Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: A good sign from congress?

  1. #1
    Regular Member rapgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Posts
    565

    A good sign from congress?

    I sent my latest protestation to my members of congress re: pending bad gun laws. Instead of getting the canned "I hate guns and gun owners" missive from Senator Murray, I received the following (which I think is a good sign that someone, somewhere actually might be getting a clue)...

    From: <Senator@murray.senate.gov>
    To: <rob@carpelaw.com>
    Subject: Response from Senator Murray

    Dear Mr. Apgood:

    Thank you for contacting my office. Your thoughtful comments are greatly appreciated.

    The views of Washingtonians are very important to my work. I will keep your thoughts in mind, and I encourage you to stay in touch. If you would like to know more about my work in the Senate, please feel free to sign up for my weekly updates at http://murray.senate.gov/updates. Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me.

    Sincerely,

    Patty Murray
    United States Senator
    Senator Murray now spends many words to say nothing. I submit that she now understands the significant number of votes that she stands to alienate by blithely jumping on the anti-gun bandwagon...
    Rev. Robert Apgood, Esq.

    A right cannot be lost by exercising it. McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3021, 177 L. Ed. 2d 894 (2010) (citing Near v. Minn., 283 U.S. 697 (1931)).

    Although IAAL, anything I say here is not legal advice. No conversations we may have privately or otherwise in this forum constitute the formation of an attorney-client relationship, and are not intended to do so.

  2. #2
    Regular Member jt59's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Central South Sound
    Posts
    1,025
    Quote Originally Posted by rapgood View Post
    I sent my latest protestation to my members of congress re: pending bad gun laws. Instead of getting the canned "I hate guns and gun owners" missive from Senator Murray, I received the following (which I think is a good sign that someone, somewhere actually might be getting a clue)...



    Senator Murray now spends many words to say nothing. I submit that she now understands the significant number of votes that she stands to alienate by blithely jumping on the anti-gun bandwagon...
    Sorry, I disagree...she blew you off. Further, I submit that she doesn't care at all or she would have addressed your concerns in context to anything that she is working on....
    Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the grey twilight that knows not victory nor defeat....Teddy Roosevelt

  3. #3
    Regular Member Grim_Night's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Pierce County, Washington
    Posts
    792
    Response from Senator Murray‏

    [Mark this message as unread] [Delete this message]
    [Keep this message at the top of your inbox]
    2/27/13
    Reply ▼

    Senator@mu​rray.senate​.gov

    Add to contacts
    To sean_witmer@hotmail.com



    Dear Mr. Witmer:



    Thank you for contacting my office. Your thoughtful comments are greatly appreciated.



    The views of Washingtonians are very important to my work. I will keep your thoughts in mind, and I encourage you to stay in touch. If you would like to know more about my work in the Senate, please feel free to sign up for my weekly updates at http://murray.senate.gov/updates. Again, thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with me.

    Sincerely,
    It's still a canned response lol...
    Armed and annoyingly well informed!

    There are two constants when dealing with liberals:
    1) Liberals never quit until they are satisfied.
    2) Liberals are never satisfied.

  4. #4
    Regular Member rapgood's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Bothell, WA
    Posts
    565
    Quote Originally Posted by jt59 View Post
    Sorry, I disagree...she blew you off. Further, I submit that she doesn't care at all or she would have addressed your concerns in context to anything that she is working on....
    Quote Originally Posted by Grim_Night View Post
    It's still a canned response lol...
    Oh. I agree. It IS still a canned response. It's just not the "I hate all guns and all gun owners" canned response that we've received from her in the past. I take it as a sign that she is, at least, not TRYING to alienate gun owners.
    Rev. Robert Apgood, Esq.

    A right cannot be lost by exercising it. McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 3025, 130 S. Ct. 3020, 3021, 177 L. Ed. 2d 894 (2010) (citing Near v. Minn., 283 U.S. 697 (1931)).

    Although IAAL, anything I say here is not legal advice. No conversations we may have privately or otherwise in this forum constitute the formation of an attorney-client relationship, and are not intended to do so.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    East Wenatchee, Washington, USA
    Posts
    132
    Quote Originally Posted by rapgood View Post
    Oh. I agree. It IS still a canned response. It's just not the "I hate all guns and all gun owners" canned response that we've received from her in the past. I take it as a sign that she is, at least, not TRYING to alienate gun owners.

    I wouldn't put it past her to have 2 canned responses. 1 for people who write in favor of gun restrictions and one for those opposed. Since she has no common ground with those of us who are opposed to restrictions on RKBA, the canned letter is short.

    The problem with testing this theory is someone would have to write a letter in favor of further restrictions on RKBA, and that person certainly won't be me!

  6. #6
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by FrayedString View Post
    I wouldn't put it past her to have 2 canned responses. 1 for people who write in favor of gun restrictions and one for those opposed. Since she has no common ground with those of us who are opposed to restrictions on RKBA, the canned letter is short.

    The problem with testing this theory is someone would have to write a letter in favor of further restrictions on RKBA, and that person certainly won't be me!
    Send her my Libertarian hands off guns viewpoint and see what she says?....
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    seattle
    Posts
    31
    I got the exact same response vebatum from Sen Patty Murray.

  8. #8
    Regular Member Sharpender's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    University Place, Washington, USA
    Posts
    75
    Quote Originally Posted by squeezeplae View Post
    I got the exact same response vebatum from Sen Patty Murray.
    Ditto
    Sharpender
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the outcome of the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •