Got email from Scott Brown: H.R. 823

Reptile

Reptile

NES Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
28,035
Likes
20,312
Feedback: 124 / 0 / 0
I called his offices a few weeks ago to express my disappointment of his lack of support for the Second Amendment.

I received this email today.

Dear Mr. Reptile,

Thank you for contacting me regarding the National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Act (H.R. 822). I value your input and strive to keep you updated on the important issues facing us today.

On February 18, 2011, Representative Cliff Stearns introduced the National Right-To-Carry Reciprocity Act. This legislation would allow any person with a valid state-issued permit to carry a concealed firearm in any state that issues concealed firearm permits, or that does not prohibit the carrying of concealed firearms.

As you may know, I support the individual right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I also believe that individual states should be allowed to decide what constitutes safe and responsible gun ownership so long as it does not violate that basic constitutional right.

Under the proposed House legislation, a national concealed carry reciprocity amendment would obligate states like Massachusetts to recognize the concealed carry permits of other states, even if the bearer of that permit does not meet the requirements established by Massachusetts to receive such a concealed carry permit. I believe that the people of Massachusetts are best positioned to decide what is best for Massachusetts. Therefore, if H.R. 822 or similar legislation comes before the Senate, I will vote no.

Again, thank you for sharing your views with me. Should you have any additional questions or comments, please feel free to contact me or visit my website at www.scottbrown.senate.gov.

Sincerely,
Scott P. Brown
United States Senator
 
Send him a letter back, and tell him that nobody is getting permits out of Chelsea these days, depriving them of their right to KBA
 
He wants to be re-elected. The CCW bill would drive some voters to the dem. He's walking a fine line. I disagree with this decision, but I understand it.
 
I got the same form letter back in November. I replied with the following:

Please re-consider!

Try flipping this around. This vote is (should be, anyway) about PEOPLES’ rights, not the state’s.

The PEOPLE have the right to keep and bear arms. Last I heard, the state has no such thing.

The PEOPLE of Massachusetts (the USA!) have the RIGHT guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms. That RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE should not go away just because someone crosses an invisible line when moving from state to state. Law-abiding citizens don’t become crazed lunatic criminals just by crossing a state line. People who would do harm won’t follow the law anyway, and will carry their guns wherever they want. H.822 simply allows law-abiding citizens to do the same without breaking the law.

Please consider the PEOPLES’ RIGHT to self defense over and above the state’s laws and misguided regulations.

Thank you Senator Brown. You’ll still get my vote next year, but it’s quickly becoming a sad fact that we’ll be voting for the lesser of two evils, rather than the candidate we truly think best represents the interests of the people of the Commonwealth.
Click to expand...

I sent a second follow-up email to him (them -- whoever reads his email is certainly not him) asking to be taken off their mailing list and to put me on their "don't call asking for money" list too. If he's not looking out for our best interests, he's no different or better than Warren.

I'll probably still vote for the SOB, but that's about it as far as activism.
 
I just responded to his Christmas greeting . We'll see if I hear back from him . Funny he's not wearing his barn coat in the Christmas video , but he'll wear it to Jon Davies funeral . He's an idiot. At the funeral he made John Kerry look good and he doesn't even realize it .
 
Scott Brown said:
As you may know, I support the individual right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I also believe that individual states should be allowed to decide what constitutes safe and responsible gun ownership so long as it does not violate that basic constitutional right.
Click to expand...

Newspeak for he supports the right to keep our arms at home because guns are scary and icky. He is as much an enemy of freedom as any of the lib dems.
 
Emoto said:
He wants to be re-elected. The CCW bill would drive some voters to the dem. He's walking a fine line. I disagree with this decision, but I understand it.
Click to expand...

He can't win those people's votes anyway. Dumb, dumb strategy trying to win Dem/anti-gun votes when they're never going to vote for him anyway.
 
Emoto said:
He wants to be re-elected. The CCW bill would drive some voters to the dem. He's walking a fine line. I disagree with this decision, but I understand it.
Click to expand...

Same here. In addition, right now Scott Brown has developed good relationships with leaders from both major political parties. He enjoys bi-partisan support. I can understand him wanting to defer to the state on this matter. On the bright side, the Senator seems to be a strong "State's rights" candidate. His non-support of this particular legislation is disappointing and I've told him so. He's an underdog in the upcoming election. There's no way Ms. Warren is going to get my vote! Not only would I expect her to not support HR 822, I'm sure she'd be filing anti-gun legislation as soon as she's sworn in.
Best regards.
 
StevieP:2154435 said:
I'll probably still vote for the SOB, but that's about it as far as activism.
Click to expand...
Screw that.

