My email to Ed Meyer's aide

16 JAN 13

Dear Eric,

It was nice speaking to you yesterday. It is clear that your expertise in respect to gun law can need some help.

I'll attach here a link to the 1939 US Supreme Court decision (and the court has only a handful of court decisions in our history)..

http://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...28801970&q=us+v.+miller+1939&hl=en&as_sdt=2,7

Of interest is the rational of what guns are covered (you really don't expect the 2nd amendment to list ARs, do you?)..as noted in the opinion of the court

"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument."

You did agree that an AR has military value .. so many arms, including AR15s, M16s would have value under the 2nd amendment. The militia means people capable of combat operations (originally men over 18 yrs old - regular citizens, not "state national guard" which did not exist).


You should realize that CT's assault weapons ban court decision, the Benjamin case, did not examine the 2nd amendment as it was not incorporated to the states until just recently. Our AWB is likely unconstitutional.


So, give the Miller case a read and let me know your thoughts. Your boss, Ed might want to read this too.

Thanks.

After he digests it, then a discussion of magazines for handguns and rifles would be next ....

I have had more luck in spoon feeding folks instead of providing more than one or 2 opinions...

My letter to Dear Leader Meyer

I post in response to your introduction of Proposed Bill No. 122. Now, ordinarily I would deluge you with data and statistics showing you why this bill is ridiculous and only intended to make illegal ALL SEMIAUTOMATIC FIREARMS, which is unlikely, but I want to work with you here.

I would venture your presumption is that law enforcement and the military are exempt because of their expertise in safe and knowledgeable use of the types of firearms you want to ban. Let’s not beat around the bush, that is your intention. I would argue however that if these types of firearms are too dangerous for civilian use, why are they not also too dangerous for law enforcement and the military. Wouldn’t your logic make those two groups safer as well?

Law enforcement personnel do not carry firearms to protect the public, they carry firearms to protect themselves. They carry firearms of the type you wish to ban to deal with bad guys. As one of your subjects, I too have to deal with the public which includes perhaps being amongst bad guys. So why would you offer to strip me of the ability to defend myself with the most up to date small arms technology available?

As I stated at the open, I would be inclined to support your bill but you have to show true leadership. Remove the exemptions. Disband the armed contingent that surrounds the Capitol campus and escorts you on official duty. Divest yourself of the very ability to defend yourself that you are attempting to impose upon your subjects, and maybe I can get behind you. To coin a phrase attributed to Thomas Paine, “Lead, follow, or get out of the way.” Remove the exemptions for all law enforcement and the military.

Thank you allowing me this time


AND NOW HIS RESPONSE:

Thank you for your recent communication concerning gun control legislation. As you can imagine, there is a great deal of legislation being submitted here in Hartford to deal with various aspects of gun abuse including expansion of gun permits, number labeling of bullets, restrictions on gun use, and application of mental health examinations and services. Some legislators, to the contrary, do not support any change in current law. I am approaching this issue with as much substantive information as I can obtain including conversations with police officers and a training session at the gun range of the State Police. I am also researching the experience of other states and countries with respect to gun use and controls.

While I am a supporter of the Second Amendment right to bear arms, I believe that the culture of violence and gun use in our country has gotten out of control. My own focus, as State Senator, will be on legislation limiting the legal capacity of guns to fire multiple rounds through gun magazines and clips which now carry 10, 20 and up to 50 bullets which can be fired by automatic and semi-automatic guns in a very short time. Those kinds of guns, which I have personally examined, are unnecessary to our civilian lives, either to our self-defense or to those who are hunters. I would make an exception for gun clubs provided that the multiple round magazines and clips are both registered with the State Police and maintained only at the gun club under strict security conditions.

This will be an interesting dialogue in the months ahead, and I certainly invite you to stay tuned and to advise me of your further thoughts.

Ed Meyer
State Senator


*** The bottom line I get from this is ""I heard you, and I don't care. I have to be seen as "doing something." So thank you for your view and move along.""***

This is what the good Senator sends me as a reply to the letter I sent him regarding his ridiculous bills. It is apparent that he will forge ahead because he got expert opinions from, ......wait for it........, the State Police. He went to the range and fired a rifle. Then of course there is the obligatory reference to other countries, you know, those other countries that enjoy a constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms; which are those again?

That's where I go for my information, state police and socialist countries. I'm sure to get an unbiased opinion there. I have to stop. I'm starting to get upset.

His response is interesting and something to bring up during the committee hearings. Other countries? Really? Oh brother. Has he ever lived in any other country? I have and the citizens all lament the loss of their firearms. Its nice that he is not focusing on jobs, taxation, and other minor doings of the state.

Of course his response should not be a surprise ... he did put in a bill for 1 rd, right?

And of course he supports the 2nd amendment (of course he does).... who has ever said otherwise?

Your point about cops knowing how to use these guns? An excellent one. Go to Weston's / police commission website and read the 13 AUG 2009 minutes .... they said the iron sights with their M16s they got are "defective" because they cannot hit anything with them...

I do not have a fire in my house right now so I don't need a fire extinguisher, right? Its a point I made to Ed's aide ... just because you don't see a need right this second, you must see that there could be a time when we would need to use the firearms just like a fire extinguisher.

Right now I'm working on his aide ... once this is complete then I will contact Ed ... and then, in my written testimony to a committee in respect to guns, I'll be noting all these fascists home addresses (as an example of the neighborhoods that they live in v. those who live in crime ridden areas). Unfortunately, the NAACP is antigun and why is a mystery.

Ed's a fascist ... the only thing we can do is to provide facts to the legislature highlighting that he and his proposals are a call to the citizens to arm themselves even more -- and this is exactly what has/is happening. Ed would call everyone who buys a 30 rd mag a baby killer.

And from me, I have talked about security issues with the FAA before 9-11, with my local school district managers, etc. for years. They all turn a deaf ear. Even now, I spoke to and offered solutions to a police chief about improving the schools' windows to prevent someone from (a highly unlikely event but one he was examining) targeting people inside a school through windows...what response did I get? Crickets.

If anyone thinks that locals are really concerned about safety and security they need to start looking for data to support this --they will find it lacking. Even now. The only thing schools, cops, etc. are concerned with is their own pay and pensions.

Ed is free to move to China or North Korea if he likes ... no civilian guns there...his paradise.

LQM said:

I'm starting to get upset.

Click to expand...

you're only NOW starting to get upset? lol, sorry, I find that slightly amusing

motoxmann said:

you're only NOW starting to get upset? lol, sorry, I find that slightly amusing

Click to expand...

No worries.

Sometimes I get excited when I'm talking about these types of things. Not only on the gun issue either. I've received letters from Meyer on other topics that do the same thing; 'thank you but..........'. "I support the Second Amendment, but.........". "I believe we spend too much money, but..........". He does that for every issue he responds to me about. But then again, he is a politician