My Congresswoman's Weak Response

[Recusant]

This is the letter that I got back from my congresswomen this morning. This is the type of bovine excrement that is being fed to gullible Americans on a daily basis. She needs to actually read the current gun laws, and work to see they are enforced instead of infringing on our rights. I will be sending her a rebuttal letter to be sure. Please pardon my rant. Abigail Spanberger 7th District, Virginia March 19, 2021 Thank you for contacting me regarding recent gun safety legislation being considered in the U.S. House of Representatives. I truly appreciate hearing your thoughts and concerns. I support responsible gun ownership. I am a former federal law enforcement officer who carried a gun every day, and I grew up in a home with firearms and in a family with avid sportsmen. While I support responsible gun ownership, I also believe that action must be taken in response to the ever-increasing number of Americans dying from gun violence every year. These tragedies happen in our schools, offices, shopping centers, and places of worship - and we are long overdue for bipartisan gun safety reform. Currently, federally licensed points of sale are required to conduct a background check before selling a firearm. However, background checks are not required if a gun is purchased from an unlicensed seller - including online or at a gun show. The "Bipartisan Background Checks Act" (H.R.8) would apply the same background check process standard that licensed sellers must utilize to unlicensed sellers, closing this background check loophole. The bipartisan legislation includes reasonable exceptions that allow a person to give a gun as a gift to a family member, provide a gun in cases of immediate self-defense, or loan a firearm for hunting or shooting sports. Studies show that states that require background checks for all firearm purchases have fewer suicides by gun, fewer law enforcement officers shot and killed, and fewer women killed by intimate partners. As such, I voted for H.R.8, the "Bipartisan Background Checks Act," which passed in the House of Representatives with support from Republicans and Democrats on March 11, 2021. To improve the background check system, I also voted for the "Enhanced Background Checks Act" (H.R.1446). While the majority of background checks are completed in minutes, under current federal law, gun sellers are permitted to sell a firearm if the individual's background check does not come back within three business days. Each year, this loophole allows thousands of prohibited buyers to purchase firearms, and it puts our law enforcement officers and communities at risk. This bill would allow for more time to complete those background checks, thereby helping close this loophole. This loophole is also commonly referred to as the "Charleston Loophole," as it allowed Dylann Roof access to the firearm he used to murder nine churchgoers at the Emanuel AME Church in Charleston, South Carolina in 2015. Again, I thank you for writing to my office and sharing your concerns. I hope that you will continue to keep me informed of the issues important to you. Your input helps me better serve as your Representative in Congress. If you would like to stay informed of the latest issues coming out of Washington, you can visit spanberger.house.gov to sign up for my e-newsletter. You can also follow me on Twitter and Instagram at @RepSpanberger and on Facebook at @RepAbigailSpanberger.

​ Sincerely, Abigail Spanberger Member of Congress

 

[benstt]

That's just a form letter. I'd love to say they actually write their constituents but that's not the case.

 

[Wirenut]

I'm still waiting for mine from Tammy Duckworth.
I'm sure she has a plan on how to involve the criminal element

 

[Old_Me]

this was from my congressman.....and he's been wheelchair bound, since he got shot in the police locker room. he was some sort of police cadet?

Dear Mr. xxxxx:

Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control legislation. I appreciate your interest in this matter, and I welcome the opportunity to correspond with you.

I firmly support the Second Amendment and recognize the vast majority of gun owners in the United States are responsible, law-abiding citizens. However, I also believe certain restrictions on firearm use and ownership are justified and appropriate. Determining which restrictions may be necessary has taken on a new urgency in the wake of the recent episodes of gun violence in our country.

As part of the policy response, I support efforts to strengthen mental health services in this country, as well as responsible gun regulations that can improve public safety without infringing on Americans' rights to own guns for lawful purposes. For that reason, in the 117th Congress, I will continue to back bills that increase inspections of gun dealers, with penalties for those who don't keep good records; reinstate the assault weapons ban; require universal background checks for gun purchases; and prohibit large capacity magazines. I have long been troubled by the types of powerful ammunition, weapons and extended gun clips that are so readily available and go well beyond the needs of self-defense or sport. This is even more troubling given the lack of constraints on the purchase of firearms, including instances where individuals can buy weapons without any background check. With this in mind, I supported H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act, which passed the House of Representatives on March 8, 2021, and would require background checks on all gun sales, approximately one-fifth of which do not currently include a background check. This bill would not require background checks for transfers between family members or temporary transfers for recreational purposes.

