email eernest2@yahoo.com
EMERGENCY ALERT --- ATTENTION CONN GUN OWNERS
TUES MAY 29, WEN MAY30 AND CONTINUING THROUGH THE WEEK IF NECESSARY, prehaps including Sat June 2,2001 the Ct House of Reps will vote on the 100+ gun add on to the conn assault rifle ban.
We ask that every Conn gun owner call their state representatives
toll free 1-800-842-8267 House Democrats and
1-800-842-1423 House Republicans and politly ask their
house reps to consider voting no--
OPPOSE SB1402 Ct Assault Rifle Ban.
Also,please call your state rep at his residence and leave a message on his answering machine or with whoever answers the phone.
We need to pull out all the stops and flood our Ct state reps phones and emails and snail mails with opposition to the assault rifle ban.
Some of us are going up to the Legislative Office Building on tues and/or wed& thur if necessary and I am providing information about this in the following posts
to this topic.
We must stop this now or the VERY LAST ASSAULT RIFLE
and the VERY LAST HIGH CAPACITY MAGIZINE will be sold in Conn on Sept30,2001
"MUCH MORE INFO FOLLOWS'"
EERNEST2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: legis@gunsafe.org | Block Address | Add to Address Book
To: legis@gunsafe.org
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 08:32:40 -0400
Subject: Sample letters
Reply-to: legis@gunsafe.org
Organization: Gunsafe (www.gunsafe.org)
FYI the Governor's e-mailbox is FULL. We hope
the reason is our letters about the semi-auto ban.
You can also snail-mail the Governor:
Gov. John Rowland
210 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06106
--------------
Here are some good letters forwarded by Gunsafe
members:
Dear Rep. Prelli:
As a Republican and a voter from your District, I
am writing to ask that
when the House leadership brings SB 1402 to the
House floor this week,
that you VOTE AGAINST IT! There are numerous
reasons to do so, some
relating to its subject matter and some not.
First, as you may know, this bill began as a bill
to have a single
handgun permit statewide. That was good. When
Messrs. Jepsen, Lawlor, and
Blumenthal were unable to convince anyone in the
Public Safety Committee of
the
merits of their so-called "assault weapons ban,"
they decided to use
what has under current Democratic "leadership"
become a tried, true and
tired formula: They added it to another bill at
the end of the session,
without hearing or notice. As a result, the
"single permit bill"
morphed into the "assault weapons ban." The
legerdemain involved here
should be of concern not just to those affected
by the proposed law
itself, but to anyone who is concerned about open
government. This
alone is reason enough to vote AGAINST this bill.
Second, the law is substantively flawed. If you
review the record from
the Committee hearing, there was no factual
support for it, and when
quizzed, its sponsors and Mr. Blumenthal admitted
there was no evidence
of a problem to be fixed. Public Safety
Commissioner Arthur Spada and Chief
State's Attorney Jack Bailey also insisted that
"assault weapons" were not a
problem in Connecticut. Instead, it is clear
that this law will not
only do nothing to solve problems with criminal
violence, but it is likely to
make instant felons of many law-abiding citizen
firearms owners who own the
listed rifles for sport.
In reality, the firearms proposed to be banned
are owned by many for
target shooting, hunting and collecting, far
beyond merely Olympic
shooting (and thus the amendment to permit
Olympic shooters is a
strawman). No one has cited any factual (as
opposed to emotional) basis
to ban them. If the concern is their accuracy
and ease of accurate
shooting, this should be a reason to support
them, not ban them!
Moreover, to limit the ability to sell or
transfer them is to seriously
impact their value, thereby constituting an
unconstitutional taking without
compensation.
I would ask that when this measure
is brought up, you inquire of the leadership why,
if they believed in
the merits of this bill, they decided to
introduce it in the "midnight
madness" method that they did, rather than as
part of a full public
debate and hearing? And, I would ask that you
consider voting against
it, both because of its procedural and
substantive flaws.
