Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: The latest from Jane

  1. #1
    Newbie cato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California, USA
    Posts
    2,335

    Post imported post

    Dear Tax Paying Serf:

    My thanks for contacting me with your views on gun control legislation.
    I apologize for any delay in my response.

    I support gun-ownership by law-abiding citizens who are competent to
    use, and safely secure, the weapons they own. However, I believe that
    some gun control laws are necessary, and I voted for the Brady law to
    impose a waiting period before permitting someone to buy a handgun.

    Furthermore, I believe military-style assault weapons are not necessary
    for self protection nor do they serve a valid sporting purpose and
    that current loopholes in the law which permit copycat assault weapons to
    be sold should be closed. I do not feel minors should be able to
    purchase guns, and, as a parent, I worry about the ability of our children
    to access guns and cause serious harm to others in our schools.

    Additionally, I am a proud cosponsor of H.R. 1022, the Assault Weapons
    Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act, which renews the assault
    weapons ban that Congress permitted to expire in 2004. The bill would ban
    the production, possession, or transfer of certain kinds of assault
    weapons and ammunition clips—some of the deadliest weapons currently
    available.

    I appreciate you taking the time to contact me, Please continue to be
    in touch.

    Regards,

    JANE HARMAN
    Member of Congress
    http://www.house.gov/harman

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    7

    Post imported post

    1. Assault is an action... not a gun.

    2. "some of the deadliest weapons currently available." Ummmm, I guess everything else only hurts. BUT an ASSAULT RIFLE can actually kill you because its DEADLY...:quirky

    3. Come on lady, get a life, dictionary, and a sense of purpose.


  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Clearing up that assault is an action probably helps. More important would be a full explanation of how the anti-gunners stole and re-defined the term "assault rifle" by pretending that look-alike weapons are the same as the real thing.

    Anybody ever seen that little ploy exposed in the media?
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  4. #4
    State Pioneer ConditionThree's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Shasta County, California, USA
    Posts
    2,231

    Post imported post



    I support gun-ownership by law-abiding citizens who are competent to
    use, and safely secure, the weapons they own.


    Interesting. This draws a newdistinction on the 2Abecause our forefathers didnt see fit to restrict ownership or use of firearmsto the 'law-abiding' or the 'competent'. This is because they knew thatpeople are first fallable and second, the standards of what constitutes'law-abiding' and 'competency' are easily movable variables. For instance, restrictions on ownership dependent on a person's competency could narrow ownership to those who are capable of demonstrating knowledge and proficiency with weapons and knowledge of lawsunder ever increasing difficulty. This leads us into denying firearms ownership to those whocannot read or write, those who have trouble with comprehension, those who are disabled; such as the blind, deaf, amputees, or parapalegic, those who have suffered diminished capacity from a stroke or seizures.

    However, I believe that some gun control laws are necessary, and I voted for the Brady law to impose a waiting period before permitting someone to buy a handgun.


    However?The first sentence written already indicates thatJane wishes to rewrite the 2A, by restricting ownership and use to only 'law-abiding' and competent citizens.Using'however' generally indicates a change in direction- instead there is more of the same subject- more gun regulation.

    Furthermore, I believe military-style assault weapons are not necessary
    for self protection nor do they serve a valid sporting purpose and
    that current loopholes in the law which permit copycat assault weapons to
    be sold should be closed.


    So our military should defend themselves with what? Harsh language?If you plan todisarm citizens with your legislation it should also apply to our armed forces. You see, what our founding fathers believed was that the people should have whatever armswere issued to the standing armies of the day. This was because it was commonly believed that a standing army represented asgreat a threat to freedom as the tyrantKing George was. These military-style assault weapons can be used for sporting purposes, but their REAL purpose is for the security of a free State. If someone chooses to commit a crime with their military-style assault weapons, there are laws already on the books to prosecute them with- without interfering with the rights of 'law-abiding' and 'competent' citizens.

    I do not feel minors should be able to purchase guns, and, as a parent, I worry about the ability of our children to access guns and cause serious harm to others in our schools.


    Uhm- it's already illegal to sell a firearm to a minor.There is also a law on the books that places stiff penalties on gun-owners who do not secure their firearms fromchildren- every gun store is mandated to have a signdetailing this requirement.If this isnt ignorance of the law, the only other thing it might beis a prelude to add morerestrictions on the 'law-abiding' and 'competent' citizen gunowners.


    Additionally, I am a proud cosponsor of H.R. 1022, the Assault Weapons
    Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act, which renews the assault
    weapons ban that Congress permitted to expire in 2004.


    The bill would ban the production, possession, or transfer of certain kinds of assault weapons and ammunition clips—some of the deadliest weapons currently available.
    Deadliest weapons currently available? Boy, that sounds scary. The funny thing is, that the firearms banned in H.R. 1022 are no more deadly than the muskets and flintlocks used in years past. Whethersomeone isshot dead with a musket ball or a hollowpoint bullet from a banned assault weapon- the results are the same. (Granted, I'd much rather have a high powered rifle...)

    If someone wants to ban the deadliest weapons currently available, they would have to start with stockpiles of Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological weapons in the possession of our government. They are a greater threat than any ofmy four lousy guns.

    A clip is something that holds paper together- How a clip figures into assault weapons escapes me. Perhaps Jane is refering to a MAGAZINE. (Of course she is- she's just not educated in the nuances in our little enclave.)


    New to OPEN CARRY in California? Click and read this first...

    NA MALE SUBJ ON FOOT, LS NB 3 AGO HAD A HOLSTERED HANDGUN ON HIS RIGHT HIP. WAS NOT BRANDISHING THE WEAPON, BUT RP FOUND SUSPICIOUS.
    CL SUBJ IN COMPLIANCE WITH LAW


    Support the 2A in California - Shop Amazon for any item and up to 15% of all purchases go back to the Calguns Foundation. Enter through either of the following links
    www.calgunsfoundation.org/amazon
    www.shop42a.com

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    19

    Post imported post

    ConditionThree wrote:

    she's just not educated....

    You were overthinking your response to her letter. This version is a much simplier and easier to understand synopsis.

    Harmon is a perfect example of how peoplein politicshave no clue what the law is and what the word "rights" means. Harmon, like most career politicians, is only in it for herself at our expense.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Los Angeles County, California, USA
    Posts
    33

    Post imported post

    " . . . and ammunition clips—some of the deadliest weapons currently
    available."



    Gee, I've been spending thousands on guns, and all I needed was a few ammo clips.

    John


Posting Permissions

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