TexasCHLforum.com

I've sent an email to all of them as well. Senator Hutchison's office is the only one that has replied back lthough its a form letter response.

All, thanks for the excellent examples. This really does help me since I was too young to experience the effects of the previous ban. Lets keep them coming and hopefully help others in this time of need.

I just sent faxed letters to both senators as well as my US rep's DC offices.

Someone on another site suggested people pledge to contact someone every day for the next 60 days on this issue encouraging them to not pass any new restrictions on freedom.

Sounds like a great idea to me, so yesterday I contacted my own Senators, Representative and the Speaker of the House.

From here on out, I'll be emailing those RINOs and moderates who are most likely to compromise and vote with the hardcore leftists, encouraging them to support freedom.

Today I emailed Sen Scott Brown of MA.

TxLobo wrote:Not to detract from anything that has been done, or said.. I'm trying to figure out where the often used phrase:

Since 1950, there has been only one mass shooting that did not occur in a place that restricts the lawful carrying of concealed weapons.

I can think of several through the years.. ?

John Lott said this in an interview with NPR.

Here is what he said:

and the United States has only one case since 1950 where one of these multiple-victim public shootings, where more than three people have been killed, that's occurred in a place where guns were allowed.

So to clarify, we're talking about 3 or more deaths, in a public shooting. By that criteria, the only one that has happened in a non "gun free zone" according to Lott is the Giffords shooting in Arizona.

Response from Congressman Michael McCaul:

Thank you for contacting me with your thoughts on the ongoing national discussion about gun rights and the 2nd Amendment. I appreciate the benefit of having your views on this matter.

Please know that I am a strong supporter of the 2nd Amendment. I believe that law abiding Americans should be allowed to protect themselves. The right to bear arms is fundamental and must be protected . Furthermore, it is understood that the greatest deterrent to violent crime is a criminal's fear that his intended victim might be armed.

I strongly oppose legislation that infringes on our 2nd Amendment rights. I will keep your views in mind should legislation come before me on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives or in committee for a vote.

Once again, thank you for contacting my office. Also, please feel free to visit my website, http://www.mccaul.house.gov" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; for more information on constituent services, legislative updates, my E-Newsletter, and the ongoing work in Congress. It continues to be a great honor to be allowed to represent you in the United States House of Representative.

Canned, and EXTREMELY non-committal response from KBH...

Dear Friend:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the terrible tragedy in Connecticut. Like all Americans, my thoughts and prayers are with the victims and their families.

As our whole nation grieves, we wait for more information about the killer's motives and means. We all want to do something to halt such senseless killings, but the question is always what law could have stopped an individual apparently so determined to commit such violent and destructive acts.

I join you in the hope that we never again encounter such a tragedy and will certainly keep your thoughts in mind.

Sincerely,
Kay Bailey Hutchison
United States Senator

Hmmm, didn't occur to me till now, but I'm guessing my threat not to vote for her again didn't motivate her much...

My recent letter:
Dear ----------,
Please consider my brief message to point out my opinion on the upcoming weapons ban.

Actually, I'll focus on the high cap issue. A Hi cap magazine and military-style weapons ban is a red herring... it hasn't worked in any fashion. The way I see it, the only logical conclusion that I can come up with is that those wanting to ban high cap magazines and unrealistically eliminate them altogether, are setting a goal to allow only 5, 6 or 7 victims in a shooting spree. This would seem to be a "victory" for them. To me it is not. The realistic goal should be to stop deaths in any and all attacks. We have to figure out a way to stop even a single digit killing event and if that can be achieved then it would be effective against attacks from those crazies even if they have high cap mags. I don't have the right answer at this time but I'm sure that is the path that must be taken.
Ideas to be considered are emergency drills, accessible safe places within the school, escape routes, allowing concealed carry (not necessarily mandating it), better barriers from entry, and more.

Please help to avoid any weapons ban.

Best regards,