Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Senator Vitter responds

A couple of weeks ago I wrote to my Senators, David Vitter and Mary Landrieu, concerning the proposed semi-auto ban and various other 2A concerns. Senator Vitter responded today via email:
Thank you for contacting me in opposition to re newing the 1994 semi-automatic weapons ban. I appreciate hearing your thoughts and want you to know that I strongly agree with you.

I firmly believe the Second Amendment to the Constitution is a guarantee of both a citizen's right to keep and bear arms and, more broadly, of our freedom. Gun control is not crime control , and the federal "assault weapons" law has had no effect on crime. I believe the answer to making our nation safer is stricter enforcement of our laws and tougher laws against criminal activity. In order to make our streets and communities safer our focus should be on locking up criminals and stopping criminal behavior, not imposing criminal penalties on law-abiding citizens merely exercising their freedoms to protect their families and property.

You may also be pleased to know that I was also an original cosponsor of the Protection of Lawful Commerce Arms Act, which recently passed and became law . This law addresses the growing and serious problem of predatory lawsuits against the firearms industry. I am also an original cosponsor of S.1001, which would restore the Second Amendment rights of law abiding citizens in our nation's capital. The citizens of Washington, D.C., deserve the right to protect themselves from the criminals, just as do citizens in Louisiana or elsewhere .

Please rest assured that should legislation to renew the 1994 semi-automatic weapons ban come before the U.S. Senate, I will fight to oppose it. Once again, thank you for contacting me regarding this important issue, and if I may be of further assistance please do not hesitate to contact me.

How about that?

1 comment:

gr8scott said...

Hmmm, sounds like the reply I received from him on immigration...

"Thank you for contacting me in opposition to amnesty for illegal aliens. I appreciate you sharing your views with me, and I agree with you 100 percent .

I llegal immigration must be controlled, and I am firmly opposed to amnesty. Amnesty sends the wrong message - that of a reward - to those who have been evading our laws. Also, it is extremely unfair to all of the legal immigrants who came to this nation and obeyed our laws to become citizens.

You may be pleased to know that I offered an amendment to remove the amnesty provisions from the Kennedy immigration bill . My amendment would have eliminat ed the Z Visa amnesty provisions in the legislation that would give illegal aliens legal status . Z Visas are amnesty - pure and simple . Unfortunately, my amendment was defeated , but I assure you I will continue to fight to curtail illegal immigration .

I strongly believe that we need to dramatically improve our border security by having more agents patrolling our borders and making major investments in infrastructure improvements, such as strategic fencing and increased detention space. Congress and the p resident should focus on securing our borders and strengthening our interior enforcement , not rewarding law breakers with amnesty ."

p.s. great blog