PLEASE talk to your fellow Representatives of
both parties and convince them
that this new bill is a SHAM, and doesn't deserve
to see the light of day. I
trust that you will vote the right way for all of
us on this bill--VOTE NO!
Thanks so much, Mr. Prelli!
Sincerely,
-------------
Dear Governor Rowland:
I am writing you to urge a VETO of the
ill-advised “assault
weapons†ban, should this onerous piece of
legislation be passed by the House
this week. (This was SB 1402, which passed in
the Senate lastweek.)
This bill has no basis in logic or fact,
and it will have no effect on
violent criminals. The bill targets lawfully
owned rifles, owned by
responsible, sensible, law-abiding citizens.
Even Commissioner of Public
Safety Arthur Spada and Chief State's Attorney
Jack Bailey insisted in
Committee hearings that these rifles were NOT a
problem in Connecticut!
The bill is a political sham, designed to
promote Senator Jepsen's run
against you for Governor.
Please VETO this bill and ask the
legislature to get serious about
fighting crime, not Connecticut's good citizens.
We, who helped elect you,
have faith that you will VETO this bill in the
interest of Constitutional
freedom.
We thank you very much for your help!
Sincerely,
-------------
Dear Representative Gerratana:
My wife and I live at xxx xxxxxx Rd., New
Britain. We have
lived here for many years and have been, and
continue to be, active in
the community. Xxxxxxx was a docent at the Art
Museum for many years
and I was a director of the New Britain Symphony.
As you obviously are,
we are concerned about safety and crime. We
believe that, for several
reasons, SB 1402, dealing with so called "assault
weapons," will do
nothing to increase safety and may make
inadvertent felons out of
otherwise law abiding citizens.
While there is a lot of press about so-called
"assault weapons," this is
merely a term devised by the media to apply to
certain firearms,
virtually none of which have been used in crimes.
When this Bill was
before the Senate Public Safety Committee,
neither Senator Jepsen,
Representative Lawlor nor Attorney General
Blumenthal could provide any
substantiating date to support this bill. In
fact, the Office of
Legislative Research studied this issue and came
to the conclusion that
these firearms are not a factor in crime.
If crime is down, it is for the same reasons
that, at times, crime is
"up." We are now enjoying excellent economic
times. The generation of
"youths" who had committed a great many crimes
has now become a
generation of young adults. We have more police
officers and more
community policing.
Any firearm possessed by a criminal, drug addict
or mentally disturbed
individual is one too many in the wrong hands.
Firearms in the hands of
responsible, law abiding adults are no threat to
public order. To the
contrary, firearms owned by women prevent
approximately 5,000 rapes
daily nationwide. They are used defensively in
this country between 1
and 2 million times each year. The real "crime
problem" is criminals
possessing firearms. By definition, criminals do
not obey laws. It is
already a Federal felony for a convicted criminal
to even posess a
firearm. A law enacted in the last session goes
a very long way toward
taking guns out of the hands of criminals.
The Firearms Task Force has resulted in the
arrest of over 40 criminals
and the confiscation of over 350 guns. This law,
and other similar
programs such as "Operation Exile," are effective
in combating crime.
Enacting statutes targeting a class of firearms
which even the Bill's
supporters admit are not a factor in crime does
nothing more than give
some people with no knowledge of the real
problems a sense of "good
feeling."
I would respectfully urge you to consider voting
against SB 1402 and in
favor of increased funding for the firearms task
force. I appreciate
your taking the time to read this letter. If you
need further
information, or wish to discuss this, please call
me at work at xxxxxxx
or at home at xxxxxxx.
Thank you,
-------------
Dear ,
I am writing with concern over SB1402 which
comes up for vote Tuesday or Wednesday this week. I
attended the Public Safety Committee
meeting in March, where there were not enough
votes to pass SB1405 and it was not voted on. At
that time the Public Safety Commissioner
said when asked that there were no problems with
"Assault Weapons" in Connecticut. There can only
be one conclusion. Political Gain. The existing
laws and instant check system are doing what they
were intended.