Some of my constituents have indicated they believe that the enforcement of existing gun laws, combined with better gun safety education, presents the best policy solution. While I agree that this is an important component of our effort to reduce gun violence, I do not believe it is sufficient by itself. I do not believe in banning all firearms. I know that many hunters and sportsmen use their weapons responsibly for recreation every day, and individuals have the right to own a firearm for self-defense. Nonetheless, there are important legislative steps that must be taken to address this public health crisis and prevent incidents like that in Newtown, CT and so many others.

Please be assured I will continue to support common-sense legislation that prevents gun violence while preserving Second Amendment rights. Thank you again for contacting me, and please keep in touch throughout the legislative session.



Sincerely,


Jim Langevin
Member of Congress

 

[ScottJ]

this was from my congressman.....and he's been wheelchair bound, since he got shot in the police locker room. he was some sort of police cadet?

Dear Mr. xxxxx:

Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control legislation. I appreciate your interest in this matter, and I welcome the opportunity to correspond with you.

I firmly support the Second Amendment and recognize the vast majority of gun owners in the United States are responsible, law-abiding citizens. However, I also believe certain restrictions on firearm use and ownership are justified and appropriate. Determining which restrictions may be necessary has taken on a new urgency in the wake of the recent episodes of gun violence in our country.

As part of the policy response, I support efforts to strengthen mental health services in this country, as well as responsible gun regulations that can improve public safety without infringing on Americans' rights to own guns for lawful purposes. For that reason, in the 117th Congress, I will continue to back bills that increase inspections of gun dealers, with penalties for those who don't keep good records; reinstate the assault weapons ban; require universal background checks for gun purchases; and prohibit large capacity magazines. I have long been troubled by the types of powerful ammunition, weapons and extended gun clips that are so readily available and go well beyond the needs of self-defense or sport. This is even more troubling given the lack of constraints on the purchase of firearms, including instances where individuals can buy weapons without any background check. With this in mind, I supported H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act, which passed the House of Representatives on March 8, 2021, and would require background checks on all gun sales, approximately one-fifth of which do not currently include a background check. This bill would not require background checks for transfers between family members or temporary transfers for recreational purposes.

Some of my constituents have indicated they believe that the enforcement of existing gun laws, combined with better gun safety education, presents the best policy solution. While I agree that this is an important component of our effort to reduce gun violence, I do not believe it is sufficient by itself. I do not believe in banning all firearms. I know that many hunters and sportsmen use their weapons responsibly for recreation every day, and individuals have the right to own a firearm for self-defense. Nonetheless, there are important legislative steps that must be taken to address this public health crisis and prevent incidents like that in Newtown, CT and so many others.

Please be assured I will continue to support common-sense legislation that prevents gun violence while preserving Second Amendment rights. Thank you again for contacting me, and please keep in touch throughout the legislative session.



Sincerely,


Jim Langevin
Member of Congress

From his Bio page:

"...At the age of 16, Langevin was injured while working with the Warwick Police Department in the Boy Scout Explorer program. A gun accidentally discharged and a bullet struck Langevin, leaving him paralyzed."

 

[Old_Me]

From his Bio page:

"...At the age of 16, Langevin was injured while working with the Warwick Police Department in the Boy Scout Explorer program. A gun accidentally discharged and a bullet struck Langevin, leaving him paralyzed."

yeah, too many dang years ago, and at my age, can't recall much, other than he got shot in the locker room.

 

[ScottJ]

yeah, too many dang years ago, and at my age, can't recall much, other than he got shot in the locker room.

You got my curiosity up, so I looked it up. Also wanted to see which side of the aisle he works from. Could've saved myself some time and made a conclusion just from his (staff's) response.

