gogodawgs
Campaign Veteran
imported post
With all due respect Senator:
Your job is to uphold the Constitution of the State of Washington, which in part states:
Declaration of Rights
We, the people of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this constitution.
Section 1 Political Power. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights
From: Regala, Sen. Debbie
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 11:20 AM
To:
Subject: RE: SB6396
Mr. Nick
Dear Mr. Smith,
Thank you for contacting my office to express your concerns about SB 6396, the Assault Weapons Ban. As you know, this bill has both strong supporters and strong opponents.(Actually at the hearing on Jan. 26th there were very few supporters and their arguments were very weak.) Fully automatic weapons, also known as machine guns, have been banned in the U.S. since 1934. (That is actually untrue, in many states it is legal to own a fully automatic weapon, it is just highly regulated.) In 1994, President Clinton signed a federal law that banned 19 types of military-style assault weapons.(Again, this is untrue, none of these weapons were 'military-style'.) The ban expired in 2004 after Congress failed to reauthorize the legislation.
Senate Bill 6396 would prohibit the sale, possession, purchase, transfer or manufacture of assault weapons conversion kits.(Again untrue, the bill says nothing of a 'kit', it speaks of cosmetic items that have nothing to do with the function of the firearm.) The bill defines semi-automatics as a weapon with a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition and a host of other characteristics related to the stock, barrel, muzzle and magazine. (Again this is untrue, 'semi-automatic' weapons are already defined as weapons that auto load the next round.)
There will be exceptions provided for law enforcement, military personnel, federal or state licensed manufacturers and repairers.(Are law enforcement, et al. covered differently in our state constitution? No they are not Section 24 refers to'the people' and not law enforcement.) Present owners may continue to possess their weapons by complying with several requirements: and allowing law enforcement to inspect for compliance.(This would be and outright violation of the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution. Furthermore, the government does not give rights they are there to 'protect and maintain individual rights.') The difference between a semi-automatic and a fully automatic weapon is not significant.(On its face this is an out and out lie, actually they are quite significant and this shows a complete lack of knowledge on the subject.)Many semi-automatic guns sold today can easily be converted to fully automatic operation with a minor after-market modification. (Again this is an out and out lie, if you can site an expert opinion on this issue it would be helpful.)
These weapons are primarily used for violence and crimes, not recreation or hunting. (The US and Washington State Constituion say nothing of recreation or hunting, as a matter of fact both the 2nd Amendment and Section 24 refer to self defense of the person, the state and the people fromgovernment.) They are weapons of choice for many criminals. (Again, this is a lie, less than 1%of these weapons are involved in crime according to the FBI. And I will remind you that Maurice Clemons used a revolver to commit murder against the Lakewood Police officers. A revolver whose technology was available 150 or more years ago.) I will be interested to learn why gun owners believe they need this type of weapon. (Don't try to cloud the issue by saying need, It is the Bill of Rights not the Bill of Needs. Again, both the 2nd Amendment and Section 24 are to protect the individual from a tyrannical government.)
I take the trust constituents place in me very seriously. (I hope that you do. For your information IAM NOT a member of the NRA or other gun organization. I have founded a PTA at a new school in this state and represented it at thestate PTA convention and other PTA members I have spoken with find laws like this a waste of the legislators time.) I will do my best to represent the interest of the 27[suP]th[/suP] Legislative District and keep your input in mind as we deliberate through this challenging issue. (Vote No)
Sincerely,
Sen. Debbie Regala
27[suP]th[/suP] Legislative District
(360) 786-7652
Email: regala.debbie@leg.wa.gov
From: Nick
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 10:30 AM
To: Regala, Sen. Debbie
Subject: SB6396
Hon. Sen. Debbie Ragala,
Senator, in response to the horrible criminal acts of a few really evil men SB 6396 has been introduced.
I urge you to DEFEAT this bill and defend the Washington State Constitution, which states.
SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
The bill does nothing to focus on the faults in our custody system to incarcerate the evil men who perpetrated crimes this past year. Please focus your time on keeping evil behind bars.
Sincerely,
Nick
With all due respect Senator:
Your job is to uphold the Constitution of the State of Washington, which in part states:
Declaration of Rights
We, the people of the State of Washington, grateful to the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this constitution.