We have a task force in the State of Connecticut
that has had much success with controlling
illegal guns and should be supported. We don't
need any new gun laws.
Thank you for your time reading this.
Sincereley
-------------
Dear Representative
I am opposed to any expansion of the
"Assault Weapon" laws. I am opposed
to any other attempts at gun control, including
the action taken by the
Connecticut State Senate on 24 May 2001.
This Action revived the text of the
"Assault Weapons" Bill (Raised Bill
No. 1405) which died in committee in March 2001.
The Senate took the text
of this dead bill, and inserted it as an
amendment into a different bill SB
1402, then deleted the text of the original bill.
This legislative
"sleight of hand", reviving a dead bill as an
amendment to a bill, is very
troubling to me, as I see it as being used to
thwart the will of the people
as expressed in the public hearing in March, and
by the action of the
Public Safety Committee.
Please vote "no" to any more gun bans.
This Bill is an incremental expansion of
outright gun bans, one gun at a
time. This bill will not reduce the amount of
crime on our streets. There
is no documentation that connects SB 1402 to ANY
reduction in crime. At
the public hearing on 20 March 2001, when asked
specifically for the data
that supported their proclamations that "Assault
Weapons" were a crime
problem, Senator Jepsen, Rep. Lawlor, and Atty.
General Blumenthal could
not give, and did not have ANY data to enter as
evidence. Their
assertions, and reasons for this bill are made up
of pure fiction, and
supported by nothing more than their personal
ambition.
A government, that bans the private
person (John Q. Public) from owning
firearms, is headed in the "wrong direction".
I think we can all agree that Hitler,
Stalin, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, and
others are NOT an example of a good government,
yet each of them enacted
"gun control", and "gun bans" upon their
population when they were in
control. I don't think we can or should head down
that road.
Please vote against this bill when it
comes to the House.
Crime control, not Gun Control.
Sincerely,
[Edited by ernest2 on 05-28-2001 at 08:11 PM]
EMERGENCY ALERT --- ATTENTION CONN GUN OWNERS
TUES MAY 29, WEN MAY30 AND CONTINUING THROUGH THE WEEK IF NECESSARY, prehaps including Sat June 2,2001 the Ct House of Reps will vote on the 100+ gun add on to the conn assault rifle ban.
We ask that every Conn gun owner call their state representatives
toll free 1-800-842-8267 House Democrats and
1-800-842-1423 House Republicans and politly ask their
house reps to consider voting no--
OPPOSE SB1402 Ct Assault Rifle Ban.
Also,please call your state rep at his residence and leave a message on his answering machine or with whoever answers the phone.
We need to pull out all the stops and flood our Ct state reps phones and emails and snail mails with opposition to the assault rifle ban.
Some of us are going up to the Legislative Office Building on tues and/or wed& thur if necessary and I am providing information about this in the following posts
to this topic.
We must stop this now or the VERY LAST ASSAULT RIFLE
and the VERY LAST HIGH CAPACITY MAGIZINE will be sold in Conn on Sept30,2001
"MUCH MORE INFO FOLLOWS'"
EERNEST2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: legis@gunsafe.org | Block Address | Add to Address Book
To: legis@gunsafe.org
Date: Mon, 28 May 2001 08:32:40 -0400
Subject: Sample letters
Reply-to: legis@gunsafe.org
Organization: Gunsafe (www.gunsafe.org)
FYI the Governor's e-mailbox is FULL. We hope
the reason is our letters about the semi-auto ban.
You can also snail-mail the Governor:
Gov. John Rowland
210 Capitol Avenue
Hartford, CT 06106
--------------
Here are some good letters forwarded by Gunsafe
members:
Dear Rep. Prelli:
As a Republican and a voter from your District, I
am writing to ask that
when the House leadership brings SB 1402 to the
House floor this week,
that you VOTE AGAINST IT! There are numerous
reasons to do so, some
relating to its subject matter and some not.
