Mine is the same.
You mean she didn't take the time to write me individually? Boo.
ETA: I emailed her back... but not sure they'll get it by hitting the reply button on that email. I think the address is good, though.
You mean she didn't take the time to write me individually? Boo.
ETA: I emailed her back... but not sure they'll get it by hitting the reply button on that email. I think the address is good, though.
Thank you for the response. I, and many others that received it, would like to caution you on your statement of "...important role that government plays in upholding statutes that aim to limit such tragedies." While that is true, the government's response can not be that certain guns should be banned, more costs to legally obtaining firearms be implemented, or the rights of ANY law-abiding citizen should be infringed.
As you know, the constitution clearly states that the rights granted by the second amendment shall not be infringed. Period. It doesn't say, "...shall not be infringed unless there's a tragedy committed with firearms..." This cannot be the answer. Any legislation to the contrary is blatantly unconstitutional.
I'm not mentally-ill. I hold no ill-will or wish harm on any person. Why, then, should my rights be limited because of the actions of such a small minority of mentally-ill persons that abused their rights?
It is my hope that you will vote down any proposed legislation that would limit the rights of me and those like-minded, law-abiding citizens like me to bear arms legally and responsibly. I can assure that any representative that votes "yay" to more gun control will lose my vote and many, many more.
Thank you for your time.
Regards,
Last edited: