Email to/from Senator Udall

[1FastGambler]

Senator Udall,
Thank you for responding. The horrible act of violence in Sandy Hook could not have been prevented by more gun laws. This evil, mentally derrainged young man did not use an AR-15 type of weapon, nor did he use high capacity magazines. Explain to me, how more gun control legislation will prevent this from happening again!!!

When has making something against the law stopped crime? Crack Cocaine is illegial and yet it is like a plague infecting every city and town in North America. Will more laws restricting its manufacture curb its use? NO.

The statistical data of mass shootings is available to the public on the FBI's website. It is extremely obvious that the proposals by Feinstein, the brady bunch, and all the rest of the gun control advocates are trying to pass WILL NOT save lives. PERIOD.

The assault weapon ban of 1994 accomplished nothing. In fact looking at the data provided by the FBI, our nation has had a consistent decline of homocides by guns since before the ban was implemented.

I strongly urge you to obey your oath to protect our constitutional rights. I repeat "RIGHTS", not privledges. It is your duty Mr. Udall. Please do the right thing.

That said, I also strongly agree that we must act by taking action that is not influenced by emotion or peer pressure. Look at the statistical data, all of the data; not just the bits and pieces that most fit a certain agenda and you will see that the locations in our great nation that have the most homocides and violent crimes are locations where the public in unarmed AND mostly poor, and unemployed.

If you truly want to save lives, I suggest you look at ways to create JOBS and get these people off of welfare. They need, more than anything a reason to get out and find a job.

Did you know that thousands of businesses in areas like Odessa Texas Help Wanted signs are everywhere. I saw a Pizza Hut marquee sign that said, "Hiring Delivery Drivers $18.00/hr + tips!!!! No joke. An Applebee's restaraunt is so desperate for waiters that they are currently in the processs of working with Russian workers to sponser their work visa's and provide them with onsite housing just to keep their doors open because they can't fill their open positions. How does this make a darn bit of sense when millions of Americans are out of work???

Please Senator Udall, the San Juan basin economy is dying because congress has put pressure on the BLM to stop issuing drilling permits; this must stop. Tell them to issue the drilling permits so that San Juan County can go back to creating jobs. I'm getting sick of watching business after business struggle financially, laying off workers and many of them even going out of business.

Our nation has much bigger issues than very miniscule % of children getting killed by a madman. Millions of unborn children are murdered by abortions. Thousands are killed by impaired or distracted drivers every year.

Pull your head out of the sand, look at the real facts and do something meaningful. Please sir. We're counting on you.

Lastly, do not support any new gun laws. Keep convicted violent criminals behind bars. Allow drilling permits on federal land and creat jobs. Stop lifelong welfare to able bodied persons. Encourage qualified teachers and school officials to carry and/or put armed guards in every school.

I thank you from the bottom of my heart if you actually take the time to read this email and give it some thought and consideration.

Sincerely,
Sean Hill
Farmington, NM






--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
To:
Subject: Thank you for contacting me
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 15:16:19 -0500




January 15, 2013

Dear Mr. Hill,

Thank you for contacting me regarding gun control. I appreciate hearing from you on this important issue.
The incomprehensible act of violence carried out at Sandy Hook Elementary School has left our nation with a profound sense of sorrow and questions about why these tragedies are occurring with increasing frequency. For answers, we must start by assessing our gun laws, how we treat mental illness in this country and the cultural desensitization towards violence. Meaningful action is clearly needed to protect our communities and to move forward. I believe that every idea should be on the table and will carefully consider any reasonable legislation that is crafted to help prevent future tragedies.
As Congress begins to consider related legislation, it is important to recognize that these debates often evoke strong responses because we are attempting to reconcile an individual's constitutional rights with society's interest in maintaining public safety and combating crime. The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution secures the right of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms. I also believe that the Constitution gives us the right to own firearms for the protection of self, family, and property, and for sporting purposes such as hunting and target shooting. For generations, many New Mexicans have exercised this right in a responsible way, and they should be able to continue to do so. However, I also recognize that our communities have an obligation to protect citizens from senseless gun violence.
As a former federal prosecutor and Attorney General of New Mexico, my first-hand experiences with the numerous crimes committed with firearms led me to believe that these crimes are among the most heinous, and should be prosecuted as forcefully as possible. During my time in Congress, I have introduced legislation to appoint an additional Assistant U.S. Attorney for each jurisdiction to be focused solely on prosecuting gun crimes.
President Obama has announced a White House task force led by Vice President Biden that will make recommendations on gun related violence. I look forward to seeing these proposals. I am hopeful that working together we will achieve sensible solutions. Please be assured that I will keep your thoughts in mind as Congress looks for ways to address this issue and prevent this type of violence.



