Response from Congressman Bob Brady - 1st Congressional District, PA

[rickypaul]

I wrote to my Congressman, Robert Brady of the 1st Congressional District which is in Northeast Philadelphia. I urged him not to support additional gun restrictions currently being proposed by the President, Senator Feinstein among others. His response is unacceptable and I urge others in my district to not vote for Congressman Brady, but to also campaign vigorously against him.

Dear Friend:

Thank you for contacting me with your views regarding gun control. As your representative in Congress, I think the most important part of my job is to understand your concerns so I can better represent the First District of Pennsylvania in our nation's capital.

While I understand your advocacy for no limitations on firearm possession, I believe that sensible gun laws can both guarantee the safety of our communities while maintaining our constitutional rights. As you know, the First District has been repeatedly struck by violence due to lax regulation of firearm purchases, and I have consistently supported legislation that aims to limit these unnecessary tragedies. In line with this approach, I am proud to have received the highest possible rating from many different groups that seek a common goal of limiting gun violence. I recognize the need to guarantee our constitutional rights, but I also believe that, in the face of the harsh reality, our nation needs common sense gun control measures that! protect our community from acts of senseless violence. I support President Obama's initiatives to curb the possession of these weapons in a manner that is in line with the Second Amendment, and I look forward to supporting the effort for sensible gun control in the 113th Congress.

I appreciate the time you have taken to contact me about this matter. I also encourage you to visit my web site (http://www.brady.house.gov/). I hope you will stay in touch and contact any of my local Philadelphia offices or my office in Washington if I can be of any further assistance.



Sincerely,

Robert Brady
Member of Congress

[rickypaul]

Below is the text of my rebuke to Bob Brady's pro gun control response:

Dear Congressman Brady,

I am equally disturbed by gun violence and am interested in having a dialogue to assist in formulating policies to curb it, Your response, however, is unacceptable to me and (I’m sure) many other law abiding gun owners in your district.

You stated in your response: “As you know, the First District has been repeatedly struck by violence due to lax regulation of firearm purchases..” I know no such thing. I challenge you to provide evidence to back up this assertion. You won’t find it because it is bogus. I also vehemently disagree with the assertion that the current laws on firearm purchases are “lax.”

As YOU must know, Pennsylvania Firearm Law requires a criminal background check for EVERY firearm purchase (source Cease Fire PA, http://www.ceasefirepa.org/issues/backgroundchecks). There is no “gun show loophole” relating to private purchases in Pennsylvania. The reality of the situation is that the only people who comply with firearm laws are law abiding citizens. Those bent on using a gun in a crime will not stop because carrying a gun is illegal without a permit or limit the magazine to only 10 rounds because more than that is against the law.

In your letter you reference “common sense” and “sensible” gun regulations. In my world, these words can only be applied to regulations that will actually do something. Nothing currently proposed would have done anything to stop any of the recent mass shooters. Also, none of what I am hearing being proposed is “consistent with the second amendment” as you stated.

One idea that would actually be effective is to rid ourselves of these ridiculous “Gun Free Zones” where all of the recent massacres have occurred. Citizens who have undergone the scrutiny to obtain a license to carry a firearm should be able to carry one in a school. I would even support special conditions, (training for eligibility), for school staff who wish to carry a firearm. This has been the case in Utah for twelve years without negative incident. The mere fact that someone may be carrying a firearm (no one will know who) provides a deterrent effect to the cowards who perpetrate these acts. This is smugly dismissed by gun control advocates. The reason it is dismissed is because gun control is about control, not about guns.

The violent crime rate has been decreasing steadily (source CNN; http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/29/justice/us-violent-crime). The state of Connecticut has an assault weapons ban in place and it did not stop Adam Lanza. Chicago has the strictest gun control laws and has the distinction of being the murder capital of the nation. The expired assault weapons ban did nothing to reduce violent crime as reported by a University of Pennsylvania Study. These realities are all ignored by gun control advocates.

I reject your position entirely. I am a professional, I am a father, I am active in my community and church. I am appalled that you would presume to know better than I about what I should do to protect my family. Because you are so much smarter than your constituents, you believe you have the right to limit our ability to defend ourselves from criminals. This is a display of tremendous arrogance.

I appreciate your response as now I know where I stand. I will be campaigning vigorously against you.

Rick Paul

[vinlander]

I had a similar experience:

http://forum.pafoa.org/pennsylvania-...-call-him.html

Lets pool our arguments and resources to defeat his lack of logic.

[rickypaul]

The tone of my rebuke of his response was intentionally angry. I don't know if thats a good or bad thing but I got my point across. I was surprised that yours and my response were completely different and not some form letter. That give me hope that he actually reads the things.

I wonder if there's a way to show him the actual number of firearms owners in his district? That would surely have an affect because I think there are plenty.

r

[vinlander]

I was surprised that yours and my response were completely different and not some form letter. That give me hope that he actually reads the things.

Definitely, which is why I replied back to him with facts and reasoning.

[photoshooter]

I am proud to have received the highest possible rating from many different groups that seek a common goal of limiting gun violence


This could be the single most stupid thing I've ever read from a politician. WTF does that even mean? I think these people are convinced that if you support 2A you are against limiting gun violence.


but I also believe that, in the face of the harsh reality, our nation needs common sense gun control measures that protect our community from acts of senseless violence.

Measures will protect our community? Measures will prevent senseless gun violence? I guess we'll allow sensible gun violence...
These guys just repeat the same crap over and over. I wonder if they ever really think about the absurd things they say? I keep waiting for Alan Fundt to jump out and tell me I'm on Candid Camera.

Rick, your letter is perfect. At least you got a response. I've written to Farnese and the silence is a sure sign of where he stands. I'm convinced most of these guys don't know what designates an assault weapon.



edit to add:

I've been writing to let these legislators know that all of the current proposed legislation would have done NOTHING to prevent the Sandy Hook tragedy. And that "assault rifles" are already banned in CT, how did that work out? And that the Columbine massacre happened during the last AWB.
They don't need to know these things. They already get "the highest approval rating from many different groups that seek a common goal of limiting gun violence."

[photoshooter]

I had a similar experience:

http://forum.pafoa.org/pennsylvania-...-call-him.html

Lets pool our arguments and resources to defeat his lack of logic.

Lots of good facts and statistics at Gun Facts