Subdeacon Joe Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 I got a canned response, wrote back a reply I needed to split into 3. Thought you all might enjoy it. Formatting seems to have suffered pasting it here. OK, “Barry,” since when are we on a first name basis? What ever happened to decorum anddignity? Do you think your attack on the2nd Amendment will be any more palatable because you used myChristian name? Dear Joseph: Thank you for taking the time towrite. I have heard from many Americans regarding firearms policy and gunviolence in our Nation, and I appreciate your perspective. From Aurora toNewtown to the streets of Chicago, we have seen the devastating effects gunviolence has on our American family. I join countless others in grievingfor all those whose lives have been taken too soon by gun violence. Again,there is no such thing as “gun violence.” There is violence, plain and simple. Like the majority of Americans, Ibelieve the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to bear arms. In this country, we have a strong tradition of gun ownership that has beenhanded down from generation to generation. Hunting and sport shooting arepart of our national heritage. Yet, even as we acknowledge that almostall gun owners in America are responsible, when we look at the devastationcaused by gun violence—whether in high-profile tragedies or the dailyheartbreak that plagues our cities—we must ask ourselves whether we are doingenough. OK, “Barry, that’s nice. We also have even more devastation caused by “car violence” and “bike violence” and even “hammer violence.” I don’t see you attacking those, “Barry.” While reducing gun violence is acomplicated challenge, protecting our children from harm should not be adivisive one. Most gun owners agree that we can respect the SecondAmendment while keeping an irresponsible, law-breaking few from inflicting harmon a massive scale. Most also agree that if we took commonsense steps tocurtail gun violence, there would be fewer atrocities like the one thatoccurred in Newtown. We will not be able to stop every violent act, butif there is even one thing we can do to reduce gun violence—if even one lifecan be saved—then we have an obligation to try. Yes, “Barry,” we can agree on keeping “an irresponsible, law-breaking few frominflicting harm on a massive scale.” Andwe have laws on the books now to do just that. But Good Ol’ Joe “Just Blast Away” Biden has admitted publicly that thefederal government doesn’t enforce those laws. Why do you, “Barry” want to add even more laws that the federalgovernment will ignore? That is why I asked Vice PresidentJoe Biden to identify concrete steps we can take to keep our children safe,help prevent mass shootings, and reduce the broader epidemic of gun violence inthis country. He met with over 200 groups representing a broadcross-section of Americans and heard their best ideas. I have put forwarda specific set of proposals based off of his efforts, and in the days ahead, Iintend to use whatever weight this office holds to make them a reality. There isno “epidemic of gun violence,” “Barry.” Every day tens of millions of honest gun owner fail to shootanybody. And, every day, thousands of honestgun owners use firearms to fend of predatory thugs. And “Blast Away Joe” is hardly the properperson to have in charge of looking into gun laws and safe gun practices. My plan gives law enforcement,schools, mental health professionals, and the public health community some ofthe tools they need to help reduce gun violence. These tools includestrengthening the background check system, helping schools hire more resourceofficers and counselors and develop emergency preparedness plans, and ensuringmental health professionals know their options for reporting threats ofviolence. And I directed the Centers for Disease Control to study thebest ways to reduce gun violence—because it is critical that we understand thescience behind this public health crisis. And, asI’m sure you know, in 2003 the CDC released a report that said, in essence,that it had been totally unable to find any causality between stripping honestcitizens of civil rights and reduction in crime or violence. In 2004 the National Academy of Sciencereleased an extensive study saying the same thing. As important as these steps are,they are not a substitute for action from Congress. To make a real andlasting difference, members of Congress must also act. As part of mycomprehensive plan, I have called on them to pass some specific proposals rightaway. First, it is time to require a universal background check foranyone trying to buy a gun. Second, Congress should renew the 10-roundlimit on magazines and reinstate and strengthen the assault weapons ban. We should get tougher on those who buy guns with the purpose of selling them tocriminals, and we should impose serious punishments on anyone who helps them dothis. Otherthan the universal background check, what you are saying is that the federalgovernment needs to enforce the laws already on the books. Every real cop, not the politically appointedchiefs of police, will tell you that magazine capacity bans are worthless. There is not enough time in the two to threeseconds needed for a magazine change for a person under attack to recognizewhat is happening and to attack and subdue a thug. About all they would be able to do in thattime is break cover and draw attention to themselves. I’m sure you are aware that almost all of theheinous attacks have happened in places that are “gun free zones.” These are reasonable, commonsensemeasures that have the support of the majority of the American people. But change will not come unless the American people demand it from their lawmakers. Now is the time to do the right thing for our children, our communities, andthe country we love. We owe the victims of heartbreaking nationaltragedies and the countless unheralded tragedies each year nothing less thanour best effort—to seek consensus in order to save lives and ensure a brighterfuture for our children. Thank you, again, for writing. I encourage you to visit www.WhiteHouse.gov/NowIsTheTime to learn more about my Administration’s approach. Sincerely, Barack Obama I call your attention to West Virginia State Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624(1943)“The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from thevicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach ofmajorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to beapplied by the courts. One's right to life, liberty, and property, to freespeech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamentalrights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of noelections.” Seems like the SupremeCourt of the United States is telling the federal government that it has nopower over any of the enumerated civil rights in the Bill of Rights. But, of course, you and the DNC have never muchconcerned yourselves with upholding the Constitution, or following the law ifeither gets in the way of your agenda. At least not since Pres. Johnson’s, oh, I guess I should call himLyndon, shouldn’t I, since we are all so chummy and all, Great Societyexperiment. I seen nothing at all“reasonable” or “common sense” about attempts to legislate away the protectionsof our civil rights guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. It isn’t about hunting, or target shooting,or plinking, or collecting. I think theHappy Warrior put it well when he said, “Certainlyone of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter howpopular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms.... Theright of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrarygovernment, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote inAmerica but which historically has proven to be always possible. (Hubert H.Humphrey) . Cordially, MISTERJoseph Lovell Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.