My 2A challange

[blankman]

So Ive been to a few Christmas parties this year, and there has been alot of talk about an AWB. But Iam truely amazed at how many of my friends and collegues who consider themselves 2a advocates do not vote, or write letters to their congress members or senate. So I gave them a challenge that by the end of the year they do exactly that. Then I thought I would do the same here. If this is something you already do, then please let me comend you. But If you are one of the ones that think it does no good, or wont change anything. I put forth the same challenge. Write at least one email or letter to your congress members and your senate members. If you choose not to thats ok but please dont complain if a ban happens. And for those who want to tell me Im wasting my time please dont, because you will just be wasting my time,when you could be writing a letter. So please let your voice be heard, It may not help but it can not hurt. Thank you to all who participate. BM

P.s feel free to challange your friends and family. Or on other sites..

Read More

 

[Mark W.]

I have a suggested text for a letter to members of congress.


Dear Sir or Madam,

You are my state Senator or Congressman. If you vote for any new gun laws that effect law abiding people. I will vote for who ever is you opponent in the next election. I will also contribute CASH money to their campaign, stick a BIG yard sign in my yard and a bumper sticker on my pickup supporting your opponent.


Hope this is simple enough for you to understand.

I AM NOT A CRIMINAL. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO MAKE ME ONE.

 

[blankman]

Thats great, we need as much of that as possible, we must let politicions know

 

[Stomper]

May I suggest you consider your words and write something strong, but not offensive, that is to say personally insulting. Gun owners are already stereotyped as "angry white men" and vindicating that perception will only be a futile waste of your efforts.

This is a war of words, phrases, and perceptions based on forced perspectives artfully crafted by media outlets, and disingenuous politicians. While you may get a warm-fuzzy feeling sticking your literary "boot" up an official's arse, you will only be giving foder to the anti-2A crowd with your own words, making you just another "useful idiot", and a detriment to yourself and the rest of us.

The main thing an oposing politician detest the most is to have a debate in the wide open, with the lights and sound turned up bright and loud, unless they have the advatage... DON'T GIVE THEM CRITICAL ADVANTAGE THAT THEY CRAVE.

Far be it from me to tell any of you "what to do", but you need to present an articulate, RATIONAL argument if you desire an audience with those who legislate the laws that WILL affect our lives. Here is a copy of the recent email I sent to Senate President, Sen. Courtney, and with the exception Ginny Burdick (nothing there to work with... at ALL) all the other Oregon legislators as well:



Dear (Insert title and name here)


I'm sending this email to all the members of the Oregon Legislature, because in light of the recent tragedies in the Clackamas Town Center & the CT school shooting, it has come to my attention that there is a growing movement within the Oregon Legislature to prohibit law abiding CHL holders from carrying their concealed handgun(s) within a public school.

I would start by pointing out that I have 6 children within the public school system, and of course I want them to be safe and feel secure so they can have maximum learning, and quality of life. Since I obviously have "skin in the game", I would ask you to consider what point is there in banning LAW ABIDING CHL holders from carrying inside the public schools? Over the course of the last 3 years or so, I have carried my legally concealed pistol many, many times while attending a school function, or participating in parent-teacher conferences and managed not to be discovered I was carrying, let alone threatened anyone, scared/intimidated anyone, or attempted to shoot the place up. Has there EVER been a case of a CHL holder perpetrating a mass school shooting?

As I'm sure you know CHL applicants have to have documentation on safe firearm use, and pass a background check for disqualifying criminal/civil convictions/arrests, and not have any documented "mental issues". I think the emotional response of, "we have to do something/anything NOW" by prohibiting law abiding CHL holders from carrying in public schools would miss the mark of keeping the children attending our public schools safe.

Case in point: The CT school was already a designated "gun free" zone. CT already has strict gun laws on military-style firearms, registration, etc. Did any of that stop the shooter from perpetrating this horrific crime? Obviously not. Did those laws keep good, law abiding folks from having a gun on those school grounds? Most likely, because there was definitely no credible resistance offered other than locking classroom doors, or teachers heroically (albeit unsuccessfully) shielding some students with their bodies.

