Warner's response

[mamabearCali]

So this is the reply I got back from Warner. I usually would not post the contents of a private email, but as it is most assuredly a form letter. I thought I would let y'all know what he said.




Thank you for contacting me to share your thoughts on the tragic events in Newtown, Connecticut and your views on gun control.

On December 14, 2012, 20 innocent children and six adults lost their lives in one of the worst, most tragic shootings to ever occur in the United States. As a parent of three daughters, this was the ultimate nightmare. Like the Virginia Tech and Columbine shootings, this tragedy unfolded in what was once regarded as a safe haven free of crime and violence: a school.

I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment constitutional right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. I own firearms and I have an "A" rating from the National Rifle Association. However, I also recognize that, like with many of our constitutional rights, our Second Amendment rights are not without limits. It is unfortunate that a tragedy of this magnitude is what is needed to prompt action, but we need to have a serious discussion on how to best avoid these kinds of mass shootings in the future. The status quo is not acceptable.

I believe our discussion should cover many issues. We can start by improving the existing criminal background check system. Currently, the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) is woefully incomplete, with many states failing to submit available records on persons who may be disqualified from purchasing or possessing firearms. With a more complete background check system, we can keep firearms out of the hands of those who have been deemed unfit to possess them.

In addition, we can take common sense measures such as passing the CAMPUS Safety Act (S. 3682), which I introduced last year. That bill would establish a national center for campus public safety within the Department of Justice to serve as a resource center and assist schools and universities in developing campus safety plans and threat assessment tools. We also need to look at changes to our mental health system so we can provide help to those with dangerous mental illnesses before it is too late. There will not be a single solution, but all of these issues and others need to be part of the conversation and I urge you to continue to express your views as we move forward.

Again, thank you for contacting me. For further information or to sign up for my newsletter please visit my website at http://warner.senate.gov.


Sincerely,
MARK R. WARNER
United States Senator


Thoughts? Flames?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[GeneFrenkle]

I know I'm forgetful, but didn't he say he was for a ban not too long ago? I dunno if he flipped back or not. As Vinnie Barbarino used to say, "I'm soooo confused!"

[mamabearCali]

I am going to send him back a response (not that he will read it). It will be of the nature "the situation has not changed in the slightest, criminals and those intent on criminal acts will find a utensil for their madness. Do not punish the lawful for the acts of he criminally insane." I will add more, but I am still formulating the rest.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[ShotgunBlast]

However, I also recognize that, like with many of our constitutional rights, our Second Amendment rights are not without limits.

Except they are without limit, as defined specifically in the Constitution.

I thought it was a good form letter that doesn't exclude himself from participating in an AWB. At least he identified real things that could be done without infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens so he doesn't have a "AWB is the only solution" mentality.

[GeneFrenkle]

That fom letter content and his intentions may not be the same.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[FiremanBob]

I would follow up by asking if his national center for campus safety will be equally effective at preventing murder as FEMA is at preventing hurricane damage.

[SpanishInquisition]

I got the same cookie cutter crapola from Warner. I'm going to formulate a written response, then I'm gonna call again to express my dissapointment in his response and how he's hiding behind his last grade from the NRA.

I will include a couple of James Madison quotes and remind him that those words describe just who the militia as described by the second amendment are, and that it's sad that my representative in Washington has forgotten the words of one of Virginia's most notable historical residents.

I'm also trying to decide if I should ask why he doesn't invest in a pair of neck bolts for the perfect halloween costume.

[wpoppert]

I got exactly the same response. He really didn't address the points in my letter to him.

[j1mmyd]

It's what he didn't say that's troubling. He's positioning himself for what he will later call "reasonable compromise".

[GeneFrenkle]

@SpanishInquisiton - Don't forget the VA Constituition also talks of the militia, too.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[j1mmyd]

While my wife keeps reminding me to not argue with crazy people, I couldn't resist responding to Sen. Warner's canned response:

Senator Warner,

I was bothered to see in your response the statement that "our Second Amendment rights are not without limits". The Second Amendment itself is actually quite clear on that topic. I'm sure you're well aware of the "...shall not be infringed." portion of the Amendment and have heard the arguments regarding its meaning. Despite its clear proscription against infringement, law abiding gun owners have, for the most part, been tolerant of the current infringements in the name of cooperation and in the hope that these unconstitutional limits might actually contribute to reducing crime. We are, after all, reasonable people.