Thank you again for sharing your thoughts with me. Please feel free to contact me with your concerns regarding any federal issue by visiting my website at www.tomudall.senate.gov. For more information, you may also visit my Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/pages/Senator-Tom-Udall/106433512869 and receive up to the minute updates through my Twitter page at http://twitter.com/senatortomudall.
Very truly yours,

Tom Udall
United States Senator

 

[wramos]

I emailed him yesterday and the sad thing is, his response to you is EXACTLY the same response I got.

Hopefully if enough people email/write he won't be able to ignore.

 

[Ropinfool]

sad thing is he probably never read it. im sure it's a programed response by one of his secretaries or aids.

 

[smarba]

EXTEMELY well written 1FAST...

Thanks for sharing.

Carl

 

[leftturnabq]

Great letter Sean.

I'd like to note something in Udall's response: 'The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution secures the right of law-abiding Americans to keep and bear arms. I also believe that the Constitution gives us the right to own firearms for the protection of self, family, and property, and for sporting purposes such as hunting and target shooting.'

The 2nd Amendment acutally reads: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

To me this means more than sporting purposes...which is not at all referenced to or mentioned. The idea of a militia is to deter a tyrannical government or an invasion. Self defense is a given.

SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED UPON is very clear to me.

To believe that an AR-15 or high capacity semi-auto of any kind matches the firepower of our current military is naive and ignorant at best.

Lastly, we do NOT need more law. There is plenty of law already in place infringing upon the 2nd amendment. We have rules in place regarding the purchase of firearms, restrictions on more extreme weapons and concealed carry law.

What we need is law enforcement. Fear of the reprocussions of the crime. Expansion of the corrections facilities if need be, and a change in the facilities provided for their residents. Criminals should fear the concequences of their actions, and law abiding citizens should have nothing to fear from their government.

 

[leftturnabq]

I know several police officers. It must be frustrating as all hell to haul someone in only for them to be released and the whole thing repeated over and over again. A vicious cycle.

This is where the system is broken. The excuses of not enough jail space and the lawyers who make their money exploiting loopholes.

Most of our government representatives are lawyers, yet they seem to overlook this...coincidence?

 

[lovehunting]

Well said guys. They will ONLY Get my GUNS when they take them from my cold dead hands. I am a law-abiding citizen and I will keep my guns period.

 

[nm_alazan]

leftturn, I couldn't agree more. Has nothing to do with sporting weapons.

Armed patriots are a back-check to counteract the rise of a tyrannical government. That's what the 2nd ammendment intended back then, and what it intends today. That concept will never be outdated.

Anyone who doesn't believe that must understand that we would still be sipping tea at noon and bowing to the queen if it weren't for that original concept. And we would be a completely disarmed populous, so a teacup would be the only thing we would have with a looped finger guard.

 

[NMPaul]

Great letter Sean.

 

[nripepi]

Just Curious, but when you say "This evil, mentally derrainged young man did not use an AR-15 type of weapon, nor did he use high capacity magazines."

It seems to me that he did us an AR-15 type of weapon (XM-15) with 30-round capacity magazines. Are those not high capacity?

Not trying to start something here, just wondering and want to know the facts and the basis for your comments.

Thanks.

 

[hntbambi]

>It seems to me that he
>did us an AR-15 type
>of weapon (XM-15) with 30-round
>capacity magazines. Are those
>not high capacity?

I have seen reports that say only handguns were used in the shootings. The semi auto rifle was in the vehicle.

 

[JFWRC]

Thank you Sean!

 

[Reuben_Soady]

Please don't fall into the trap of using liberal/girly/psycho language to define the issues.

30 rds is "minimum standard capacity" for an AR, and
15-20 is standard for a 9mm, thankyou very much.

 

[nripepi]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-18-13 AT 09:33PM (MST)[p]Reuben.

I do not believe I was falling into the trap. Standard to some, could definitely be high capacity to others. Maybe we should call 30 in the middle between high capacity and low capacity, middle capacity?