 

[Recusant]

As part of the policy response, I support efforts to strengthen mental health services in this country, as well as responsible gun regulations that can improve public safety without infringing on Americans' rights to own guns for lawful purposes. For that reason, in the 117th Congress, I will continue to back bills that increase inspections of gun dealers, with penalties for those who don't keep good records; reinstate the assault weapons ban; require universal background checks for gun purchases; and prohibit large capacity magazines. I have long been troubled by the types of powerful ammunition, weapons and extended gun clips that are so readily available and go well beyond the needs of self-defense or sport. This is even more troubling given the lack of constraints on the purchase of firearms, including instances where individuals can buy weapons without any background check. With this in mind, I supported H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act, which passed the House of Representatives on March 8, 2021, and would require background checks on all gun sales, approximately one-fifth of which do not currently include a background check. This bill would not require background checks for transfers between family members or temporary transfers for recreational purposes.

Some of my constituents have indicated they believe that the enforcement of existing gun laws, combined with better gun safety education, presents the best policy solution. While I agree that this is an important component of our effort to reduce gun violence, I do not believe it is sufficient by itself. I do not believe in banning all firearms. I know that many hunters and sportsmen use their weapons responsibly for recreation every day, and individuals have the right to own a firearm for self-defense. Nonetheless, there are important legislative steps that must be taken to address this public health crisis and prevent incidents like that in Newtown, CT and so many others.

Please be assured I will continue to support common-sense legislation that prevents gun violence while preserving Second Amendment rights. Thank you again for contacting me, and please keep in touch throughout the legislative session.



Sincerely,


Jim Langevin
Member of Congress

Mr. Langevin says the he doesn't want to infringe on Americans' rights to own guns for lawful purposes, and then in the next sentence says he wants to reinstate the assault weapons ban; require universal background checks for gun purchases; and prohibit large capacity magazines. To me these two statements seem to contradict the other. He then goes on to say he's troubled by the types of powerful ammunition, weapons and extended gun clips that are so readily available and go well beyond the needs of self-defense or sport. I believe he slipped up here when he mentions "weapons". All guns can be weapons, so is he troubled by firearms in general. Magazines that he says are extended are extended from what? Can he tell us when a 10 round magazine ever been standard in an AR15? How can he predict what any of us need when in comes to self-defense or sport? He should acquaint himself with ammo from WWI and WWII to truly understand "powerful". I have to wonder who is writing these responses. Looks like the anti-gun folks have made their propaganda available and told these folks what to say. It's good to post these congressional responses so we can poke holes in their arguments.

 

[Funwithfuel]

I'm still waiting for mine from Tammy Duckworth.
I'm sure she has a plan on how to involve the criminal element

I haven't heard or read anything from those two traitors. The only one I do receive propaganda from is Rino Kinzinger. "I appreciate your position, thank you for blah-blah-blah, but I don't care so i vote with my commie friends to strip you of your rights." That's all I ever get until I replied once to say I won't support any future endeavors and will firmly support whoever runs against him.

 

[dbarnes42]

Am I missing something or can they not even agree on the day it was passed? Spanberger said "As such, I voted for H.R.8, the "Bipartisan Background Checks Act," which passed in the House of Representatives with support from Republicans and Democrats on March 11, 2021." and then Langevin said "With this in mind, I supported H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act, which passed the House of Representatives on March 8, 2021"

 

[krunchnik]

What I find to be a common truth is the fact that common sense is no longer very common.
They always say that they work towards the goal of common sense gunlaws-we know what they mean is that any law that will stick to the outhouse wall is the one they support-just do something-anything-even if it doesn't actually accomplish a darn thing.
All to often it is heard that they support our 2ND Amendment when in all reality it's a complete lie and they know it.

 

[jumpinjoe]

Excerpted from the letter received by Old_Me from his congressional representative .......

He first writes this: "I firmly support the Second Amendment and recognize the vast majority of gun owners in the United States are responsible, law-abiding citizens." 'I firmly support' sounds to me like he supports the 2nd amendment as it's written, including the part about 'no infringement'. That's a good thing!

But then he goes on to say this: "However, I also believe certain restrictions on firearm use and ownership are justified and appropriate." I just have to ask how is it one can "firmly" support the second amendment, but also "believe in restrictions (yep, that means infringement) on firearm ownership."

The second amendment clearly says "Shall not be infringed." I would ask him if he doesn't accept that a 'restriction' is in fact an 'infringement'. Is this simply an oxymoron, or is it more in the line of 'politician doublespeak'?

