Message from and reply to my local rep in VA

Pat Tarrant

Custom testicles
Moderator
#1
Below is a reply indecently received from my local delegate regarding 2A restrictions. Posted for both info for others as well as feedback.


Good Afternoon,

Thank you for your email. I understand there is much concern about how potential sensible gun law legislation will affect law-abiding gun owners and their access to firearms. I have been an advocate for sensible gun laws that do not hurt our law-abiding citizens, but rather protects our citizenry as a whole.

I am an advocate for increasing the age to purchase assault rifles from 18 to 21, a ban on bump stocks and universal background checks. I know these ideas may not mirror your own, but I hope we can have open conversations about how we can address gun violence in Virginia.

Please do not hesitate to contact me in the future with any other questions or comments.

Sincerely,

Delegate Karrie Delaney, District 67


Ms. Delaney,

Thank you very much for taking the time to respond to me. While I certainly admire your motivations, I truly believe your intentions are misplaced. I would be honored to have a conversation with you face to face or over the phone to discuss our views, and I appreciate your invitation to further conversation.

I'd like to state that there is no such thing as "gun violence." People are violent, and choose to use various tools from guns to knives to bombs to airplanes to rental vans and no on to commit violent acts. Any restrictions on legal purchase or possession of guns only harms those not intent on committing violence, and makes the citizenry as a whole more exposed to violence by those who do not care about laws.

Additionally, as long as firearms related charges are the first to be plead away as part of a deal, any future gun laws are hollow threats to criminals who know better, and serve to deny arms from the law abiding who want nothing more than to be a contribution to society. Gun owners are overwhelmingly a positive and contributing populace to our great country. Additional laws that will only be voluntarily followed by the most upstanding citizens of our communities do noting but create criminals out of the best of us.

I am greatly concerned for efforts to restrict sales to those between 18 and 21 years old. My reasons for concern are both practical and moral. On the practical side, such a raise would prove to be only a temporary speed bump to legal gun purchases, for those who would bother to obtain a gun legally at all, for those intending to commit violence with a gun. Additionally, there have been few examples of those 18-21 who have legally prulurchased guns who went on to commit violence with them. On the moral side, we place trust enough in 18 year olds to vote, or to be drafted into armed services against their will. To demand such responsibity from our young adults while denying them the right to obtain tools for their defense is contradictory to the responsibility we demand of them. Especially for those young adults in disadvantaged living situations, such restrictions on their natural and protected civil rights would place them at considerable risk and danger to criminals who are them as easy targets.

As a competent shooter, former military member, and fledgling writer in the firearms and firearms training community, I think bump stocks and similar devices are stupid. They are also entirely legal, and should be. I have worked in the intelligence community, specializing in counterterrorism for the last decade. I'm very familiar with what modern rifles can do. The tragedy in Law Vegas likely would have been worse if the shooter did not use a bump stock, as they severely inhibit accurate fire and are little more than a range toy. Additionally, bump firing a rifle is a simple technique that can be accomplished with nothing more than a few moments of practice with the technique. Any restrictions there would be ineffective at combating violence of any sort, and only would hinder those who are using guns for all legal purposes. Also, seeing several drafts for bump stock bans, the writing is so sloppy and vague that it could be interpreted to ban higher quality trigger modules, sighting systems, grips, magazines, and even professional training. All those things not only make guns more effective, but also SAFER to operate. Such poor legislation is certain to be used in ways far beyond the stated purpose to ban a silly accessory like a bump stock.

Universal background checks actually do have the potential to do some good, however there are many pitfalls as well. First and foremost, background checks have continually proven innefective at keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. Even if one were to fail a background check, there are innumerable alternatives for criminals to use as weapons. Additionally, the fees payable to cover mandatory background checks (as well as Concealed Carry Permits and NFA taxes for those interested in purchasing a short barreled rifle or shotgun or a sound suppressor) amount to a poll tax, a tax payable in order to exercise an enumerated and protected right. According to the 24th Amendment, poll taxes are illegal as they deter those of low income from being able to exercise their equal rights. Universal background checks are proven ineffective, and amount to an illegal tax on a protected right.

I am entirely in favor of possible actions which could combat violence and provide enhanced responses when it does occur which fobbit further restrict our legal and moral rights. Additional funding for police training for active shooters and mass casualty events would be a great avenue. Enhancing mental health programs and responses to actual provable threats is another. Allowing trained and qualified teachers to carry concealed weapons on school grounds is worth exploring (I'm certainly not in favor of forcing teachers to carry guns when they have little interest or aptitude to do so). Offering teachers the chance to learn trauma care and have access to medical equipment suited to treat trauma could save many lives in the even to a mass shooter, while still being a huge benefit to more mundane injuries as well. As we can see from other countries and states that ban all sorts of weapons, mass attacks still happen. They happen in the USA, UK, France, Germany, Australia, Japan, China, everywhere, despite bans on all sorts of guns. We can best focus our efforts by deterring attacks, by trying to legally identify those likely to commit attacks whike respecting rights of those who have not committed any crimes, and provide more effective responses when attacks do happen.

I'd also like to urge you to support and advance gun rights for your fellow citizens. Legislation such as the Hearing Protection Act, which aims to treat sound suppressors, which reduce the risk of hearing damage and the associated strain on our healthcare industry, like any firearms that only require simple background checks to purchase, deserves to be passed. Further, short barreled rifles and shotguns, currently restricted via the National Firearms Act, should be removed from the act. They have never posed any more risk to society as their longer barreled versions, yet are well suited to defending people in their homes (especially for people of less physical strength like the elderly and many women, as the gun's shorter length and lighter weight make them easier for those people to effectively and safely use). Additionally, laws aimed to allow military members and civilians with state issued carry permits to carry their concealed weapons on US military and Intelligence Community installations is vital to their protection. In this day and age, the military and IC professionals are at considerable risk, especially as the government has allowed their most private information to be stolen by foreign governments and sold to whomever wishes to buy it. Currently, and despite the trust the government has placed in those who hold security clearances and the exhaustive background checks we regularly endure, we cannot even store privately owned guns in our cars into our facilities, and we are often high profile targets who are vulnerable and unarmed during our daily commutes.

Again, I'd like to sincerely thank you for your response and desire to have an earnest conversation about our rights, responsibility, and safety. It would be a pleasure to continue via email, phone, or in person.

Warmest regards,
 
#2
Link up with the NRA and any local guys in your area and try to get this local rep defeated in a primary in favor of a more pro 2A candiate.

Looking at the most recent primary for your rep less then 6,000 people voted. Just a little bit of fundraising, volunteer work, and grassroots mobilization goes a long way. Even if you can do something like work with the NRA and local college republicans or Young Americans for Liberty to knock doors or have a local PD endorse her primary challenger you have quite the ability to make a difference