1FastGambler's letter "young man did not use an AR-15 type of weapon, nor did he use high capacity magazines" and then hntbambi's reply: "I have seen reports that say only handguns were used in the shootings. The semi auto rifle was in the vehicle." I believe this to be false, I believe every credible news source has said that the main weapon used was the Bushmaster 223 which shot over 100 rounds in the incident. Many of the 30-round clips were changed out prior to being emptied. I am not naive to know that as much harm could be done with "standard" clips in a 9 MM (especially with someone who practiced a lot), just look at what happened at Virginia Tech, maybe limiting those clips should be looked at as well.

1FastGambler's letter said "Pull your head out of the sand, look at the real facts and do something meaningful." He continues to talk about the "real facts" and I believe he got one of those important "real facts" wrong. I was just pointing it out and wanted some clarification.

This is a really important issue and we owe it to those kids in that classroom who lost their lives and to their families to have a rational discussion about what can be done to minimize the chance of this happening again.

Thank you.

Nino

 

[1FastGambler]

>>It seems to me that he
>>did us an AR-15 type
>>of weapon (XM-15) with 30-round
>>capacity magazines. Are those
>>not high capacity?
>
>I have seen reports that say
>only handguns were used in
>the shootings. The semi
>auto rifle was in the
>vehicle.
_________________________________________
Correct.

The media is making up their own versions of the truth.

 

[1FastGambler]

>Please don't fall into the trap
>of using liberal/girly/psycho language to
>define the issues.
>
>30 rds is "minimum standard capacity"
>for an AR, and
>15-20 is standard for a 9mm,
>thankyou very much.
______________________________________

Also correct.

The definition to me of high capacity is a capacity that is aftermarket and was never offered in each firearm as standard issue.

That said, the FN PS90 comes from the factory with a 50 round drum and should not be considered high capacity. It's the way the rifle was originally designed.

 

[1FastGambler]

>LAST EDITED ON Jan-18-13
>AT 09:33?PM (MST)
>
>Reuben.
>
>I do not believe I was
>falling into the trap.
>Standard to some, could definitely
>be high capacity to others.
> Maybe we should call
>30 in the middle between
>high capacity and low capacity,
>middle capacity?
>
>1FastGambler's letter "young man did not
>use an AR-15 type of
>weapon, nor did he use
>high capacity magazines" and then
>hntbambi's reply: "I have seen
>reports that say only handguns
>were used in the shootings.
>The semi auto rifle was
>in the vehicle." I
>believe this to be false,
>I believe every credible news
>source has said that the
>main weapon used was the
>Bushmaster 223 which shot over
>100 rounds in the incident.
> Many of the 30-round
>clips were changed out prior
>to being emptied. I
>am not naive to know
>that as much harm could
>be done with "standard" clips
>in a 9 MM (especially
>with someone who practiced a
>lot), just look at what
>happened at Virginia Tech, maybe
>limiting those clips should be
>looked at as well.
>
>1FastGambler's letter said "Pull your head
>out of the sand, look
>at the real facts and
>do something meaningful." He
>continues to talk about the
>"real facts" and I believe
>he got one of those
>important "real facts" wrong. I
>was just pointing it out
>and wanted some clarification.
>
>This is a really important issue
>and we owe it to
>those kids in that classroom
>who lost their lives and
>to their families to have
>a rational discussion about what
>can be done to minimize
>the chance of this happening
>again.
>
>Thank you.
>
>Nino
__________________

yes sir, it sounds like you fell into the trap... left by the media.

You haven't got anything 100% correct, however you came close when you said, "we owe it to those kids", but you are forgetting about the adults who lost their lives also.

It's like you are saying that a mother getting killed is less important than a child getting killed. I don't agree with that at all.

IT IS A FACT THAT MORE GUNS IN THE HANDS OF LAW ABIDING CITIZENS CREATES A SOCIETY WITH LESS VIOLENT CRIME.

For the sake of all? PLEASE? Look at the data on the FBI?S website and see for yourself. Compare cities and states with the most strict gun laws to the ones with the most lenient gun laws and you will see that the above statement is true!

The absolute #1 most impactful action that could happen to save lives during mass shootings is to eliminate ALL gun free zones with a few exceptions such as liquor establishments and courtrooms. I do agree that these two locations should be gun free due to the hightened state of emotions that can and do occour in these places.