It seems to me if they are serious about reducing crimes wherein firearms are used, then make it a violation of law to intentionally shoot a firearm at another human being ...... Oh wait! That's already a law! Well then make it a violation of law to intentionally use a firearm in a robbery...... Oh wait! That's already a law too! Well then how about knowingly transferring a firearm to a known criminal, crazy, or druggie! ..... Well damn, that's already a law as well. Maybe it would be wise to actually enforce these laws already existing.

It would seem logical to most rationally thinking folks, that the gun is not the problem. That being the case, then stop trying to restrict and/or regulate (infringe) what type or size of firearm I can "keep and bear". Punish me or any other for the illegal use and/or misuse of any firearm regardless of size or type........ BECAUSE IT AIN'T THE GUN, STUPID!

We typically use that logic regarding the illegal use/misuse of motor vehicles, baseball bats, hammers, butcher knives, etc, etc. But we don't dream up feel good legislation to restrict what type and/or size of any of these items I can 'keep and bear'. BECAUSE IT AIN'T ANY OF THESE ITEMS EITHER STUPID!

 

[TidalWave]

this was from my congressman.....and he's been wheelchair bound, since he got shot in the police locker room. he was some sort of police cadet?

Dear Mr. xxxxx:

Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control legislation. I appreciate your interest in this matter, and I welcome the opportunity to correspond with you.

I firmly support the Second Amendment and recognize the vast majority of gun owners in the United States are responsible, law-abiding citizens. However, I also believe certain restrictions on firearm use and ownership are justified and appropriate. Determining which restrictions may be necessary has taken on a new urgency in the wake of the recent episodes of gun violence in our country.

As part of the policy response, I support efforts to strengthen mental health services in this country, as well as responsible gun regulations that can improve public safety without infringing on Americans' rights to own guns for lawful purposes. For that reason, in the 117th Congress, I will continue to back bills that increase inspections of gun dealers, with penalties for those who don't keep good records; reinstate the assault weapons ban; require universal background checks for gun purchases; and prohibit large capacity magazines. I have long been troubled by the types of powerful ammunition, weapons and extended gun clips that are so readily available and go well beyond the needs of self-defense or sport. This is even more troubling given the lack of constraints on the purchase of firearms, including instances where individuals can buy weapons without any background check. With this in mind, I supported H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act, which passed the House of Representatives on March 8, 2021, and would require background checks on all gun sales, approximately one-fifth of which do not currently include a background check. This bill would not require background checks for transfers between family members or temporary transfers for recreational purposes.

Some of my constituents have indicated they believe that the enforcement of existing gun laws, combined with better gun safety education, presents the best policy solution. While I agree that this is an important component of our effort to reduce gun violence, I do not believe it is sufficient by itself. I do not believe in banning all firearms. I know that many hunters and sportsmen use their weapons responsibly for recreation every day, and individuals have the right to own a firearm for self-defense. Nonetheless, there are important legislative steps that must be taken to address this public health crisis and prevent incidents like that in Newtown, CT and so many others.

Please be assured I will continue to support common-sense legislation that prevents gun violence while preserving Second Amendment rights. Thank you again for contacting me, and please keep in touch throughout the legislative session.



Sincerely,


Jim Langevin
Member of Congress

Talk about mealy-mouthing....
I would rather he wrote me back and simply said “I do not agree with your concerns and I support increased gun control...”

All I really want to know about my reps is Are you voting yes or no on ________ issue? And is it the will of the citizens you are supposedly representing?
Let’s get back to the bottom line of things, please....

 

[DaveHissem]

Talk about mealy-mouthing....
I would rather he wrote me back and simply said “I do not agree with your concerns and I support increased gun control...”

All I really want to know about my reps is Are you voting yes or no on ________ issue? And is it the will of the citizens you are supposedly representing?
Let’s get back to the bottom line of things, please....

I think TidalWave hit the nail on the head. These people WE elect to represent us, WE need to remind them that they are OUR representatives meant to act on OUR needs and wants. Instead they consider themselves our leaders and decided they know what's best for us. Remind them they are supposed to speak for you, they are YOUR voice. Time to start over! Drain the swamp, instill term limits, start over. Get the predators out of control. Sorry for the rant, It just makes me mad to see what we have become...