Section 1 Political Power. All political power is inherent in the people, and governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and are established to protect and maintain individual rights
From: Regala, Sen. Debbie
Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 11:20 AM
To:
Subject: RE: SB6396
Mr. Nick
Dear Mr. Smith,
Thank you for contacting my office to express your concerns about SB 6396, the Assault Weapons Ban. As you know, this bill has both strong supporters and strong opponents.(Actually at the hearing on Jan. 26th there were very few supporters and their arguments were very weak.) Fully automatic weapons, also known as machine guns, have been banned in the U.S. since 1934. (That is actually untrue, in many states it is legal to own a fully automatic weapon, it is just highly regulated.) In 1994, President Clinton signed a federal law that banned 19 types of military-style assault weapons.(Again, this is untrue, none of these weapons were 'military-style'.) The ban expired in 2004 after Congress failed to reauthorize the legislation.
Senate Bill 6396 would prohibit the sale, possession, purchase, transfer or manufacture of assault weapons conversion kits.(Again untrue, the bill says nothing of a 'kit', it speaks of cosmetic items that have nothing to do with the function of the firearm.) The bill defines semi-automatics as a weapon with a magazine capable of holding more than 10 rounds of ammunition and a host of other characteristics related to the stock, barrel, muzzle and magazine. (Again this is untrue, 'semi-automatic' weapons are already defined as weapons that auto load the next round.)
There will be exceptions provided for law enforcement, military personnel, federal or state licensed manufacturers and repairers.(Are law enforcement, et al. covered differently in our state constitution? No they are not Section 24 refers to'the people' and not law enforcement.) Present owners may continue to possess their weapons by complying with several requirements: and allowing law enforcement to inspect for compliance.(This would be and outright violation of the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution. Furthermore, the government does not give rights they are there to 'protect and maintain individual rights.') The difference between a semi-automatic and a fully automatic weapon is not significant.(On its face this is an out and out lie, actually they are quite significant and this shows a complete lack of knowledge on the subject.)Many semi-automatic guns sold today can easily be converted to fully automatic operation with a minor after-market modification. (Again this is an out and out lie, if you can site an expert opinion on this issue it would be helpful.)
These weapons are primarily used for violence and crimes, not recreation or hunting. (The US and Washington State Constituion say nothing of recreation or hunting, as a matter of fact both the 2nd Amendment and Section 24 refer to self defense of the person, the state and the people fromgovernment.) They are weapons of choice for many criminals. (Again, this is a lie, less than 1%of these weapons are involved in crime according to the FBI. And I will remind you that Maurice Clemons used a revolver to commit murder against the Lakewood Police officers. A revolver whose technology was available 150 or more years ago.) I will be interested to learn why gun owners believe they need this type of weapon. (Don't try to cloud the issue by saying need, It is the Bill of Rights not the Bill of Needs. Again, both the 2nd Amendment and Section 24 are to protect the individual from a tyrannical government.)
I take the trust constituents place in me very seriously. (I hope that you do. For your information IAM NOT a member of the NRA or other gun organization. I have founded a PTA at a new school in this state and represented it at thestate PTA convention and other PTA members I have spoken with find laws like this a waste of the legislators time.) I will do my best to represent the interest of the 27[suP]th[/suP] Legislative District and keep your input in mind as we deliberate through this challenging issue. (Vote No)
Sincerely,
Sen. Debbie Regala
27[suP]th[/suP] Legislative District
(360) 786-7652
Email: regala.debbie@leg.wa.gov
From: Nick
Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 2010 10:30 AM
To: Regala, Sen. Debbie
Subject: SB6396
Hon. Sen. Debbie Ragala,
Senator, in response to the horrible criminal acts of a few really evil men SB 6396 has been introduced.
I urge you to DEFEAT this bill and defend the Washington State Constitution, which states.
SECTION 24 RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself, or the state, shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain or employ an armed body of men.
The bill does nothing to focus on the faults in our custody system to incarcerate the evil men who perpetrated crimes this past year. Please focus your time on keeping evil behind bars.
Sincerely,
Nick