Strong emotional situations sometimes cause rational thinking to fly out the window.

Magazine capacity of 10 rounds or less will have little to no effect on saving lives, probably not even a measurable amount in the grand scheme of things.

Question for all - were you watching the news when the Sandy Hook shooting was taking place?

If yes, was it not incredibly obvious to you that the media was doing a great job of "ad libbinng"?

I don't know how many times I heard a reporter say, "we've just confirmed xxxxxxxxxx", and then 5 minutes later they had a different story.

I beleive that 3 pistols were used and nothing else because this was the most consistent "story" told by every news station.

Nino, your last sentence -

This is a really important issue and we owe it to those kids in that classroom who lost their lives and to their families to have a rational discussion about what can be done to minimize the chance of this happening again

While I feel the same way, the truth is no man, woman, or government will EVER be capable of preventing this type of tragedy. Adam & Eve are to blame for bringing sin into the world.

Face it, evil people exist everywhere as do the mentally derrainged. Evil is within all of us, however most of us know the difference between right and wrong and choose to act accordingly, the rest can be broadly grouped into two categories. Those that have serious mental illness and those who choose to let evil rule over them.

The best possible solution is to do the best we can to minimize the amount of damage these people can cause. In regards to school shootings, I strongly beleive that the best possible solution is to allow teachers & school staff members to carry on school grounds after they have the necessary training AND/OR putting armed guards in every school.

Why should these armed gaurds AND/OR teachers and staff members be limited to 10 rounds when, God forbid, something like another madman breaks into another schoold and goes on a shooting spree.

Do you know how accurate our best police officers are during a shootout?
What % of their shots are hits?
What % of their shots kill or completely stop the criminal?

Doesn't it make the most sense to allow zero restrictions on magazine capacities simply because there will never be complete confiscation from every criminal of these "so called" high capacity magazines and therefore why should the GOOD GUYS have fewer bullets????????????????????????????????

I beleive that the 2nd Amendment was written so that the general public would not be "out gunned" by the government. Things have changed dramatically in the last 221 years. While I don't beleive that the general public should have nuclear weapons, I do beleive that we should have equal firepower with firearms, this is for the exact same reason our Gov't has nuclear, and that is so that peace will prevail simply due to the potential threat.

Sorry for the long post, but I felt compelled to share my thoughts in a more detailed manner.

 

[leftturnabq]

1FastGambler, I am in complete agreement with what you have stated. Restricting the honest, law-abiding civilian is not he answer. We are not the threat to the public, amd many police agencies will tell you that. We would never dream of slaughtering our families, classrooms full of gradeschool children, or innocent people in general.

It takes a sick & twisted person to do something like that, but no weapons ban enforced on the law-abiding public will prevent someone from acting out such horrific violence...never has and never will. Gun FREE zones in today's society are easy targets. Same as any weapons free society in history.

It may techincally be against the 2nd Amendment, but I do support the ideas of tightened security in schools, improved mental healthcare, and more thorough background checks. However, the undertaking and expense of regulating private sales seems near impossible, and with all of today's privacy laws I don't really know how good the background checks are or will be with flagging mental healthcare issues.

I do not see where banning semi-auto rifles or magazine restrictions will change anything other than making current law abiding civilians who own such fireamrs out to be criminal.


I also think there must be some kind of coincidence with the young age of the perpitrators involved in these most recent incidents.

 

[muleybeast]

Great letter. You got a canned response from the senators aides. When I was in college I got to work in a senators mail room in D.C. My job was to open all mail, read it, and disseminate it to the proper specialist in the senators office. These individuals in turn would usually type up, or forward a form letter. If enough letters of the same topic were received, the senator himself would then usually draft a mass letter to send out. The response you got is most likely one of those. If enough of us on here get involved, it could make a difference!!!

 

[nripepi]

Sorry, but I disagree with the aftermarket statement as it doesn't make any sense to me at all. If the factory design came with a 1000 round drum, would that be high capacity or standard? What if the factory design was for a 5 round clip as standard, would a 10 round clip be high capacity then? The limit or definition cannot be based on design and aftermarket. You can say that 30 rounds is not high capacity and argue that point, but the high majority of people in this country of ours would disagree with you.

