at me when I woke up made me feel ill… 😉

      • The mug on her would make any horse do the ‘Animal House’ (after the classic scene in the 1978 movie Animal House where the horse has a heart attack in the deans office).

  4. Anyone notice on DiFi’s list of banned weapons by name includes:

    SPAS 12 – A gun that hasn’t been manufactured for over 12 years.
    Tec-9 – A gun that’s manufacture hasn’t existed for over 12 years.
    Streetsweeper – A gun that is already a NFA Destructive Device, made by a company that hasn’t existed for more than 20 years.

    • It’s called consolidating your gains. The disarmament activists aren’t completely ignorant of how the world works. They know darn well that if they passed a new law which dropped one or more banned-by-name firearms from the list, even if they’re out of production, it would just be a matter of time before someone started making them again.

  5. I have sent similar emails to everyone from the President down to my local (Alabama) representatives & received nothing other than the “form letter” replies from Biden. Sadly, I don’t believe that any of our elected officials are actually reading any of these. We are, in my opinion, for the most part being “led” by a self-ordained ruler “class” who insulate themselves from the citizens w/layers of peons, often w/their own uninformed agendas. But… I won’t stop voicing with my $$ & voice & votes as long as I have the opportunity.

    • Don’t worry too much about whether they’re reading them. Of course they’re not reading them. Most likely a staffer is looking at them and throwing them in the “fer” or “agin” pile. Then they look at the size of the piles to get an idea where public opinion is. What we’re doing is helping to skew the mail statistics on the issue. Of course that’s assuming the politician in question isn’t lying about the amount of mail they’re getting. But there’s one count they can’t lie about and that’s the vote count at the next election. They ignore our letters at their own political peril.

  6. I hate emailing NJ senators. The topic of firearms is categorized under “public safety” not under “civil rights”. The last time I heard the term”
    Public safety ” was when I was studying the french revolution and the reign of terror. Just sayin.

    • At least you can reach both of yours. Donnelly’s website (Indiana) doesn’t actually work yet, and last I checked also didn’t include a physical address for correspondence.

      • If you can call receiving an automated response from people who pretend to care what you think, but will vote to limit your rights anyway, as reaching them, then I guess I’ve reached them many times already. NJ is hopeless.

        • NY is just as bad. I have only received replies from Chuckie Schumer. Which says: “I believe it is possible to strike a reasonable balance. ” Blah blah blah. This is what I have done, and I am so great.
          Fortunately I will be protesting at the state capital on Friday Feb 8th. I hope to see MANY NYers there too!

    • I live in a different state, but I checked the civil rights box instead of public safety, it’s not your fault they don’t know the differance.

  7. I glad you changed the picture, looking at her is bad enough but that up close shot was unbearable

  8. At least she learned not to muzzle sweep the entire audience with the safety off and her finger on the trigger. She didn’t learn much else, though.

  9. I just emailed one of my senators, who might actually reply…

    It might not be a bad idea to publish more of these letters by us to give us more material and perspectives with which to contact our representatives. I’ve got a few sentences to donate.

  10. I really find it amazing that one woman, who at 95 years old has nothing more to gain politically, devotes her entire life to trying to take away guns. Can’t she do what most nice old ladies do, and sew some sweaters for the grand kids? I can’t understand what she has to gain by going all out to disarm the public. It’s almost comical already.

    • She is not 95 years old, she is an evil 4000 year old demon fron the darkest depths of hell, doing her very best to gain control of the surface world….. and I’d almost guarantee that she has a shoulder thingy that goes up.

    • She is 79. Still, good point. Moreover, her record in getting legislation passed is pretty abysmal compared with most of her peers.

      • When I went to the senate website, other than this abomination, she hasn’t introduced a bill since 2010!

  11. Senators Inhofe and Coburn have got to be getting tired of hearing from me, especially given their position on this topic. All the same, another letter sent

    • I’m pretty sure every politician in PA is sick of hearing me, still more letters sent this morning.

  14. below is Senator Rubio’s reply to me……….sounds like Feinstein’s 2A comments…

    Thank you for writing to me regarding the tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut. I share your concern for the victims of this tragedy.

    My heart breaks for the victims and families impacted by this senseless act of violence. In a world that can at times be defined by its darkness, children are a reminder of what is good, cheerful and beautiful about life. An act of violence against these defenseless young people, as well as the faculty and staff who dedicate themselves daily to educating and caring for them, is a deed of unconscionable evil. I pray that God holds Newtown close as the community continues to heal from this tragedy.

    In the aftermath of this unspeakable tragedy, like millions of Americans, I am looking for public policy changes that might prevent such a horrible event from happening again. I continue to be a strong supporter of the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution which guarantees citizens the right to safely and responsibly bear arms. At the same time, I have always been open to measures that would keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. In light of this horrible tragedy, I am open to new ideas to prevent mass tragedies like this from happening again.

    It is an honor and a privilege to serve as your United States Senator. I appreciate your concern regarding this situation. If I can ever be of assistance to you, please do not hesitate to contact me.

