Durbin's Reply

What's the hunt looking like this year in your area? Share!
User avatar
Deebz
 
Posts: 988
Joined: Fri Aug 27, 2010 8:25 am
Location: Illinois

Durbin's Reply

Postby Deebz » Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:42 am

After submitting letters to my representatives using the link posted here the other day, this is the response I got from Senator Durbin:



Dear Mr. *******:

Thank you for contacting me about gun violence prevention in light of the shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. I appreciate hearing from you.

I share with all Americans a profound sense of sorrow at the senseless act of violence committed at Sandy Hook Elementary School. The nation mourns this event and many Americans wonder what can be done to prevent this type of tragedy in the future.

I am an original cosponsor of the Large Capacity Ammunition Feeding Device Act which would reinstate a ban on magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition. The ban on multi-round magazines expired along with the federal assault weapons ban in 2004. I am a cosponsor of a bill that would reinstate the ban on assault weapons and would expand the definition of assault weapons to close loopholes that allow gun manufacturers to work around the previous ban.

I support universal gun background checks, which prevent the transfer of firearms without a background check by non-licensed gun sellers. I am a cosponsor of “terror gap” legislation that would give the Attorney General discretionary authority to deny gun sales to individuals who are known or appropriately suspected to be engaged in terrorism.

The majority of Americans and the majority of thoughtful gun owners and hunters agree that there must be reasonable limits on gun ownership and weapons. We must institute common-sense limits, such as barring those with a history of mental instability, those with a history of violent crime or who are subject to restraining orders, and those whose names have been placed on a terrorist watch list from owning weapons. Straw purchasers and gun dealers should face firm penalties. There should be limits on how many firearms may be purchased in one month. Those who own firearms that are within the reach of children should have protective locks on their weapons.

The United States Supreme Court has raised questions about the Second Amendment and the protections and responsibilities under this Constitutional amendment. I plan to hold a Senate Judiciary Hearing in the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Human Rights Subcommittee to address this Constitutional question and how to forward on gun control.

My heart and prayers go out to the victims and their families in Newtown, Connecticut, as we remember the children and teachers who lost their lives.

Thank you again for contacting me. Please do not hesitate to keep in touch.

Sincerely,
Richard J. Durbin
United States Senator

RJD/jv
"When a hunter is in a tree stand with high moral values and with the proper hunting ethics and richer for the experience, that hunter is 20 feet closer to God." ~Fred Bear

User avatar
Woods Walker
 
Posts: 4952
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Northern Illinois

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby Woods Walker » Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:47 am

Hunt Hard,

Kill Swiftly,

Waste Nothing,

Offer No Apologies.....

>>>--------------------------------->
NRA Endowment Life Member

xmatax
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2012 6:30 am
Location: NW PA

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby xmatax » Wed Jan 30, 2013 11:38 am

"We must institute common-sense limits"

I look at this statement in his letter to you and it sticks out very boldy and it makes me want to smack the man right upside the head...

Yes common sense limits will include back-ground checks, harder to get for mentally unstable and/or criminals BUT what he doesn't say is in his "common sense limits" there has been no proof that has been presented on his behalf, or on the behalf of ANY of the politicians trying to ban AR's and semi-automatics and larger clips that they are part of the problem. So via his own arguement, common sense tells us if there is no evidence to the contrary and common sense can't point out how much more negatively these certain types of firearms are than others, then why are they even bringing them into the debate?

unclebuck
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby unclebuck » Wed Jan 30, 2013 3:35 pm

Im sure I will get flack for this but, I dont really see a problem with anything he said. Is it the fact that he doesnt like magazines that hold over 10 rounds or the fact that he wants to eliminate "assault weapons" (whatever his definition of that might be) ? Maybe its because I dont care about 30 round magazines or AR's that I dont have a problem with it. Or maybe its because im not completely paranoid that the government is going to barge into my house and take all my guns right before giving me my ration of bread and soup broth for the week. I personally dont think there should be a ban on semi-auto "assault rifles" or, large capacity magazines, but at the same time I really dont feel like my life will be effected by this at all. Is it that you guys are worried that like pump shotguns and bolt action rifles will be next or what? Not trying to start an argument. Just curious.

User avatar
kellory
 
Posts: 2677
Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 3:01 pm
Location: Ohio

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby kellory » Wed Jan 30, 2013 4:25 pm

unclebuck wrote:Im sure I will get flack for this but, I dont really see a problem with anything he said. Is it the fact that he doesnt like magazines that hold over 10 rounds or the fact that he wants to eliminate "assault weapons" (whatever his definition of that might be) ? Maybe its because I dont care about 30 round magazines or AR's that I dont have a problem with it. Or maybe its because im not completely paranoid that the government is going to barge into my house and take all my guns right before giving me my ration of bread and soup broth for the week. I personally dont think there should be a ban on semi-auto "assault rifles" or, large capacity magazines, but at the same time I really dont feel like my life will be effected by this at all. Is it that you guys are worried that like pump shotguns and bolt action rifles will be next or what? Not trying to start an argument. Just curious.