I am a proud gun owner, but I wonder if there were not 30-round clips or 10-round or 50-round (whatever is high capacity), if there were not AR model semi-auto guns, if there were not high capacity clips for handguns...if these were never made and sold would there be less senseless deaths in the case of these mass shootings? I think there would be, but we obviously don't know that so we should think about and discuss it and think about it for the future kids and mothers and fathers and sons and daughters not just for now.

My kids lives are more important to me than mine and is why I said we owe it to them and their innocent nature. We owe it to everyone, we owe it to the future. I didn't mean to stir the pot that I am currently stirring, sorry for that. Every option needs to be looked at, that is all I am saying in a truthful factual way.

 

[1FastGambler]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-23-13 AT 01:47PM (MST)[p]Nripepi, I thank you for your civility in your response.

I expected to catch some flack for my opinion on the definition of a high capacity magazine.

Your question about magazines that hold multiple rounds not ever existing may or may not reduce the number of lives taken in mass shootings is, in my opion a moot point. I agree that if they had never existed some wackjob may only kill 19 people instead of 20.

The above statement is like saying, well, if we never had guns at all people wouldn't be killed by guns.

Ummm, yea. So you wish we were all back in the stoneage throwing spears? Please don't take offense, I'm just trying to get my point across.

The fact is that US citizens already own tens of millions of magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Agreed? Good.

Making them illegial to buy or sell now solves nothing. They are still accessible to anyone and obviously already in the hands of many.

Think bigger.

I beleive that the best possible solution has already been presented, and it has nothing to do with more laws or restrictions on law abiding American citizens.

Our freedoms are being stripped away from us at an alarming rate. I for one have had about all I can stand of congress creating more and more laws and our current president's insane number of executive orders creating restrictions on the citizens of this great nation when our judicial system can't even incriminate guilty criminals, much less keep them behind bars.

I support God, my family, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights.
I support zero new laws on gun control.
I support arming teachers/school staff and/or armed guards.
I support eliminating gun free zones other than what's mentioned above.
I support closing loopholes that lawyers find to keep guilty criminals out of jail.
I support the NRA.

I oppose new gun laws.
I oppose martial law.
I oppose executive orders.
I oppose labor unions.
I oppose illegial immigration.
I oppose voter fraud.

 

[nripepi]

I am thinking long-term, maybe tomorrow this would not make a difference, but in 50 years, would it? 100 years? 200 years? That is what I would like to know. We are not just talking about today or tomorrow, but the future.

But maybe it would make a difference in the near future. I believe last two mass shootings were from very new guns and new clips, if they only had 10-round clips would it have saved anyone? Maybe, maybe not. As you say, maybe it does save one out of 20? Is 1 out of 20 worth it? Is 5 out of 20 worth it? Do you actually need more than 10 rounds in a clip?

 

[1FastGambler]

Really?

So your plan will somehow guarantee that no criminal and/or psycho will be capable of using a 30 round magazine in mass shootings 50 years from now?

Wow. You have a great imagination.

Go ahead and make your laws, I'll just build my own 30 round magazines for Ak-47's and sell them on the black market.

I've said it before & I'll say it again, What would the outcome in Sandy Hook have been like if 1/3 of the teachers were armed, including the teacher who's class was attacked?

Think about it. If you still don't get it I guess you never will.

The NRA said it best, "The only way to stop a bad guy with a gun, is a good guy with a gun".

 

[nripepi]

"I've said it before & I'll say it again, What would the outcome in Sandy Hook have been like if 1/3 of the teachers were armed, including the teacher who's class was attacked?"

It could easily have been the same. He could have easily just shot the teachers. Most kindergarten teachers I know, and I know a whole bunch of them, definitely could not handle a gun very well. It is an option though that should definitely be looked at it as it might be a deterrence for some, definitely include armed guards in schools as well as an option to be looked at.

Have you been following all of the slashings in China of young school children by mentally troubled individuals? Most of the kids have survived, including the latest one at the same time as Sandy Hook. If those individuals had access to semi-auto guns, they would have killed all of those kids that were slashed and probably a bunch more that is all I am saying. It is definitely much easier with semi-autos and high capacity clips, there is not debating that.

The best way to stop a bad guy who wants a gun to shoot people, is to make sure he can't get that gun or if he does get one, hope its a pea shooter and not an AR-15 with 100 round clips with quick expansion bullets. The other option is to have everyone and their brother armed like the wild west and let him get his gun and then shoot him.

I think we need to focus on keeping these weapons out of these individuals hands somehow and bans on ARs and bans on clip sizes (maybe it should 5 rounds allowed in a clip?) should at least be on the table for debate. As should all other options, screenings, mental health help, licensing,.....

I believe I am a rational individual (maybe I am not), who owns a pile of guns, and just want what is best for our country's future. I want there to be debate of which you have provided many good arguments.

 

[1FastGambler]

No one is suggesting we arm teachers who are incapable of the safe and authoritive handling of a firearm. In order to be allowed to carry at a school, intense training should be required.

Example: In order for anyone to carry on school property they must first pass a 3-4 week training program with the state police academy and take a refersher course every 2 years. This training should be free of charge to the teachers/school staff members.

Does the above statement change your mind regarding arming our teachers?

During a shootout, the odds are very much stacked in favor of the person with the best/most training. This is why I beleive you are mistaken.

 

[Reuben_Soady]

"Need" is not a criteria useful for determining the permissibility of an item or action.

e.g. We certainly don't "need" television or automobiles.

 

[leftturnabq]

The problem is not so simply solved as a ban. As mentioned, there are millions of such weapons already in circulation within the public. A ban at this point does nothing but make law abiding citizens out to be criminals. Does anyone really believe that if the bad guy had to reload a couple more times that it would matter in a classroom full of cornered grade school kids?! Like 1st graders could overtake him between reloads or would even know enough to try.

Besides the point of the 2nd Amendment has nothing to do with sport anyway. It is about civilians being able to defend themselves in the best way possible from threats both domestic and foreign. This idea includes using the fact that the civilian population is well armed as a deterrent. Dissarming or handicapping the law abiding population goes against this whole idea. I do not buy into this idea not working today as it did then...even with today's much more advanced military arsenal.

The same idea as a deterrent holds true with well armed school security as well as the possibility of arming trained teachers. I personally believe every police force should be well armed...every squad car should have a shotgun and a rifle.

It's quite obvious to me that gun free zones have become a target. The only gun free zone I am comfortable entering might be a courthouse where armed guards thoroughly search all who enter.

Yes, it is sad that our society has come to this point, but it is where we are at. The world is a nasty place and has been since the beginning. For anyone to believe otherwise, they are living in a sheltered fairy tale bubble or are in denial. The wealthy politicians who preach otherwise are hypocrites with the security measures they and their families have at their disposal, but are too good for the rest of us?!

As for what has gone on most recently, another thing that stands out to me is the young age of those committing these horrific crimes. There has to be a link...more than a coincidence.


Solutions:

-Law enforcement = strict penalties for violent criminals.
-Increases security and security measures in gun free zones.
-Gun safety training and awareness.
-Improved mental healthcare.
-Better records transparency on people with recorded mental health issues.

 

[JustMuleys]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-13 AT 09:08PM (MST)[p]If you got a call that there was an armed man running around at YOUR childs school...God Forbid.
Which would matter to you more?
1. Knowing he was armed only with a revolver or a shotgun and not an AR?
2. Knowing there was a trained guard or 2 or 3 there to protect your child?

If we could ban all AR's and Hi-cap mags today, and make them disappear today, and 2 weeks from now a wack-job shot 4 kids with a revolver, would that be an acceptable number just because he didn't use an AR and a Hi-cap mag?

Would we say " well gosh at least they didn't get shot by an AR", at their funeral?

Fact is, ZERO deaths is the only acceptable number, and shame on our govt for wanting to pass some "Zero-affect, Knee-jerk" legislation, in the name of saying "well atleast we did something".

 

[1FastGambler]

LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-13 AT 09:08PM (MST)[p]LAST EDITED ON Jan-24-13 AT 09:07?PM (MST)

>
>If you got a call that
>there was an armed man
>running around at YOUR childs
>school...God Forbid.
>1. Would you feel any comfort
>if he was armed only
>with a revolver or a
>shotgun and not an AR?
>
>2. Would you feel any comfort
>knowing there was a trained
>guard or 2 or 3
>there to protect your child.
>
>
>If we could ban all AR's
>and Hi-cap mags today, and
>make them disappear today, and
>2 weeks from now a
>wack-job shot 4 kids with
>a revolver, would that be
>an acceptable number just because
>he didn't use an AR
>and a Hi-cap mag?
_________________________

Well said lefturn & justmuleys.