 

[BobM]

Mr. Langevin says the he doesn't want to infringe on Americans' rights to own guns for lawful purposes, and then in the next sentence says he wants to reinstate the assault weapons ban; require universal background checks for gun purchases; and prohibit large capacity magazines. To me these two statements seem to contradict the other. He then goes on to say he's troubled by the types of powerful ammunition, weapons and extended gun clips that are so readily available and go well beyond the needs of self-defense or sport. I believe he slipped up here when he mentions "weapons". All guns can be weapons, so is he troubled by firearms in general. Magazines that he says are extended are extended from what? Can he tell us when a 10 round magazine ever been standard in an AR15? How can he predict what any of us need when in comes to self-defense or sport? He should acquaint himself with ammo from WWI and WWII to truly understand "powerful". I have to wonder who is writing these responses. Looks like the anti-gun folks have made their propaganda available and told these folks what to say. It's good to post these congressional responses so we can poke holes in their arguments.

Sounds to me like is marching to own drummer, sounds hypocritical and seems to not be able to comprehend what infringement means....and why? Typical political non stance behavior serving only themselves?

 

[Old_Me]

Excerpted from the letter received by Old_Me from his congressional representative .......

He first writes this: "I firmly support the Second Amendment and recognize the vast majority of gun owners in the United States are responsible, law-abiding citizens." 'I firmly support' sounds to me like he supports the 2nd amendment as it's written, including the part about 'no infringement'. That's a good thing!

But then he goes on to say this: "However, I also believe certain restrictions on firearm use and ownership are justified and appropriate." I just have to ask how is it one can "firmly" support the second amendment, but also "believe in restrictions (yep, that means infringement) on firearm ownership."

The second amendment clearly says "Shall not be infringed." I would ask him if he doesn't accept that a 'restriction' is in fact an 'infringement'. Is this simply an oxymoron, or is it more in the line of 'politician doublespeak'?

It seems to me if they are serious about reducing crimes wherein firearms are used, then make it a violation of law to intentionally shoot a firearm at another human being ...... Oh wait! That's already a law! Well then make it a violation of law to intentionally use a firearm in a robbery...... Oh wait! That's already a law too! Well then how about knowingly transferring a firearm to a known criminal, crazy, or druggie! ..... Well damn, that's already a law as well. Maybe it would be wise to actually enforce these laws already existing.

It would seem logical to most rationally thinking folks, that the gun is not the problem. That being the case, then stop trying to restrict and/or regulate (infringe) what type or size of firearm I can "keep and bear". Punish me or any other for the illegal use and/or misuse of any firearm regardless of size or type........ BECAUSE IT AIN'T THE GUN, STUPID!

We typically use that logic regarding the illegal use/misuse of motor vehicles, baseball bats, hammers, butcher knives, etc, etc. But we don't dream up feel good legislation to restrict what type and/or size of any of these items I can 'keep and bear'. BECAUSE IT AIN'T ANY OF THESE ITEMS EITHER STUPID!

yeah, the A-Typical political double talk. i think (my opinion only) is that he to this day, holds a grudge on the cop, that accidently shot him..

i "think" as i said in a previous post, he was in the locker room that fateful day. the cop was either showing another cop a gun he bought, or maybe his new service gun at the time. then "it went off"..

well, i cannot recall how gun safety's were installed on guns back in those days, but WE ALL KNOW that the best safety, is to keep your dang finger OFF the trigger, as how many guns just "go off" while holding them.??

as a result, the congressman has been wheelchair bound since then. yet, he was in the scouts (i thought a police cadet), meaning he must have at ONE time decided to become a cop himself.

now since that fateful day, his dreams were dashed, as i see it, and to this day, he holds that grudge. by speaking out against gun rights, 2nd amendment rights, to punish all those who own guns.

that, and of course, he's a democrat.....

i can assure you, i vote against him in EACH election. problem here though, is that New England is staunch democratic land.

a politician can do NO WRONG, and get re-elected each election.

and we ALL KNOW, that democrats, NEVER DO anything wrong.......(sarcastic remark)

 