After donating to him and voting for him, then having him proverbially stab us in the back on multiple occasions, repeatedly mail me bullshit photo op crap, wannabe celebrity book info, and a letter starting put with how he voted against somerhing because he feels people ought to be hired based on ability and finishing off with a "pat me on the back because I've introduced a law to use government tax breaks to promote hiring veterans," I'm convinced he just doesn't get it, and he needs to go regardless of the consequences.
I've been contemplating voting for nutbag Warren to get rid of the newly-made, Washington-establishment, not even fit to be called RINO, Scott Brown.

Repeatedly re-upping scumbags like this IS the problem.
 
I think I'll donate to Elizabeth what's her socialists election campaign, if Brown is going to be an enemy of the people might as well have somebody in there that doesn't lie about being an enemy of the people.

We don't need no water let the mother !@#$er burn...
 
Using Senator Brown's logic, maybe we shouldn't recognize the drivers licenses that are issued by the other 49 states as well. Just put a damn wall around the state and be done with it.
 
He's absolutely right to oppose the bill. This is a blatant federal intrusion onto state's rights.

CCW is NOT a federally recognized right. -And it's not likely to be anytime soon. This is a state issue. The feds need to butt out.
 
Bill Nance said:
He's absolutely right to oppose the bill. This is a blatant federal intrusion onto state's rights.

CCW is NOT a federally recognized right. -And it's not likely to be anytime soon. This is a state issue. The feds need to butt out.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I have a bit of trouble accepting that Feds and the gov't should butt out of our lives in general but this is good legislation. Let the states sort out their own s*** and if MA law doesn't match what you want, do a cost/benefit analysis of staying vs moving and work on changing the laws here.

Not to mention, what the gov't gives they can take away... just keep them out of my life either way.
 
Bill Nance said:
He's absolutely right to oppose the bill. This is a blatant federal intrusion onto state's rights.

CCW is NOT a federally recognized right. -And it's not likely to be anytime soon. This is a state issue. The feds need to butt out.
Click to expand...

Assuming Brown actually meant that and it is not just a convenient excuse. Somehow "Under the proposed House legislation, a national concealed carry reciprocity amendment would obligate states like Massachusetts to recognize the concealed carry permits of other states, even if the bearer of that permit does not meet the requirements established by Massachusetts to receive such a concealed carry permit. " Makes this sound more restrictive not less.

This is no more a "blatant intrusion onto states rights" then making New York recognize my MA drivers license. If my drivers test, insurance, drivers ed was different in MA should it now not still valid in New York and 48 other states. I can not get a ticket for driving with a valid license from another state but it's a felony to accidentally cross state lines with a valid gun permit from another state? It is still a transportation law, just like a driver's license. Restrict Machine guns, silencers but no law to open up gun license reciprocity? WTF is the big problem with using the same system to force the few states with restrictive laws to open up?

Brown is asking us to eat a ****sandwich, he can call it steak but it is what it is. Brown is better then Coakley but he's still a Mass politician. Definitely not a libertarian this email or your argument makes him out to be. Spinning an anti's message to call it a state's right on an area the federal government already has an interest in is total BS.
 
Bill Nance said:
He's absolutely right to oppose the bill. This is a blatant federal intrusion onto state's rights.

CCW is NOT a federally recognized right. -And it's not likely to be anytime soon. This is a state issue. The feds need to butt out.
Click to expand...

What part of "shall not be infringed" do you have trouble with? This is one place where the feds should have stepped in decades ago and said "he guys, you can't do ANYTHING that infringes on the right of the people to keep and bear arms, the fed gov mandates a background check for purchases (questionable) but the states shouldn't be creating their own laws to restrict federal rights.

To put it another way, it's like having the first amendment then each state saying "well you can have your free speech, but you need to take a training class, and ask for permission whenever you publish something, and if we decide it's inflammatory or against the good of the state we can deny your publication"

That is EXACTLY what they are doing here, there is no other right in the Bill of Rights worded as strongly as the 2A and yet you Bill sit on your high horse and declare "The states should be allowed to give it to people in the tailpipe if they chose, it's their right as a state"

No Bill it's not their right as a state.
 

Similar threads

H.R. 5135
Replies
1
Views
361
Agnotology
Agnotology
Went to purchase first firearm and got delayed from NICS
2 3 4
Replies
95
Views
2K
upcountry
upcountry
you got a pet firearm?
Replies
12
Views
561
pinefd
pinefd
Correct way to get guns back from police?
Replies
16
Views
721
appraiser
appraiser
Shipping gold chain from Fla to Ma?
2 3
Replies
64
Views
1K
Sentenza
S
Back
Top Bottom