Response to Sen. Casey

[Ckygo-go]

I really have one thought and i would hope that you take the time to
think about what i have to say. Every firearm ever invented was
invented for the sole purpose of killing and to try to make an argument
over So called military assault style weapons over any other kind of
weapon is disingenuous at best. Please bear with me as i'm not
referring to you but this whole affair over the second amendment. Now
take the 1911 45 it was made for the military but no one cares about it
but in the wrong hands could kill many people, but that doesn't make it
less dangerous than a AR 15! So what are we really talking about here?
If any thing me as a black American i should let you know that given
the history of Slavery, The Black Codes, Jim Crow, Co-intel Pro & Iran
Contra to name a few the devastation to My community at large and the
effects they caused and still are being felt by Us, that even though we
suffered -America was made Stronger because It was forced to look at
itself and change for the better. Look to our history and realise that
All of America is being stratified into something called a fascist
state! One Leader or Majority doesn't rule every person and if out of
350,000,000 people only one person wanted to keep a firearm then you my
elected official have a civic duty to preserve the rights of that one
person over the wishes of that majority or Dictator! That is what
makes the United States so great. Just to think if Washington had not
the courage to give up unlimited power & reserve the rights of that
power to the people, then His greed would have been the benefactor 236
years later to Obama but he didn't. My heart goes out to sandy hook
victims BUT what i find so disingenuous is Black Americans have been
dying in the thousands since the early eighties by gun violence Yet
Where has the cry of doing something been for those murdered by guns up
until sandy hook? that statement alone should make every politician
calling for change take leave of their duties because they are willing
to forego all of the principals of the Constitution & bill of rights
just to make a political statement. If you look at what i wrote a few
lines back at the thousands who died before sandy hook and tell me you
weren't calling for the destruction of the 2nd Amendment before then,
THAT makes you a hypocrite and conformist. It takes a real person with
the moral fiber of Washington to do just as he & our Forefathers have
done and that is- Do not what's politically correct but go against your
own views & wishes and Do what's in the spirit of our FOUNDING FATHERS
Protect every single persons Right to Keep and Bare Arms and that right
shall not be infringed!! ("INFRINGE"-Verb. 1. Actively break the terms
of a law, agreement. 2. Act so as to limit or undermine something;
encroach on) Thanks and May the spirit of the Forefathers be your
guide......Mr.------


-----Original Message-----
From: Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr. <senator@casey.senate.gov>

Sent: Fri, Apr 12, 2013 7:22 pm[/COLOR]
Subject: Response from Senator Casey



Dear Mr.

Thank you for taking the time to contact me about recent proposals
related to guns. I appreciate hearing from you about this issue.

As you know, on December 14, 2012, an individual in Newtown,
Connecticut forced his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School and opened
fire on teachers and staff in the building. In total, the perpetrator
murdered 20 students between the ages of six and seven years old, as
well as six adults, many of whom heroically sought to stop the shooter
and save the lives of children. Like many Americans, I was deeply
affected by the scope and brutality of this act. The motives that led
to this senseless massacre will likely never fully be comprehended.
However, I believe that all public officials have a responsibility to
work to prevent such an event from occurring again. This incident
reflects a complex problem that requires a comprehensive strategy,
including funding for law enforcement officers and the mental health
care system.

As you may know, I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment.
Pennsylvania has a fine hunting and sporting tradition, and I will
defend the right to bear arms as it is enshrined in our Constitution. I
will continue to back the right to bear arms for purposes of
self-defense, recreation, sporting and collection. However, I also
believe that the attack at Sandy Hook Elementary School highlights very
serious dangers posed to public safety by the misuse of certain
military-style weapons and technology originally developed for warfare.
According to reports, the shooter possessed a military-style
semiautomatic weapon and was able to kill many children and adults very
quickly. He also allegedly used magazines containing up to 30 rounds of
ammunition and carried hund reds of rounds more. After much reflection
and careful study of the issue, I have decided to support a federal
assault weapons ban as well as legislation restricting high capacity
magazines. In light of what occurred at Sandy Hook, these are two
measures that could lessen the chances that this will happen again.
Before supporting such a law, I would first and foremost ensure that it
did not infringe upon the right to bear arms as established by the
Second Amendment.

Our Nation has already begun a critical dialogue as we examine what
steps must be taken to prevent this type of tragedy in the future. On
January 17, 2012, President Obama unveiled a package of proposals to
reduce gun violence, which included strengthening the system of
background checks, reinstating the assault weapon and high-capacity
magazines ban, improving school safety and expanding access to mental
health services.

On January 24, 2013, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California introduced
S. 150, the Assault Weapons Ban of 2013. This legislation would
explicitly permit the possession of affected firearms that were owned
prior to the bill’s enactment; firearms that are manually operated;
firearms used by military, law enforcement and retired law enforcement;
and antique weapons. Further, this legislation lists 2,258 hunting and
sporting rifles and shotguns that are entirely exempt from the ban.

This legislation would ban the sale, transfer, manufacturing and
importation of all semiautomatic rifles that can accept a detachable
magazine and have at least one of seven specified military features. S.
150 would further ban semiautomatic pistols that can accept a
detachable magazine and have at least one of certain listed military
features, as well as ammunition magazines that can accept more than 10
rounds. The Assault Weapons Ban would also regulate the transfer and
storage of permitted, grandfathered weapons and allow local law
enforcement to use certain federal funds for voluntary gun buyback
programs. On March 14, 2013, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary
approved the Assault Weapons Ban by a vote of 10-8. The Judiciary
Committee also recently approved legislation to expand background
checks for gun sales and legislation to punish and deter firearms
trafficking.