Another case in point: the tragic Clackamas Town Center shooting. Supposedly that mall is a "gun free zone". Being private property, that is the proprietor's prerogative. Did it keep the perpetrator from killing two, and wounding a third victim before mercifully killing himself? No, it did not. There is a report that (again, despite the "gun free zone" notices) a CHL holder pointing his pistol at the shooter may have actually caused the shooter to cut his shooting spree short!

The only thing that will be accomplished is letting the "bad guys" know there is now State legislated "kill zones" filled with easily intimidated children, where the odds are exceptionally good that there will be little to no resistance. That's why "gun free zones" like malls, the CT school, the Denver theater, Virginia Tech, and Ft. Hood (very regulated firearms possession policies there) were subjects of tragic mass shootings... each of the perpetrators knew they had a target rich environment to hurt and kill (mostly) unarmed people.

Outlawing, or banning certain firearms or "high capacity" magazines will only ensure the "bad guys" are the ones to most likely have them. Murder is already illegal, but it didn't stop the recent tragedies. Stealing is illegal, but it didn't stop either of the last two perpetrators from taking firearms that didn't belong to them.

I understand emotions are running high, and the need to feel empowered and feel like you have done something to help prevent another crime or tragedy, but I would appeal to your good senses and encourage you to not let law abiding CHL holders be legislated to the level of murders, and terrorists. All you will get is a "good feeling" like you've really accomplished something to make our schools safer, but all the laws ever passed still won't stop those bent on perpetrating deadly evil. Sadly, the only thing most of these types of people understand is the threat of having unexpected, and potentially deadly force visited upon them from a potential victim, and helps prevent them from acting upon their desires.

Please consider this issue in a circumspect manner!


Thank you for your time,


"Stomper Wienerkoff!" (BTW- that's not my real name)
Woodburn, OR

 

[Mark W.]

Why waste all the time writing a long letter to an aid. The congressman or senator is never going to waste time reading a letter from someone they have no vested interest in. A nice well thought out arguement will fall on deaf ears its only how your money is going to vote they care about.

 

[Burt Gummer]

Maybe your 2A friends realize their votes/input do not matter and that all important politicians are bought/pre-selected and are mere puppets for those that put them in office.

Politics/politicians = the illusion of freedom, the pacifier that keeps the slaves happy.

Just sayin', maybe not.

 

[Stomper]

Yeah, I empathize with your sentiments, truly... BUT this could go in one of three possible ways.

1.
Enough of our elected leaders will listen to reason and honor their role in defending our Constitutional rights.

2.
Our names will be noted in these debates and added to the lists of "enemies of the state".

3.
This will only be an exercise in formality before the "reset button" gets hit, and our "dear leaders" will experience the true purpose of the 2A... That is if enough CITIZENS have the stones to STAND.


You cannot hope to have any chance to win over the majority of the public to your views being condescending jack-wagons, otherwise you're no better than the elitist schmucks who would enslave you and yours.

 

[Squidly]

I have a suggested text for a letter to members of congress.


Dear Sir or Madam,

You are my state Senator or Congressman. If you vote for any new gun laws that effect law abiding people. I will vote for who ever is you opponent in the next election. I will also contribute CASH money to their campaign, stick a BIG yard sign in my yard and a bumper sticker on my pickup supporting your opponent.


Hope this is simple enough for you to understand.

I AM NOT A CRIMINAL. DO NOT ATTEMPT TO MAKE ME ONE.

I would consider something short, sweet, and to the point similar to the above quote. Above all, avoid anything that sounds angry or threatening.

Loquacity is a sign of frivolity.

μολὼν λαβέ

 

[Kevatc]

May I suggest you consider your words and write something strong, but not offensive, that is to say personally insulting. Gun owners are already stereotyped as "angry white men" and vindicating that perception will only be a futile waste of your efforts.

This is a war of words, phrases, and perceptions based on forced perspectives artfully crafted by media outlets, and disingenuous politicians. While you may get a warm-fuzzy feeling sticking your literary "boot" up an official's arse, you will only be giving foder to the anti-2A crowd with your own words, making you just another "useful idiot", and a detriment to yourself and the rest of us.

The main thing an oposing politician detest the most is to have a debate in the wide open, with the lights and sound turned up bright and loud, unless they have the advatage... DON'T GIVE THEM CRITICAL ADVANTAGE THAT THEY CRAVE.

