Click here to contact your congressman

Click here to contact your senators

The following is my own original letter which I have sent to Congressman Pitts and Senators Toomey and Casey of Pennsylvania. Permission is granted to copy, paste and send my letter with your own introduction and signature, and you are of course welcome to use it as a guide for writing your own pro-2A piece...


Dear [insert Congressman or Senator and last name here],

[introduce yourself here - briefly describe your job, certifications, military experience, etc.]


In the near future you will most likely be required to cast a vote either for or against the proposed "Assault Weapons Ban". Casting your vote in favor of such a ban would be a terrible mistake. I strongly urge you to vote against any sort of gun control legislation. Please consider the following points, and reiterate them loudly and clearly to the rest of congress during any debate regarding proposed  gun control or bans of any type:


1. The Second Amendment of our Constitution states, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." This means that the citizenry - the people who you represent - have the right to own, carry and use weapons for security purposes. These security purposes include self-defense, defense of others and defense of freedom. Please note that the Second Amendment makes no reference to hunting or any other "sporting purposes"; it refers to arms that can be effectively implemented against an armed enemy. In modern-day America, these arms are AR-15's, AK-47's, M1A's, Mini-14's, etc - the same firearms that the proposed "Assault Weapons Ban" would criminalize. If you vote in favor of the proposed "Assault Weapons Ban", you will be voting against the U.S. Constitution which you swore an oath to support and defend, and this would be an act of treason.


2. The rights listed in our Constitution's Bill of Rights - including the Second Amendment - were not granted to us by government; the Constitution does not "give us our rights." The Bill of Rights was written by our nation's founders to formally recognize our pre-existing God-given rights and to restrict the government from ever attempting to infringe upon them. The entire Constitution is basically a summary of restrictions regarding what the government of the United States can and cannot do. The government has no authority to revise, restrict or take away any rights listed in the Bill of Rights. Any attempt to do so would be an act of treason.


3. The mainstream media has a very loud voice which undoubtedly has an impact upon American politics, however - the mainstream media represents the values and desires of only a small minority of Americans. Approximately 40 to 50% of American households have at least one firearm, and most gun owners own multiple firearms which would be restricted by the proposed "Assault Weapons Ban". Such a ban would instantly criminalize millions of honest Americans who use their firearms lawfully and responsibly. These people will remember how you voted regarding the proposed "Assault Weapons Ban", and most - if not all - gun owners will consider a vote for such a ban to be an act of treason; to cast your vote in favor of the ban would be to forfeit your future as a politician.


4. The mass-shootings that have occurred in our nation in recent years are tragic and should be a source of national outrage. If we wish to be serious about making our nation's schools safer, then we need to propose legislation that would repeal the Gun Free School Zones Act of 1990 and allow the adults who work in schools to carry firearms for the purpose of defending everyone there. "Gun free school zones" obviously are not gun free - otherwise there would be no school shootings. Since there will continue to be school shootings regardless of what laws are passed, why not at least allow responsible adults who already legally carry a firearm virtually everywhere else to also carry in the schools? They just might stop a murderer and save many lives.


5. The mainstream media, the Obama administration and certain members of congress are using the Sandy Hook massacre as a catalyst to enact legislation that would attempt to disarm all law-abiding Americans. They are not concerned about the safety of our nation's schools - they are concerned about preventing an armed response to future undesirable legislation they plan to enact - whatever that may be. This will not play out in their favor; it will backfire tremendously. Even if the proposed "Assault Weapons Ban" is passed, the Americans targeted by the ban are not going to register or turn in their guns - they will become outlaws before they surrender their firearms. The people who would be willing to register their firearms are those who are strictly sport shooters and have nothing to register. Gun buy-back programs illustrate the kinds of firearms people are willing to turn over to the government: broken Saturday Night Specials and rusty antiques. Americans who own modern handguns and military-pattern rifles are generally not going to register or turn in anything. Consider how much money people are currently spending to arm themselves at the last hour in anticipation of the proposed "Assault Weapons Ban." They are not going to register or surrender those firearms, but they are prepared to use them as intended by the fathers of our nation and as written in our Declaration of Independence: "When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security."

If it is your will to properly represent your constituents, to keep the peace across our land and to continue with a successful political career, then I implore you to loudly reject any new gun control legislation, vote "NO" to the proposed "Assault Weapons Ban", and instead propose sensible congressional actions that will amplify both liberty and personal security for law-abiding citizens while making society a more dangerous place for criminals. I will watch your vote with great interest and gratefully support you in future elections if you defend our Constitution.


Sincerely,

[your name here]



11JAN2013

Dear Mr. Mann:

 

Thank you for contacting me about a possible federal ban on assault weapons. It was good to hear from you.

 

First of all, I thank you for your service to our country. As a veteran, I especially appreciate your sacrifice. 

 

As you know, in response to the tragic shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, Sen. Diane Feinstein announced on December 17, 2012 that, in 2013, she would "introduce a bill to stop the sale, transfer, importation and manufacturing of military-style assault weapons and high-capacity ammunition feeding devices." While she has not yet introduced this bill, she has stated that it would ban the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of: 

 

· certain semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have military characteristics;

· semiautomatic rifles, handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds, firearms with "thumbhole stocks" and "bullet buttons;"

·  large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds.

 

However, the bill is said to grandfather in currently legally-owned weapons, and exempt over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes, antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons. 

 

Like you, I believe that the Second Amendment means what it says. Rest assured, as this and other bills are considered, I will continue to stand for the Constitution. 


Thanks again for sharing your views with me; I will keep them in mind. Please don't hesitate to contact me again if I can be of any service to you or your family.