On March 21, 2013, Senator Harry Reid of Nevada introduced S. 649, the
Safe Communities, Safe Schools Act of 2013. This bill includes three
pieces of gun legislation previously reported out of the Judiciary
Committee: S. 374, the Fix Gun Checks Act of 2013; S. 54, the Stop
Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act of 2013; and S. 146, the School and
Campus Safety Enhancements Act of 2013. On April 8, 2013, Senator Reid
moved to proceed to S. 649 and begin consideration in the full Senate.
Please be assured that as the Senate considers this important
legislation, I will have your views in mind.

Again, thank you for sharing your thoughts with me. Please do not
hesitate to contact me in the future about this or any other matter of
importance to you.

For more information on this or other issues, I encourage you to visit
my website, http://casey.senate.gov. I hope you will find this online
office a comprehensive resource to stay up-to-date on my work in
Washington, request assistance from my office or share with me your
thoughts on the issues that matter most to you and to Pennsylvania.

Sincerely,
Bob Casey
United States Senator


P.S. If you would like to respond to this message, please use the
contact form on my website: http://casey.senate.gov/contact/

[thefirstndsecond]

Dear Senator Casey,

I agree, we need to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. An assault weapons ban and magazine capacity ban are not the answers. To say this does not take anyone's guns away is fraudulent. Banning the sale and transfer of AR platform firearms keeps these firearms out of the hands of future law abiding citizens. There is already substantial statistical information supporting the fact long arms are an extremely small percentage of any criminal activity. I do sympathize with those family's lives effected by a crazy man, however to support these bills definitely does not support the second amendment. Anyone with any experience knows capacity is a training issue.

You do not have my views in mind because you are supporting these two bills, the assault weapons ban and S. 649 which also does not address the cultivation of criminal activity. The second amendment is not just about hunting and you insult the public by referring to these bills as not an infringement because they do not effect any type of hunting firearm. Not to mention, in many states not including Pennsylvania, you may hunt with a semi auto rifle and or shotgun.

This is a sad day indeed when politicians like yourself resort to feel good legislation which doesn't address the real issues at hand and simple appeases those wishing to delete the second amendment from the constitution. I expected more from you sir. I expected more from someone who is a servant of the people.

Thank you,

[Ckygo-go]

Dear Senator Casey,

I agree, we need to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. An assault weapons ban and magazine capacity ban are not the answers. To say this does not take anyone's guns away is fraudulent. Banning the sale and transfer of AR platform firearms keeps these firearms out of the hands of future law abiding citizens. There is already substantial statistical information supporting the fact long arms are an extremely small percentage of any criminal activity. I do sympathize with those family's lives effected by a crazy man, however to support these bills definitely does not support the second amendment. Anyone with any experience knows capacity is a training issue.

You do not have my views in mind because you are supporting these two bills, the assault weapons ban and S. 649 which also does not address the cultivation of criminal activity. The second amendment is not just about hunting and you insult the public by referring to these bills as not an infringement because they do not effect any type of hunting firearm. Not to mention, in many states not including Pennsylvania, you may hunt with a semi auto rifle and or shotgun.

This is a sad day indeed when politicians like yourself resort to feel good legislation which doesn't address the real issues at hand and simple appeases those wishing to delete the second amendment from the constitution. I expected more from you sir. I expected more from someone who is a servant of the people.

Thank you,

Amen to that!

[rgkitchen]

This is what I sent to Sen. Toomey . . . .

OK, so you submitted your amendment, but there are still four other "secret" amendments proposed by liberal gun grabbing Senators. They won’t even post their descriptions on the Legislative Information web site. How can you even consider supporting S.649? What are you voting on if the bill and its amendments are not even posted? From other sources I have discovered that one of those other amendments is Diane Feinstein's so-called assault weapons ban. Where do you stand on S.649 with that amendment added?

This Administration has a history of selective adherence to and enforcement of lawfully enacted legislation (immigration, welfare reform, border security, etc.). How do you expect it to respect anything that comes from Congress now? What guarantee can you give me that the Justice Department will not liberally interpret this new legislation? How can I be protected from some liberal health care worker or law enforcement officer placing my name in the new database of unapproved gun owners? Even though your proposed amendment does not have a de facto “gun” registration, it does create a database of gun owners. I don’t want my name in any government database so that they can look me up any time they want and come to my home to seize my guns. What if they come when I am at work or away? Who will protect my wife and children? Will they end up like Vicki and Sammy Weaver? You may think this extreme, but with the visceral hatred of gun owners by the media, and even members of your body, anything can happen. What are you going to do to protect me and my family from the government?

I ask these questions in all sincerity since I am not seeing any movement toward protecting lawful gun owners in Congress. Why are you so afraid of standing up for the 2nd Amendment? The right to keep and bear arms is specifically enumerated in the Bill of Rights. There is absolutely no mention of abortion, pornography, or homosexuality anywhere in the Constitution, but these awful activities now have been elevated to a “right” far superior to the 2nd Amendment. Why does Congress cringe like Dracula in daylight anytime someone mentions saving the unborn, but will fall all over itself trying to outdo one another in finding new ways to unarm ordinary American citizens?

I’m not being ridiculous here. I would appreciate an honest answer from you – not a robo-letter. Will you drop your support of S.649 once the liberals load it up with their unconstitutional amendments? They only need 51 votes to add them. Will you then join in with other patriotic Senators and filibuster the final vote on this bill? Finally, why is our God given right to keep and bear arms subservient to a woman’s “right” to kill her baby, or two guys’ “right” to get “married”?

[brianinpa]

I just simply sent to both Casey and Toomey:

Good luck during the next election.