[BobM]

yeah, the A-Typical political double talk. i think (my opinion only) is that he to this day, holds a grudge on the cop, that accidently shot him..

i "think" as i said in a previous post, he was in the locker room that fateful day. the cop was either showing another cop a gun he bought, or maybe his new service gun at the time. then "it went off"..

well, i cannot recall how gun safety's were installed on guns back in those days, but WE ALL KNOW that the best safety, is to keep your dang finger OFF the trigger, as how many guns just "go off" while holding them.??

as a result, the congressman has been wheelchair bound since then. yet, he was in the scouts (i thought a police cadet), meaning he must have at ONE time decided to become a cop himself.

now since that fateful day, his dreams were dashed, as i see it, and to this day, he holds that grudge. by speaking out against gun rights, 2nd amendment rights, to punish all those who own guns.

that, and of course, he's a democrat.....

i can assure you, i vote against him in EACH election. problem here though, is that New England is staunch democratic land.

a politician can do NO WRONG, and get re-elected each election.

and we ALL KNOW, that democrats, NEVER DO anything wrong.......(sarcastic remark)

As weird as it may sound to some, may be closer to truth than fiction?

 

[Bassbob]

The thing you have to remember is that these idiot politicians ( What's with the gal who says she was a federal officer, but then goes on to say that you can currently buy guns online with no FFL or BGC ?) is that they actually are representing their constituents. If you live in Maryland or DC or NY or wherever, you live in a place that is inundated with leftists who will repeatedly elect leftists until the end of time. I live in a state with a long running red super majority. When leftists around here whine about not being represented I tell them to move across the river to the People's Republik of Illinois.

You really have 3 choices. Move someplace where like minded people live, change the opinions of the people who live near you or deal with your elected politicians who represent the majority of the people where you live.

 

[Funwithfuel]

All my komrads here in the people's republic of Illinois will back me up on this. In Illinois, it doesn't matter how you vote. The urban sprawl and the unions dictate that this state remains blue. Never mind the fact that the majority of the map is red.
As has been stated so many times before, we have some of the most oppressive gun laws in the country. All this and yet Chicago makes headlines every nice weekend. So much so , someone put up a website that keeps tally on shootings and murders. There's a clear indication of what the problem is, but, it can't be addressed. It's easier to demonize the firearm and those who want to keep them.
Www.Heyjackass.com

 

[Bassbob]

All my komrads here in the people's republic of Illinois will back me up on this. In Illinois, it doesn't matter how you vote. The urban sprawl and the unions dictate that this state remains blue. Never mind the fact that the majority of the map is red.
As has been stated so many times before, we have some of the most oppressive gun laws in the country. All this and yet Chicago makes headlines every nice weekend. So much so , someone put up a website that keeps tally on shootings and murders. There's a clear indication of what the problem is, but, it can't be addressed. It's easier to demonize the firearm and those who want to keep them.
Www.Heyjackass.com

Absolutely true. I have plenty of friends and co-workers who live in the southern region over there. I have close friends who live in Springfield. Belleville, Edwardsville ( My niece goes to school there - GO COUGARS- and is currently the leading scorer in the OVC and the second leading in goals per game in the entirety of NCAA Women's Soccer - she is studying forensics and is being recruited by the FBI), Milstadt, Fairview, Dupo, Carbondale, Cahokia, etc.. I will drive hundreds of miles out of my way to avoid even driving through Illinois.

The Left in STL and KC have always tried to do the same thing. They passed something called " Clean Missouri", which was repealed last year and was an attempt to redistrict the state in such a way that every district had equal representation from republicans and democrats. It would have put towns that were hundreds of miles apart in the same district while some towns that were right next to each other would be in different districts. Basically it was a smaller version of what the house democrats are trying to do with the " For the people" BS. A blatant power grab by the dems. Fortunately the rural conservatives in my state all come out in force to vote, so it was repealed and my state enjoys a veto proof republican majority. Hence why we are on the cusp of passing the most intense 2A sanctuary law in the history of the US called The Second Amendment Preservation Act. It will make it a crime to enforce any unconstitutional gun control laws past present and future and LEO or elected officials who aid the feds in enforcing any unconstitutional gun control laws will be heavily fined and permanently barred from working in the state of Missouri.