Far be it from me to tell any of you "what to do", but you need to present an articulate, RATIONAL argument if you desire an audience with those who legislate the laws that WILL affect our lives. Here is a copy of the recent email I sent to Senate President, Sen. Courtney, and with the exception Ginny Burdick (nothing there to work with... at ALL) all the other Oregon legislators as well:



Dear (Insert title and name here)


I'm sending this email to all the members of the Oregon Legislature, because in light of the recent tragedies in the Clackamas Town Center & the CT school shooting, it has come to my attention that there is a growing movement within the Oregon Legislature to prohibit law abiding CHL holders from carrying their concealed handgun(s) within a public school.

I would start by pointing out that I have 6 children within the public school system, and of course I want them to be safe and feel secure so they can have maximum learning, and quality of life. Since I obviously have "skin in the game", I would ask you to consider what point is there in banning LAW ABIDING CHL holders from carrying inside the public schools? Over the course of the last 3 years or so, I have carried my legally concealed pistol many, many times while attending a school function, or participating in parent-teacher conferences and managed not to be discovered I was carrying, let alone threatened anyone, scared/intimidated anyone, or attempted to shoot the place up. Has there EVER been a case of a CHL holder perpetrating a mass school shooting?

As I'm sure you know CHL applicants have to have documentation on safe firearm use, and pass a background check for disqualifying criminal/civil convictions/arrests, and not have any documented "mental issues". I think the emotional response of, "we have to do something/anything NOW" by prohibiting law abiding CHL holders from carrying in public schools would miss the mark of keeping the children attending our public schools safe.

Case in point: The CT school was already a designated "gun free" zone. CT already has strict gun laws on military-style firearms, registration, etc. Did any of that stop the shooter from perpetrating this horrific crime? Obviously not. Did those laws keep good, law abiding folks from having a gun on those school grounds? Most likely, because there was definitely no credible resistance offered other than locking classroom doors, or teachers heroically (albeit unsuccessfully) shielding some students with their bodies.

Another case in point: the tragic Clackamas Town Center shooting. Supposedly that mall is a "gun free zone". Being private property, that is the proprietor's prerogative. Did it keep the perpetrator from killing two, and wounding a third victim before mercifully killing himself? No, it did not. There is a report that (again, despite the "gun free zone" notices) a CHL holder pointing his pistol at the shooter may have actually caused the shooter to cut his shooting spree short!

The only thing that will be accomplished is letting the "bad guys" know there is now State legislated "kill zones" filled with easily intimidated children, where the odds are exceptionally good that there will be little to no resistance. That's why "gun free zones" like malls, the CT school, the Denver theater, Virginia Tech, and Ft. Hood (very regulated firearms possession policies there) were subjects of tragic mass shootings... each of the perpetrators knew they had a target rich environment to hurt and kill (mostly) unarmed people.

Outlawing, or banning certain firearms or "high capacity" magazines will only ensure the "bad guys" are the ones to most likely have them. Murder is already illegal, but it didn't stop the recent tragedies. Stealing is illegal, but it didn't stop either of the last two perpetrators from taking firearms that didn't belong to them.

I understand emotions are running high, and the need to feel empowered and feel like you have done something to help prevent another crime or tragedy, but I would appeal to your good senses and encourage you to not let law abiding CHL holders be legislated to the level of murders, and terrorists. All you will get is a "good feeling" like you've really accomplished something to make our schools safer, but all the laws ever passed still won't stop those bent on perpetrating deadly evil. Sadly, the only thing most of these types of people understand is the threat of having unexpected, and potentially deadly force visited upon them from a potential victim, and helps prevent them from acting upon their desires.

Please consider this issue in a circumspect manner!


Thank you for your time,


"Stomper Wienerkoff!" (BTW- that's not my real name)
Woodburn, OR

Mr. Wienerkoff, that is a great letter! Plenty of logic that can't be argued with. I would sign my name to it as well.

Kevatc Kielbasakoff.

 

[blankman]

nice letter Stomper. mine have not been as detailed,but I think I got my point accross. for those who feel their voice will not be heard,or are afraid of being on a list. Then please feel free to opt out. What I and others choose to do may have no effect at all, but I will keep trying. I also saw that Kalamamark has a simular Post. good on tou Mark