 

Sincerely,
 
Joe Pitts
Member of Congress


Dear Representative Pitts,
I wrote you an e-mail earlier this past week regarding your vote on any upcoming gun control legislation, including the proposed "Assault Weapons Ban", and your response included the following:
"the bill is said to grandfather in currently legally-owned weapons, and exempt over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes, antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons. Like you, I believe that the Second Amendment means what it says. Rest assured, as this and other bills are considered, I will continue to stand for the Constitution."
Please understand that a vote for this bill is a vote directly against the United States Constitution. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with "hunting or sporting purposes"; the Second Amendment is a restriction upon the federal government that states that ownership and use of firearms by citizens for the purposes of security - implicitly, preventing tyranny in government - cannot be infringed upon by the government. Also, we all know that this bill demands registration, which throughout history and around the world has always led to subsequent confiscation, and which has then most often led to the rise of dictatorial regimes and the extermination of their political/religious/ethnic opponents. Please seriously consider these points and make them known loudly and clearly to the rest of congress.
Thank you!
Sincerely,
Matthew Mann
12JAN2013
Dear Representative Pitts,

I wrote you an e-mail earlier this past week regarding your vote on any upcoming gun control legislation, including the proposed "Assault Weapons Ban", and your response included the following:


"the bill is said to grandfather in currently legally-owned weapons, and exempt over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes, antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons. Like you, I believe that the Second Amendment means what it says. Rest assured, as this and other bills are considered, I will continue to stand for the Constitution."


Please understand that a vote for this bill is a vote directly against the United States Constitution. The Second Amendment has nothing to do with "hunting or sporting purposes"; the Second Amendment is a restriction upon the federal government that states that ownership and use of firearms by citizens for the purposes of security - implicitly, preventing tyranny in government - cannot be infringed upon by the government. Also, we all know that this bill demands registration, which throughout history and around the world has always led to subsequent confiscation, and which has then most often led to the rise of dictatorial regimes and the extermination of their political/religious/ethnic opponents. Please seriously consider these points and make them known loudly and clearly to the rest of congress.


Thank you!
Sincerely,

Matthew Mann


12APR2013
Dear Mr. Mann:
 
Thank you for taking the time to contact me about recent proposals related to guns. I appreciate hearing from you about this issue.  
 
As you know, on December 14, 2012, an individual in Newtown, Connecticut forced his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School and opened fire on teachers and staff in the building. In total, the perpetrator murdered 20 students between the ages of six and seven years old, as well as six adults, many of whom heroically sought to stop the shooter and save the lives of children.  Like many Americans, I was deeply affected by the scope and brutality of this act. The motives that led to this senseless massacre will likely never fully be comprehended. However, I believe that all public officials have a responsibility to work to prevent such an event from occurring again. This incident reflects a complex problem that requires a comprehensive strategy, including funding for law enforcement officers and the mental health care system.  
 
As you may know, I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. Pennsylvania has a fine hunting and sporting tradition, and I will defend the right to bear arms as it is enshrined in our Constitution. I will continue to back the right to bear arms for purposes of self-defense, recreation, sporting and collection. However, I also believe that the attack at Sandy Hook Elementary School highlights very serious dangers posed to public safety by the misuse of certain military-style weapons and technology originally developed for warfare. According to reports, the shooter possessed a military-style semiautomatic weapon and was able to kill many children and adults very quickly. He also allegedly used magazines containing up to 30 rounds of ammunition and carried hund reds of rounds more. After much reflection and careful study of the issue, I have decided to support a federal assault weapons ban as well as legislation restricting high capacity magazines. In light of what occurred at Sandy Hook, these are two measures that could lessen the chances that this will happen again. Before supporting such a law, I would first and foremost ensure that it did not infringe upon the right to bear arms as established by the Second Amendment.  
 
Our Nation has already begun a critical dialogue as we examine what steps must be taken to prevent this type of tragedy in the future. On January 17, 2012, President Obama unveiled a package of proposals to reduce gun violence, which included strengthening the system of background checks, reinstating the assault weapon and high-capacity magazines ban, improving school safety and expanding access to mental health services.
 
On January 24, 2013, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California introduced S. 150, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. This legislation would explicitly permit the possession of affected firearms that were owned prior to the bill’s enactment; firearms that are manually operated; firearms used by military, law enforcement and retired law enforcement; and antique weapons. Further, this legislation lists 2,258 hunting and sporting rifles and shotguns that are entirely exempt from the ban.  
 
This legislation would ban the sale, transfer, manufacturing and importation of all semiautomatic rifles that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one of seven specified military features. S. 150 would further ban semiautomatic pistols that can accept a detachable magazine and have at least one of certain listed military features, as well as ammunition magazines that can accept more than 10 rounds. The Assault Weapons Ban would also regulate the transfer and storage of permitted, grandfathered weapons and allow local law enforcement to use certain federal funds for voluntary gun buyback programs. On March 14, 2013, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary approved the Assault Weapons Ban by a vote of 10-8. The Judiciary Committee also recently approved legislation to expand background checks for gun sales and legislation to punish and deter firearms trafficking.
 
On March 21, 2013, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada introduced S. 649, the Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013. This bill includes three pieces of gun legislation previously reported out of the Judiciary Committee: S. 374, the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013; S. 54, the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013; and S. 146, the School and Campus Safety Enhancements Act of 2013. On April 8, 2013, Senator Reid moved to proceed to S. 649 and begin consideration in the full Senate. Please be assured that as the Senate considers this important legislation, I will have your views in mind.  
 
Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of importance to you.  
 
For more information on this or other issues, I encourage you to visit my website, http://casey.senate.gov. I hope you will find this online office a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.
 
Sincerely,
Bob Casey
United States Senator