This one is a bit longer and more detailed, since the first batch was targeted to a group of people. Feel free to crib if you like.
Ms. *****,
I am writing you tonight to voice my concerns regarding potential new gun restrictions in the Commonwealth, and to ask that you do not support them. I am a law-abiding gun owner, but you probably haven't heard much about me lately. Partly because the media doesn't report crimes that don't happen, but also because owning firearms doesn't define me. First, I am a husband, a son, a brother, a neighbor, and a friend. I help out my neighbors, I foster animals for Baypath Humane Society, I support my local food banks, and I run a lot of races for charity. I don't identify myself primarily as a gun owner, and neither do most of the other 300,000 or so law-abiding citizens who are licensed in Massachusetts, because there is more to us than that.
But, yes, I do own guns, for sport, for hunting, and for protection. It is a right that I do not take lightly, nor is it one that is easy to express in our state. As you may know, in Massachusetts we have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. We currently have an 'assault weapons' ban and magazine size restrictions, as well as AG safety rules which greatly limit the types of guns that can be purchased here. We have background checks for every sale. We have a permitting process that is as invasive and arbitrary as the local police chief decides to make it, and he or she may reject any applicant at will. Finally, every single firearms transaction is recorded with the state. Once we are approved for a permit, we have extensive rules governing how we must store and transport our firearms with severe penalties attached to non-compliance, even if unintentional(the laws are quite complex and convoluted), and almost any criminal offense will result in permanent revocation. In other words, it really isn't that easy to legally get a firearm in Massachusetts.
My heart breaks for the loss of young lives at Sandy Hook, for the broken families, and for everyone who loses a family member or falls victim to violence of any sort. However, when I consider the legislation passed in New York, or the suggestions alluded to by Rep. Linsky, I can only conclude that the goal is not to stop violence at the hands of criminals and madmen, but to place an insurmountable logistical and financial burden on law-abiding citizens.
Liability insurance would place a large financial burden on current gun owners, would put them at risk of having their policies cancelled similar to people who own the wrong breed of dog, and would do nothing to dissuade a criminal from committing a crime with a gun.
Making us store our firearms at our gun clubs would almost certainly force most clubs to close; the costs would simply be too much for most clubs, which are run on a shoestring budget. The clubs that did make the investment would have to charge members exorbitant fees, and would advertise to criminals that this is the place to find many guns in a single location with no one to prevent theft. Further, despite popular thought, the rifle is the preferred gun for personal defense, so having to store rifles away from our homes would explicitly reduce our ability to defend ourselves and our families. The only goal here is to impose a financial burden and to separate us from our rightful property, while still holding us legally liable for what happens should that property be stolen.
Further restrictions on the types of firearms or magazine capacity simply amounts to an outright gun ban. Requiring ammunition magazine holding fewer than ten rounds would render almost every handgun and rifle in common use today illegal or unusable.
I am entirely amenable to legislation that punishes those who steal firearms, use firearms in the commission of crimes, etc, but I ask you not to attack the rights of law-abiding citizens in order to protect us from criminals.
Yesterday, in Massachusetts, over 300,000 registered, law-abiding gun owners didn't harm anyone. We are the good men and women of this Commonwealth. We love our families, our state, and our country, and want nothing more than to exercise our rights as Americans without being held forth as scapegoats every time a criminal commits an unthinkable crime.
Thank you,
Rider
Ms. *****,
I am writing you tonight to voice my concerns regarding potential new gun restrictions in the Commonwealth, and to ask that you do not support them. I am a law-abiding gun owner, but you probably haven't heard much about me lately. Partly because the media doesn't report crimes that don't happen, but also because owning firearms doesn't define me. First, I am a husband, a son, a brother, a neighbor, and a friend. I help out my neighbors, I foster animals for Baypath Humane Society, I support my local food banks, and I run a lot of races for charity. I don't identify myself primarily as a gun owner, and neither do most of the other 300,000 or so law-abiding citizens who are licensed in Massachusetts, because there is more to us than that.
But, yes, I do own guns, for sport, for hunting, and for protection. It is a right that I do not take lightly, nor is it one that is easy to express in our state. As you may know, in Massachusetts we have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation. We currently have an 'assault weapons' ban and magazine size restrictions, as well as AG safety rules which greatly limit the types of guns that can be purchased here. We have background checks for every sale. We have a permitting process that is as invasive and arbitrary as the local police chief decides to make it, and he or she may reject any applicant at will. Finally, every single firearms transaction is recorded with the state. Once we are approved for a permit, we have extensive rules governing how we must store and transport our firearms with severe penalties attached to non-compliance, even if unintentional(the laws are quite complex and convoluted), and almost any criminal offense will result in permanent revocation. In other words, it really isn't that easy to legally get a firearm in Massachusetts.
My heart breaks for the loss of young lives at Sandy Hook, for the broken families, and for everyone who loses a family member or falls victim to violence of any sort. However, when I consider the legislation passed in New York, or the suggestions alluded to by Rep. Linsky, I can only conclude that the goal is not to stop violence at the hands of criminals and madmen, but to place an insurmountable logistical and financial burden on law-abiding citizens.
Liability insurance would place a large financial burden on current gun owners, would put them at risk of having their policies cancelled similar to people who own the wrong breed of dog, and would do nothing to dissuade a criminal from committing a crime with a gun.
Making us store our firearms at our gun clubs would almost certainly force most clubs to close; the costs would simply be too much for most clubs, which are run on a shoestring budget. The clubs that did make the investment would have to charge members exorbitant fees, and would advertise to criminals that this is the place to find many guns in a single location with no one to prevent theft. Further, despite popular thought, the rifle is the preferred gun for personal defense, so having to store rifles away from our homes would explicitly reduce our ability to defend ourselves and our families. The only goal here is to impose a financial burden and to separate us from our rightful property, while still holding us legally liable for what happens should that property be stolen.
Further restrictions on the types of firearms or magazine capacity simply amounts to an outright gun ban. Requiring ammunition magazine holding fewer than ten rounds would render almost every handgun and rifle in common use today illegal or unusable.
I am entirely amenable to legislation that punishes those who steal firearms, use firearms in the commission of crimes, etc, but I ask you not to attack the rights of law-abiding citizens in order to protect us from criminals.
Yesterday, in Massachusetts, over 300,000 registered, law-abiding gun owners didn't harm anyone. We are the good men and women of this Commonwealth. We love our families, our state, and our country, and want nothing more than to exercise our rights as Americans without being held forth as scapegoats every time a criminal commits an unthinkable crime.
Thank you,
Rider
