Sen. Brown,
Sen. Portman,
Rep. Kaptur,
I'm writing you today to ask you to
oppose the bill introduced by Sen. Diane Feinstein, S.150, the so-called
Assault Weapon ban. While the tragedy in Newtown CN was devastating, I believe
this proposed ban is a gross overreaction that will not make anyone safer. The
language of the bill would restrict the sale and transfer of perfectly legal firearms,
all which are no more lethal than their counterparts which are not listed in
the ban. Further evidence of this overreaction is summed up in the fact the
Newtown CN shooter did not use a semi-automatic rifle in his shooting, nor did
he have one on site. But rather there was a semi-auto shotgun found in the
trunk of his vehicle and it was never taken into the school.
The current firearms laws in CN
were unable to prevent this tragedy; this new proposed ban would not have
either.
Additionally, penalizing the rights
of millions of law abiding voters who own the majority of these firearms due to
the acts of a small few is grossly unfair and unconstitutional. I sure you
would agree with that the majority of firearms owned in this country are never
used for violence, yet this proposed ban would restrict the rights of those who
have never illegally used a weapon, nor committed any crime.
I would also site that Chicago IL,
and Washington D.C. already have firearms laws at least as restrictive as this
proposed ban yet those laws are do nothing to curb the violence in those
cities.
The problem is not weaponry rather
it is the declining moral compass of our nation. You cannot legislate a
conscience to anyone.
The UK went down this road in the
last decade and things have not gotten better for them.
There are reports coming out of Great Britain of two sorts.
One is the increase in use of large kitchen knives in
assaults so much so the some ER doctors are calling for bans on them.
Also the use baseball bats being used in assaults are also
on the rise in that nation.
Secondly, the UK has also increased
its use of armed police since its firearms ban due to the fact that the
criminals do not obey the laws anyway. Do we really believe criminals here in
the U.S. will obey a new ban?
Please also consider the impact on
the economy. The sale of firearms, ammunition, accessories, training, competition,
press and television represent a vast industry that will be severely impacted
by this ban. The revenue and taxes generated by law abiding citizens and the livelihoods
of many areas of even our state will be affected. I reference one major local event
here in Ohio, the annual National Rifle Matches held here in Camp Perry Oh,
near Port Clinton. Shooters from around the world flock here for the two month
long event generating a huge in flux of cash into the local economy. This
proposed ban would hit a large number of your constituents directly in their wallets,
since this proposed ban targets the very firearms around which the national matches
are built.
Finally and most importantly is the
constitutionality of such a ban. The Second Amendment clearly prohibits any law
which would infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. This
right was recognized as the right of the people to defend themselves against
the government should it become despotic. If this proposed ban passes it will surely
face a constitutionality challenge in the Supreme Court, the outcome of which
will shape our liberties for generations to come.
I strenuously urge you to oppose this ban and any proposed
ban that limits the rights of law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms.
Sincerly,
David K. Reamey
No comments:
Post a Comment