First, as you may know, this bill began as a bill
to have a single
handgun permit statewide. That was good. When
Messrs. Jepsen, Lawlor, and
Blumenthal were unable to convince anyone in the
Public Safety Committee of
the
merits of their so-called "assault weapons ban,"
they decided to use
what has under current Democratic "leadership"
become a tried, true and
tired formula: They added it to another bill at
the end of the session,
without hearing or notice. As a result, the
"single permit bill"
morphed into the "assault weapons ban." The
legerdemain involved here
should be of concern not just to those affected
by the proposed law
itself, but to anyone who is concerned about open
government. This
alone is reason enough to vote AGAINST this bill.
Second, the law is substantively flawed. If you
review the record from
the Committee hearing, there was no factual
support for it, and when
quizzed, its sponsors and Mr. Blumenthal admitted
there was no evidence
of a problem to be fixed. Public Safety
Commissioner Arthur Spada and Chief
State's Attorney Jack Bailey also insisted that
"assault weapons" were not a
problem in Connecticut. Instead, it is clear
that this law will not
only do nothing to solve problems with criminal
violence, but it is likely to
make instant felons of many law-abiding citizen
firearms owners who own the
listed rifles for sport.
In reality, the firearms proposed to be banned
are owned by many for
target shooting, hunting and collecting, far
beyond merely Olympic
shooting (and thus the amendment to permit
Olympic shooters is a
strawman). No one has cited any factual (as
opposed to emotional) basis
to ban them. If the concern is their accuracy
and ease of accurate
shooting, this should be a reason to support
them, not ban them!
Moreover, to limit the ability to sell or
transfer them is to seriously
impact their value, thereby constituting an
unconstitutional taking without
compensation.
I would ask that when this measure
is brought up, you inquire of the leadership why,
if they believed in
the merits of this bill, they decided to
introduce it in the "midnight
madness" method that they did, rather than as
part of a full public
debate and hearing? And, I would ask that you
consider voting against
it, both because of its procedural and
substantive flaws.
PLEASE talk to your fellow Representatives of
both parties and convince them
that this new bill is a SHAM, and doesn't deserve
to see the light of day. I
trust that you will vote the right way for all of
us on this bill--VOTE NO!
Thanks so much, Mr. Prelli!
Sincerely,
-------------
Dear Governor Rowland:
I am writing you to urge a VETO of the
ill-advised “assault
weapons†ban, should this onerous piece of
legislation be passed by the House
this week. (This was SB 1402, which passed in
the Senate lastweek.)
This bill has no basis in logic or fact,
and it will have no effect on
violent criminals. The bill targets lawfully
owned rifles, owned by
responsible, sensible, law-abiding citizens.
Even Commissioner of Public
Safety Arthur Spada and Chief State's Attorney
Jack Bailey insisted in
Committee hearings that these rifles were NOT a
problem in Connecticut!
The bill is a political sham, designed to
promote Senator Jepsen's run
against you for Governor.
Please VETO this bill and ask the
legislature to get serious about
fighting crime, not Connecticut's good citizens.
We, who helped elect you,
have faith that you will VETO this bill in the
interest of Constitutional
freedom.
We thank you very much for your help!
Sincerely,
-------------
Dear Representative Gerratana:
My wife and I live at xxx xxxxxx Rd., New
Britain. We have
lived here for many years and have been, and
continue to be, active in
the community. Xxxxxxx was a docent at the Art
Museum for many years
and I was a director of the New Britain Symphony.
As you obviously are,
we are concerned about safety and crime. We
believe that, for several
reasons, SB 1402, dealing with so called "assault
weapons," will do
nothing to increase safety and may make
inadvertent felons out of
otherwise law abiding citizens.
While there is a lot of press about so-called
"assault weapons," this is
merely a term devised by the media to apply to
certain firearms,
virtually none of which have been used in crimes.
When this Bill was
before the Senate Public Safety Committee,
neither Senator Jepsen,
Representative Lawlor nor Attorney General
Blumenthal could provide any
substantiating date to support this bill. In
fact, the Office of
Legislative Research studied this issue and came
to the conclusion that
these firearms are not a factor in crime.
