In regard to state Senator James Eldridge, Middlesex/Worcester district

[Phillip Gain]

In response to my letter to his office asking for his support on Senate Bill 661, An Act Repealing the Ban on Modern Sporting Arms:

Dear Mr. Gain,

Thank you for contacting my office about Senate Bill 661, An Act Repealing the Ban on Modern Sporting Arms. Having given the issue significant consideration and thoughtful review, I am opposed to S.661, and would like to take this opportunity to explain my position on this important issue.

Most significantly, I am concerned that this legislation would threaten the safety of Massachusetts residents. The weapons that this bill would legalize are the weapons of choice for gangs, drug traffickers, mass killers, and terrorists, including the Intratec TEC-DEC9 used by the Columbine shooters. Police across the country find themselves under threat of being outgunned even by a single gunman or small group of criminals. Making these weapons more easily accessible would only exacerbate the threat to public safety that such weapons present.

I understand that those who support Senate bill 661 are interested in making these weapons more accessible for sport and self-defense. While I recognize that some individuals would feel safer owning these firearms, I worry that this legislation will threaten public safety by flooding the market with weapons destined to end up in the wrong peoples’ hands.

In looking into this issue, I learned that regulation of assault weapons has proven to be largely effective in protecting Massachusetts residents’ personal safety. In the decade during which the Federal Assault Weapons Ban was in effect, for instance, the number of crimes involving these weapons was cut by about two-thirds. Since the ban expired in 2004, however, their use in crimes has unfortunately increased.

The current Massachusetts Assault Weapons Ban is partially responsible for the fact that we boast the second lowest firearm fatality rate in the nation, whereas this legislation would undermine our current gun violence prevention laws. Let’s keep Massachusetts safe by keeping dangerous assault weapons out of our state to the greatest extent possible.

Thank you again for contacting my office regarding this important issue. If you have any further questions about this or any other legislation, please feel free to contact me by email at [email protected], or call my State House office at 617-722-1120.

Very truly yours,
James B. Eldridge

There's his contact information. You should call his office and tell them just how you feel. And be sure to vote against him when he comes up for re-election. (Unless he changes his position, which I seriously doubt.)

 

[Phillip Gain]

My reply:

Dear Senator Eldridge,

Let me remind you of Article 17 of the Massachusetts Constitution:

Art. XVII. The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority and be governed by it.

Let me also remind you of the Second Amendment to the US Constitution:

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.

I’m not sure what part of “the people” and “shall not be infringed” you do not understand.

Also…I’d like to illuminate a few facts for you. Unlike your email to me…I will cite sources for my information:

Myth: High capacity, semi-automatics are preferred by Criminals

Fact: The use of semi-automatic handguns used in crimes is slightly less than the ratio of semi-automatic handguns owned by private citizens. Any increase in style and capacity simply reflects the overall supply of the various types of firearms.
Source: Targeting Guns, Dr. Gary Kleck, Criminologist, Florida State University, Aldine, 1997


Myth: Assault weapons are a serious problem in the U.S.

Fact: In 1994, before the Federal “assault weapons ban,” you were eleven (11) times more likely to be beaten to death than to be killed by an “assault weapon.”
Source: FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1994

Fact: In the first year since the ban was lifted, murders declined 3.6%, and violent crime 1.7%.
Source: FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, Preliminary Summary, 2004

Fact: Nationally, “assault weapons” were used in 1.4% of crimes involving firearms and 0.25% of all violent crime before the enactment of any national or state “assault weapons” ban. In many major urban areas (San Antonio, Mobile, Nashville, etc.) and some entire states (Maryland, New Jersey, etc.) the rate is less than 0.1%.
Source: Targeting Guns, Gary Kleck, Aldine Transaction, 1997, compilation of 48 metropolitan police departments from 1980-1994

Fact: Even weapons misclassified as “assault weapons” (common in the former Federal and California “assault weapons” confiscations) are used in less than 1% of all
homicides.
Source: FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1993


Myth: The 1994 (former) Federal Assault Weapons Ban was effective

Fact: “ ... we cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence.”
Source: An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003, National Institute of Justice, June 2004

Fact: The ban covered only 1.39% of the models of firearms on the market, so the ban’s effectiveness is automatically limited.

Fact: “The ban has failed to reduce the average number of victims per gun murder incident or multiple gunshot wound victims.”
Source: Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994-96, National Institute of Justice, March 1999

Fact: “The public safety benefits of the 1994 ban have not yet been demonstrated.”
Source: Impacts of the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban: 1994-96, National Institute of Justice, March 1999

It is apparent that while you have “given the issue significant consideration and thoughtful review,” you have done so only in terms of how it might affect your standing with your party. It is clear that you have not given consideration to any actual facts.

You have lost my vote. And I will see to it that you lose many more.

Sincerely,

Phillip A. Gain

I'd appreciate it if anyone in this clown's district would write to him and express similar sentiments.

 

[richardnorton]

Well I have to laugh, those are the biggest reasons I live in Texas, and Iwould challange him on the "assault weapon" use in crimes, the fact is that te mislabeled "assault weapons" are NOT used in crimes and the people saying that are lying.

 

[rjplt23]

Keep Up the fight friend. I email my legislators several times a week.

 

[rob929]

I received a similar response from a government official on the issue of open carry in the state of Oklahoma.

I'm sure glad they know what's best for the rest of us.

Don't stop what you're doing.