Avatar of f0st3r21

FEMA Region I – Federal Senator Response to Guns

0 rating, 0 votes0 rating, 0 votes (0 rating, 0 votes, rated)
You need to be a registered member to rate this post.
Loading ... Loading ...

January 8, 2013 in Guns


For public record:

After writing one of my senators recently, I received this response in my email. It is curious to me: I did not give my email address on this occasion. Perhaps, I was remembered? This response shows that this senator cares not for the Constitution as it was written or intended and will support more, big government tyranny. I see this as a declaration of usurpation and should be scrutinized by the way of PFC Manning (the Wiki Leaks soldier), because he is a full U.S. citizen -unlike Piers Morgan. These folks are the antithesis of freedom. Here is his letter:

Dear Mr. *************:

Thank you for contacting me about the school shooting in Newtown, Connecticut, and gun control in the United States.  I appreciate hearing from you on this very important issue.

The tragedy in Newtown left me shocked and horrified.  As a father and grandfather, I cannot begin to imagine the pain and grief that the families of the victims are experiencing.  Many constituents, like you, have written in to me in the past few weeks to express their support for meaningful changes to federal firearms policy.  I have heard from parents, grandparents, veterans, teachers,  hunters, and children, all expressing their belief that our laws need to be improved, and urging Congress to act.  I have also heard from Vermonters, like you, who are concerned that new legislation could interfere with our Second Amendment rights.

I grew up hunting in Vermont and am still an avid target shooter.   I value our Second Amendment rights, and the Supreme Court has said definitively that Americans are guaranteed its protections.   But like all of the rights guaranteed by our Constitution, it is not absolute.  I agreed with Justice Scalia when he wrote in the Supreme Court’s  District of Columbia v. Heller decision that the Second Amendment does not prohibit reasonable regulations.  The factors underlying the terrible tragedy in Newtown, Connecticut, are complex, and involve a host of issues relating to mental health treatment, firearms  policy, and school safety.  It is my hope that as this conversation continues, the Senate will hear from many Americans, including experts from law enforcement, from the mental health community, and from leaders in our educational system.

One thing that I am especially concerned about is the role that mental health records play in the purchasing of firearms.  The National Instant Criminal Background Check System, or NICS, is an FBI database that is intended to provide licensed sellers with a quick and easy way to  determine if, among other things, a buyer has a history of mental illness.  Unfortunately, the majority—some estimates say as many as 91 percent—of mental health records are not in NICS, due to a lack of reporting and legitimate competing values involving privacy.   But in order to be effective, the records that make up our background check system must be as complete as possible, and I support efforts to improve the inclusion of these records.  In 2007, I worked with a bipartisan group of Senators and Representatives to pass the NICS Improvement Amendments Act of 2007.  This bill, which was unanimously passed by both the House and Senate, helped to improve the collection o f records for inclusion in the federal background check system.  The bill, which was unfortunately prompted by the tragic events at Virginia Tech in April of 2007, helped to improve the information sharing of criminal and mental health records between State and federal law enforcement agencies.   I have supported strong funding for this law and will continue to do so and encourage state and local officials to play their important role in making the NICS database as complete as possible.

In the past weeks, many, including the President, have called for sensible changes to our federal gun laws.   While this has traditionally been a difficult topic to broach in Congress.   I am very hopeful that we will be able to work together and make meaningful changes to our national firearms policy, while still preserving the Second Amendment rights that Vermonters cherish.  I look forward to starting  this conversation early this Congress, and I plan to hold a Judiciary Committee hearing on our national gun control policies.  If there are practical, sensible, workable answers to prevent such unspeakable tragedy, we should make the effort to move them forward.

Thank you for contacting me.  Please keep in touch.



United States Senator


My emailed response to Senator Leahy:


You are wrong. Your position is the antithesis of freedom. It is possible to build a gun -of any calibers- with $10 of parts from any hardware store. A database is the prerequisite to forced disarmament. The reason folks in our country are safe is not because of the military or the government; we are safe because no country has the courage to take on our citizenry. If you disarm the nation’s citizens, you will not be helping us. You will be subverting us.

Maybe one or two U.S. states needs strict laws. Vermont does not need strict laws. We are prospering in this area. Why would you punish all of the law abiding citizens? Do you not realize that a criminal will break any law they choose? This whole ordeal is a serious waste of taxpayer dollars. You should be more concerned with our budget.





Harken, evildoers: don’t tread on me.

Infowars.com Videos:

Comment on this article:

1 response to FEMA Region I – Federal Senator Response to Guns

  1. Thanx for sharing this!

    1470 Bullets + 2 GRENADES per MARINE aimed at innocent citizen’s front doors…..
    Now WHY do we need a 2nd amendment?

Leave a reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.