If crime is down, it is for the same reasons
that, at times, crime is
"up." We are now enjoying excellent economic
times. The generation of
"youths" who had committed a great many crimes
has now become a
generation of young adults. We have more police
officers and more
community policing.
Any firearm possessed by a criminal, drug addict
or mentally disturbed
individual is one too many in the wrong hands.
Firearms in the hands of
responsible, law abiding adults are no threat to
public order. To the
contrary, firearms owned by women prevent
approximately 5,000 rapes
daily nationwide. They are used defensively in
this country between 1
and 2 million times each year. The real "crime
problem" is criminals
possessing firearms. By definition, criminals do
not obey laws. It is
already a Federal felony for a convicted criminal
to even posess a
firearm. A law enacted in the last session goes
a very long way toward
taking guns out of the hands of criminals.
The Firearms Task Force has resulted in the
arrest of over 40 criminals
and the confiscation of over 350 guns. This law,
and other similar
programs such as "Operation Exile," are effective
in combating crime.
Enacting statutes targeting a class of firearms
which even the Bill's
supporters admit are not a factor in crime does
nothing more than give
some people with no knowledge of the real
problems a sense of "good
feeling."
I would respectfully urge you to consider voting
against SB 1402 and in
favor of increased funding for the firearms task
force. I appreciate
your taking the time to read this letter. If you
need further
information, or wish to discuss this, please call
me at work at xxxxxxx
or at home at xxxxxxx.
Thank you,
-------------
Dear ,
I am writing with concern over SB1402 which
comes up for vote Tuesday or Wednesday this week. I
attended the Public Safety Committee
meeting in March, where there were not enough
votes to pass SB1405 and it was not voted on. At
that time the Public Safety Commissioner
said when asked that there were no problems with
"Assault Weapons" in Connecticut. There can only
be one conclusion. Political Gain. The existing
laws and instant check system are doing what they
were intended.
We have a task force in the State of Connecticut
that has had much success with controlling
illegal guns and should be supported. We don't
need any new gun laws.
Thank you for your time reading this.
Sincereley
-------------
Dear Representative
I am opposed to any expansion of the
"Assault Weapon" laws. I am opposed
to any other attempts at gun control, including
the action taken by the
Connecticut State Senate on 24 May 2001.
This Action revived the text of the
"Assault Weapons" Bill (Raised Bill
No. 1405) which died in committee in March 2001.
The Senate took the text
of this dead bill, and inserted it as an
amendment into a different bill SB
1402, then deleted the text of the original bill.
This legislative
"sleight of hand", reviving a dead bill as an
amendment to a bill, is very
troubling to me, as I see it as being used to
thwart the will of the people
as expressed in the public hearing in March, and
by the action of the
Public Safety Committee.
Please vote "no" to any more gun bans.
This Bill is an incremental expansion of
outright gun bans, one gun at a
time. This bill will not reduce the amount of
crime on our streets. There
is no documentation that connects SB 1402 to ANY
reduction in crime. At
the public hearing on 20 March 2001, when asked
specifically for the data
that supported their proclamations that "Assault
Weapons" were a crime
problem, Senator Jepsen, Rep. Lawlor, and Atty.
General Blumenthal could
not give, and did not have ANY data to enter as
evidence. Their
assertions, and reasons for this bill are made up
of pure fiction, and
supported by nothing more than their personal
ambition.
A government, that bans the private
person (John Q. Public) from owning
firearms, is headed in the "wrong direction".
I think we can all agree that Hitler,
Stalin, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, and
others are NOT an example of a good government,
yet each of them enacted
"gun control", and "gun bans" upon their
population when they were in
control. I don't think we can or should head down
that road.
Please vote against this bill when it
comes to the House.
Crime control, not Gun Control.
Sincerely,
[Edited by ernest2 on 05-28-2001 at 08:11 PM]
host11.cedant.com;>