• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Letter regarding carrying in National Parks

just_a_car

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
2,558
Location
Auburn, Washington, USA
imported post

Sent one to both Cantwell and Murray.

Here's my letter to Murray:

Dear Senator Murray,

I had the pleasure of asking a Social Security question of you in the '99-'00 school year at Steven's Hospital when you had an open forum to the public. I was then a Senior at Edmonds-Woodway High School and am now a proud member of the voting public. Since it is apparent by your being out in the public to ask questions that you are indeed interested and engaged in the public's opinion I'd like to again ask you to lend your ear.

I urge you to send a letter to the Department of the Interior
supporting the efforts of Senator Crapo and 46 other Senators to allow state law to determine if law-abiding citizens can carry a firearm for self-defense while visiting National Parks and National Wildlife Refuges. The right for a citizen to defend himself is both Constitutionally protected and is not negotiable.

Please let me know what you are going to do.

Sincerely,

JAC (real name here)
 

just_a_car

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
2,558
Location
Auburn, Washington, USA
imported post

Just got a response from Senator Murray... not exactly what I was hoping for:
Dear Mr. JAC (real last name omitted):

Thank you for contacting me to express your support for allowing guns to be carried in our nation's parks. I appreciate hearing from you.

Like all Americans, I am concerned about violent crime and its effects on children, families, and communities. As a U.S. Senator, I have supported legislation to increase punishments for convicted felons. In addition, I have worked hard to emphasize crime prevention strategies, especially among young people, and rehabilitation and treatment efforts for those who are already in trouble.

I also believe that reasonable measures to control firearms should be one part of our national crime- fighting strategy. Throughout my time in office, I have supported common sense gun control measures that reduce gun violence while providing the least possible inconvenience to law-abiding gun owners. I voted for the Brady Bill because I believed it would keep firearms away from criminals while still allowing law abiding citizens to purchase guns. I also supported a requirement that federal firearm licensees agree to sell gun storage and safety devices, a measure that is important in preventing children from having unsupervised access to guns.

On the other hand, I have concerns about legislation that would give the government information about law-abiding gun owners. Such proposals include recent bills that require federal registration of firearms. Registration efforts could threaten the privacy rights of legitimate gun owners.

Gun control efforts must strike a balance between safety and individual rights. Whenever gun control legislation comes before the Senate, I will examine it closely to ensure that it is fair and evenhanded. Rest assured, should such legislation be considered, I will keep your concerns in mind.

Again, thank you for contacting me. If I can be of service in the future, please be in touch.

I hope all is well in Edmonds.

I am glad that she's against registration, but I wasn't aware that she voted for and seems to still support the Brady Bill.
 

G20-IWB24/7

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
886
Location
Tacoma, WA, ,
imported post

That reads like a form letter to me. The fact that she didn't even touch upon the National Park issue tells me that one of her staffers opened your letter, saw that it was from someone pro-gun and replied with the "Pro-gun responding form letter." I'd bet she has one for the anti-gun crowd, patting herself on the back, and a few hundred others for other topics.
 

thewise1

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2007
Messages
383
Location
Moscow, ID
imported post

G20-IWB24/7 wrote:
That reads like a form letter to me. The fact that she didn't even touch upon the National Park issue tells me that one of her staffers opened your letter, saw that it was from someone pro-gun and replied with the "Pro-gun responding form letter." I'd bet she has one for the anti-gun crowd, patting herself on the back, and a few hundred others for other topics.
I'm a software engineer, used to work at the Port of Seattle - we had an application that allowed a single person to sort through and respond to all the feedback, questions, comments, etc using form letters. I'm sure that people like the good senator have much better versions for exactly this purpose.
 

just_a_car

Regular Member
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
2,558
Location
Auburn, Washington, USA
imported post

Thanks for pointing that out. I just replied to her with this:
I am highly offended that you would deem this issue so moot as to use a form letter to respond.

For what I am referencing, please see this letter: http://www.impsec.org/~jhardin/sen_murray-letter1.txt
You should look into at least changing the wording after a few YEARS.

Hopefully you figure out rather quickly that the public will not put up with this crap and expect REAL accountability from their senators. I expect a non-form-letter response from you; anything less is grounds for a published letter to as many media outlets as I can contact.

Good luck,
-JAC (Real Name Here)
Voting Public

Edit: Well, this is interesting, I just received this after replying directly to the email that was sent:
This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification

Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:

Senator@murray.senate.gov

Technical details of permanent failure:
PERM_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 13): 550 5.1.1 <Senator@murray.senate.gov>... User unknown

Yeah... she really cares what we think.
 

John Hardin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2007
Messages
683
Location
Snohomish, Washington, USA
imported post

just_a_car wrote:
I just received this after replying directly to the email that was sent:
This is an automatically generated Delivery Status Notification

Delivery to the following recipient failed permanently:

Senator@murray.senate.gov

Technical details of permanent failure:
PERM_FAILURE: SMTP Error (state 13): 550 5.1.1 <Senator@murray.senate.gov>... User unknown
Yeah... she really cares what we think.
"Never ascribe to malice, that which can be explained by incompetence."
-- Napoleon Bonaparte

If you are going to be communicating with your reps very much (at any level of government), get a fax modem and print-to-fax your letters to their office fax number. That's what I do for all but trivial matters. It does, however, force a little more structure on the communications - i.e. you need to format it as a proper letter, and it takes a little longer than just dashing off an email...

And while a fax has less impact than a genuine letter, it has a lot more impact than an email (primarily because it takes more effort).
 
Top