Now that those already unconstitutional restrictions are being decried as not going far enough by the extremists in the media and so-called progressives, we are likely approaching an major intersection. There is now a sufficient body of evidence available, to any whose opinions are formed by evidence and not emotion, that any reasonable person should conclude that restrictions on lawful citizens are not just ineffective, but counterproductive. They actually result in increased crime and put us and our loved ones at greater risk. As a result, you should expect to see the cooperative spirit of the law-abiding firearms owners erode very rapidly as we begin to demand a return to the complete freedom from infringement the Bill of Rights specifies.

Of all you said in your response, I can agree wholeheartedly with the statement that "The status quo is not acceptable". It is time to not only prevent the further erosion of our rights, but time to restore those already infringed.

I urge you to be courageous and to resist the pressure you will receive from your party and progressive groups. Do not allow the problems of the large population center become ours. Having lived recently in Manhattan and San Francisco I've seen first hand how the unarmed citizens remain defenseless against the fearless armed criminals. We don't need to borrow any of their problems or their so-called solutions in Virginia.

Respectfully,

Jim
Arlington

[SpanishInquisition]

Here's my response to Warner's canned crapola:

Senator Warner,

In your canned response to my last message instructing you to defend my second amendment rights, you tout your "A" rating by the NRA as a shield. Ratings change, Senator. The Constitution does not change except by extraordinary process.

I was dismayed to say the least that you would entertain the idea of limiting my rights due to acts of a criminal. You said "I also recognize that, like with many of our constitutional rights, our Second Amendment rights are not without limits. "

Allow me to refresh your memory regardig limits on Second Amendment rights. I'll use some quotes from some other Virginians that you may recognize:

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356

"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms."
-- Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950]

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788


While not fortunate enough to be a Virginian, Tenche Coxe of Pennsylvania also had sage advice for you to heed, Senator:

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American...[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people."
--Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.


As you can see, sir, the Second Amendment was not intended to be limited by the framers of the Constitution.

I urge you to re-think your position so that it matches the vast bulk of your law-abiding constituancy.

To summarize concisely: DO NOT VOTE TO APPROVE ANY LIMITS ON MY RIGHTS AS GUARANTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION.

[wpoppert]

Nicely done on the responses to that inane form letter! Here's mine:

Mr. Warner:
I received the form letter you sent in response to my letter dated December 18, 2012. I have enclosed the original letter for your reference, since you clearly either did not read it or understand it the first time. I encourage you to give it a try. I think you will find it easy to understand. Aside from the fact that your response did not address the points in my letter at all, I have some other issues with it as well.

In your second paragraph, you state an obvious truth: “Like the Virginia Tech and Columbine shootings, this tragedy unfolded in what was once regarded as a safe haven free of crime and violence: a school.” Unfortunately, you also miss the obvious point: why would anyone regard schools as safe havens free of crime and violence? Because they have signs posted indicating that they are “gun-free zones”? Aren’t we being too timid in our response to such problems? If you are serious about stopping crime, you should show equal concern for all citizens, and support legislation declaring all of the United States a “crime-free zone.” That may sound ridiculous, but it is no more so than thinking that posting signs and passing laws to disarm law-abiding citizens will stop massacres like Virginia Tech, Columbine, or Newtown.

In your third paragraph, you claim: “I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment constitutional right of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. I own firearms and I have an "A" rating from the National Rifle Association. However, I also recognize that, like with many of our constitutional rights, our Second Amendment rights are not without limits.” I strongly suspect that your rating with the NRA has dropped sharply. I also understand that Senator Feinstein owns guns. That does not make her, or you, respectful of the rights of ordinary citizens. As for the extent of the Second Amendment, I urge you to actually read it. It is quite clear when it says “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Do you think it is within your power to arbitrarily decide that this means anything other than what it says? The fact that previous congresses have infringed upon that right does not legitimize your current attempt to do so.

I would greatly appreciate a thoughtful response to the actual questions that I raised in this and my previous letter. I’m sorry if my tone sounds disrespectful, but I’m sure it will improve when I perceive that you have some degree of respect for your constituents.

[XD9SCLCP380]

Awesome reponses guys!



Mark