If you think that...you have not been listening.

REMEMBER?

"First They Came for the Jews"
By Pastor Niemoller


First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.
The only real difference between a good tracker and a bad tracker is observation. All the same data is present for both. The rest is understanding what you are seeing.

unclebuck
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby unclebuck » Wed Jan 30, 2013 5:32 pm

kellory wrote:
unclebuck wrote:Im sure I will get flack for this but, I dont really see a problem with anything he said. Is it the fact that he doesnt like magazines that hold over 10 rounds or the fact that he wants to eliminate "assault weapons" (whatever his definition of that might be) ? Maybe its because I dont care about 30 round magazines or AR's that I dont have a problem with it. Or maybe its because im not completely paranoid that the government is going to barge into my house and take all my guns right before giving me my ration of bread and soup broth for the week. I personally dont think there should be a ban on semi-auto "assault rifles" or, large capacity magazines, but at the same time I really dont feel like my life will be effected by this at all. Is it that you guys are worried that like pump shotguns and bolt action rifles will be next or what? Not trying to start an argument. Just curious.


If you think that...you have not been listening.

REMEMBER?

"First They Came for the Jews"
By Pastor Niemoller


First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.


k... anyone with an actual answer?

User avatar
JPH
 
Posts: 3419
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 10:28 am

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby JPH » Wed Jan 30, 2013 7:17 pm

unclebuck wrote:Im sure I will get flack for this but, I dont really see a problem with anything he said. Is it the fact that he doesnt like magazines that hold over 10 rounds or the fact that he wants to eliminate "assault weapons" (whatever his definition of that might be) ? Maybe its because I dont care about 30 round magazines or AR's that I dont have a problem with it. Or maybe its because im not completely paranoid that the government is going to barge into my house and take all my guns right before giving me my ration of bread and soup broth for the week. I personally dont think there should be a ban on semi-auto "assault rifles" or, large capacity magazines, but at the same time I really dont feel like my life will be effected by this at all. Is it that you guys are worried that like pump shotguns and bolt action rifles will be next or what? Not trying to start an argument. Just curious.


Unclebuck, I find your remarks reasonable. I agree with you on a few points, and disagree with you on a few. I'm with you on the magazine capacity but not so much on the ARs or "assault weapons". That's okay. As far as I am concerned, that is the point of forums. People should be able to discuss important questions like these without shrill rhetoric. Unfortunately, that has not proven possible here on this topic.

I wish you the best in your search for answers, but I don't hold out a great deal of hope.

User avatar
Woods Walker
 
Posts: 4952
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Northern Illinois

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby Woods Walker » Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:20 pm

"k... anyone with an actual answer?"

If you're serious with that question, then I suggest that you go back and look at some of the threads I've started, and especially this one.....

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=38989

That pretty well covered it. If you still don't get it after going through 6 pages (IGNORE THE SLAVE DIVERGENCE!!!), then you probably never will. It's not about hunting, it's not about what you or anyone or anything else thinks we "need". It's about freedom granted to us by our Creator when we were born. I can't state it anymore simply than that.
Hunt Hard,

Kill Swiftly,

Waste Nothing,

Offer No Apologies.....

>>>--------------------------------->
NRA Endowment Life Member

User avatar
Woods Walker
 
Posts: 4952
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 10:21 am
Location: Northern Illinois

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby Woods Walker » Wed Jan 30, 2013 8:46 pm

unclebuck: I have a question for you that may save us all a lot of cyber ink.

Do you believe in the individual right to keep and bear arms as spelled out in the Constitution? Yes or no. No "Yes...but". I'll respect your answer either way, but at least we'll know where we all stand.
Hunt Hard,

Kill Swiftly,

Waste Nothing,

Offer No Apologies.....

>>>--------------------------------->
NRA Endowment Life Member

unclebuck
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:59 pm

Re: Durbin's Reply

Postby unclebuck » Thu Jan 31, 2013 9:23 am

Woods Walker wrote:unclebuck: I have a question for you that may save us all a lot of cyber ink.

Do you believe in the individual right to keep and bear arms as spelled out in the Constitution? Yes or no. No "Yes...but". I'll respect your answer either way, but at least we'll know where we all stand.


Of course. I'd be a hypocrite if I said no since I own several firearms. I just think some people get carried away with it.

Next

Return to General Discussions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot] and 11 guests