    Sincerely,

    Marco Rubio
    United States Senator

  16. I’ve totally changed my tone. F those ‘logical’ arguments. This isn’t the exact wording, the original is on my home computer. Its getting hard not to be borderline terrorist though.

    Dear Sir/Madam-
    I voted for you last election. My friends, family, coworkers, and I have decided that we will not stand for ANY further infringement on our Second Amendment Constitutional Rights. I trust you will make the wise decision.
    Thanks for your hard work,
    Tom

  17. 1) The collapsible stock exists so they are adjustable to different body types. My partner and I can both use the same gun comfortably. I can buy one gun instead of many.

    2) The pistol grip is more more ergonomic and controllable especially for for people without great hand strength, arthritis or disabilities. Long arms in general are thought to be better for home defense than pistols because they are inherently more manageable and therefore accurate and allow recoil to be handled with both arms and the body. This could be very important if you are anything other than an average-sized able bodied person. Control makes it safer self-defense option.

    3) Everyone, including small, elderly, or disabled people can better handle the recoil of a .223 than 00 buckshot. A typical shotgun loaded with 5 shots of 00 buck has the firepower to put a total of 45 .330 caliber solid lead projectiles on target, but you are forced to fire 9 at a time so the recoil is much greater. Nine .330 caliber projectiles is considered adequate to reliably put down one attacker. A typical AR15 with a standard 30 round magazine only affords the ability to put 30 .223 caliber projectiles on target. Given the shotguns “five attacker capacity” an AR15 with standard 30 round magazine only affords 6 .223 caliber projectiles per attacker, but you can fire them one at a time, so it is much lower recoil and therefore a more controllable. This means you can use appropriate force instead of overwhelming force with an AR15. Also since the rifle is auto ejects and auto loads you can focus on situational awareness rather than manipulating the weapon. These attributes make the AR15 a safer and better self-defense option than a shotgun.

    4) An AR15 is loaded with hollow point ammo for home defense, which are designed to stop inside a target and will not penetrate building structures as readily as a .330 lead ball used in 00 buckshot, so it is therefore a superior defensive weapon in terms of safety to bystanders.

    5) The .223 is much less powerful than even the minimum power hunting round considered humane for deer hunting. If people are forced to use hunting rifles for defense the heavy fast moving bullets have much greater potential to do more collateral damage than light fast moving bullets.

    6) The “barrel shroud” is a forearm grip on an AR15 and it is designed as a mounting surface for flashlights so that in a home defense situation one can positively identify their target and what is beyond it, and this is a much safer and socially conscious option than shooting shotguns in the dark.

    7) A flash suppressor decreases muzzle flash which would otherwise cause instant night blindness which inhibits a person’s ability to see while they are shooting. This would be dangerous, hence the flash suppressor is a smart and safe feature.

    8) Self-defense is a human right and in the USA that means that there should be no institutional-by-proxy discrimination on who has that right based on natural born or age related limitations on size, strength, or agility, and the fact is that these modern rifles have the most merit for socially safe and accessible self-defense compared to any other weapon options which exist.

    -D

  20. Thanks for posting this. I modified it fairly extensively, but gave credit to the original author, and have sent it to both my Senators and Congressman.

  23. Her bill is now S-150 with 17 co-sponsors, most are from CT, MA, NY, HI, IL, and the rest of the NE!

    • Ironic that the birthplace (New England) of the Revolution (which was precipitated by the attempted confiscation of arms) is leading the charge to disarm the citizens of this great country.

  26. You forgot to mention the bayonet lug. Banning that feature put an end to all those bayonettings back in the ’80s and ’90s.

    • “Silly, there weren’t any bayonettings in the ’80s and ’90s! Those things are on the list because they make me wet myself just thinking about them!”

  27. I know this is off topic, but…..The Firearm Blog not only refuses to take a stand for the 2a fight, they keep a banner ad for CheaperThanDirt as well.

    • The CTD thing sucks, but I’m glad they stay politics free. Sometimes I just want to read about guns and not the chicken-hawks trying to take them away. I’m cool with there being one corner of the internet for that.

  28. No more pics of the nasty hag from kalifornia.

    Other than that call your Reps and senators and say kill the ban!!!

  29. Truth bein’ what it is, there’s really only one actual assault weapon in the whole picture…and a few inanimate objects.

  30. ” Banning the most common weapon only makes another weapon the most common and statistical probability predicts that the newest common weapon will then be the weapon of choice for criminals. ”

    Well…. DUH!
    That is their plan.

  33. Is anyone else besides me getting frustrated with the hundreds of acronyms being used these days? What is the point of using them so much? I can understand the purpose of most, but some of them aren’t necessary. For example pols, is it really that hard to type out politicians? There are plenty of others that I won’t list. This gets really annoying when you run into new ones that you aren’t familiar with. Then you have to use google to decipher the message you are trying to read.

  34. Why does NatGunRights.Org fall for the left’s demonizing of inanimate objects and call them “weapons” instead of the far more accurate “Firearm”?

Comments are closed.