COPY and SEND THIS to your anti gun congresscritters,photocopy & give to non shooters

[ernest2]

A wonderful new resource has opened for the firearms community.
You own it to yourself and your family to check out and bookmark
www.keepandbeararms.org/

They have a congressional letter writer that is very good and wonderfull pro-gun articles and information.

A MUST SEE FOR ALL!
ernest2
---------------------------------------------
Keep And Bear Arms .com Launching Soon
-------------------------------------------- Letter to My Anti-Gun Friends
by Angel Shamaya with contributing editors.

Reprinted from the free KeepAndBearArms.org Email Report Inspired by This Document
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear Anti-Gun People,

I am opening a dialogue with you to better comprehend your position
through reviewing your responses to a few questions. After you've read
my questions and the provided links, I'll answer any questions you may
have regarding my strong belief in the right to keep and bear arms, and
I hope you will truthfully answer the questions I pose to you below:

1) Do you believe the government is always honest with the people?

2) A woman who is unarmed is easy prey for an armed rapist. But there
are many places in America where a woman cannot legally carry a gun to
protect herself from attack. Do you think it is better for a woman to be
raped than to fend off a rapist in self-defense with a gun? If so, why? If
not, then do you advise women to resist armed rapists with their bare
hands?

3) Britain has effectively disarmed its citizens. Their own Olympic
shooters had to ship guns out of the country or turn them in to be
destroyed. But if more gun control decreases crime, why is Britain
experiencing an epidemic of gun-related violence? (See
http://www.newsunlimited.co.uk/gun)

4) Washington, D.C. has a per capita murder rate of 69 per 100,000 with
the strictest gun control laws in the country. Indianapolis, with much
more gun freedom, only has 9 murders per 100,000 residents. If
disarming people makes cities safer, how can this be?

5) There are tens of thousands of cases of people getting no response
from the 911 system--including scores of cases where people were still
wounded or killed after having dialed 911. If a criminal is already inside
your house, garage, or car, is dialing 911 really the most effective way of
immediately dealing with the situation?
(See
http://www.channel2000.com/news/stor...3-124534.html)

6) Police also have no legal requirement to protect you when you call for
help. People attacked by criminals and injured after calling police for
help cannot sue in court and win. This places the responsibility of
personal protection in the hands of each individual. Does it make sense
that the individual be denied the same access to tools for self-protection
that police enjoy? (See http://rkba.org/research/kasler/protection and
also http://dial911.itgo.com)

7) Every national gun licensing and registration in history has led to
confiscation. Gun registration in America has already led to confiscation
in New York and California. (See
http://www.sierratimes.com/arjj020700.htm) If you support gun
registration in America, would you please explain how having their guns
registered helped the citizens in China, Nazi Germany, Cambodia, the
Soviet Union, or Uganda? Do you think gun registration was beneficial to
the Jews in Germany, the Cambodians under Pol Pot, or the Chinese
under Mao Tse Tung? (See http://www.jpfo.org/L-laws.htm.)

8) Why are the media and the government working in unison to disarm
America when the most in-depth scientific studies on the subject of
private gun ownership shows that more guns in the hands of citizens
REDUCES violent crime? (See
http://www.reasonmag.com/0001/fe.js.cold.html) What agenda for the
US do they have planned that requires disarming the citizens of our
country?

9) Criminals get guns, knives, and bludgeons any time they wish, and
they disobey whatever laws they wish--including laws against robbery,
rape, and murder. Why would you want to make law-abiding citizens
easier prey by taking away their guns?
(See
http://www.the-times.co.uk/news/page...2004.html?999)

10) We rarely see both sides of the gun debate issue on national
television. Why is that? It has already been proven by the most in-depth
scientific study on the subject of guns and crime that more guns in the
hands of law-abiding citizens means less crime.

11) The ACLU and most Americans think a door-to-door search for drugs
is a gross violation of civil rights. Many gun banners would like to see
door-to-door confiscation of guns. Are you willing to have Your Home
searched for guns (or anything else) any time the government wishes to
do so?

12) Every year Americans citizens legally kill 3-5 times as many
criminals as are killed by all the law enforcement officials combined. Up
to 2 1/2 million times a year, citizens use guns to legally thwart
crime--usually when they are the intended victims. If citizens are
disarmed, these intended victims will be defenseless against armed
criminals. Are you saying that millions of Americans each year should
have no right to stop criminals who are victimizing them? Would you
prefer to give many more criminals the ability to succeed each year?

13) Today, many men and women have reason to believe that the
Federal government is intent on disarming the American people as a
means to significantly greater control--the way citizens in disarmed
China, Germany, the Soviet Union and Cuba are controlled. If these
people are right, does this concern you?

14) There are 360-450 citizens in America for every law enforcement
officer. (600,000/750,000 to 270,000,000) Do you believe each law
enforcement officer can protect 360-450 people from violent criminals?

15) When they express anger, law-abiding gun owners are presented as
"extremists" in today's media. American public servants surrounded by
armed bodyguards and/or living in neighborhoods with private security
are telling law-abiding citizens we cannot carry or even own (some
cities/states) a gun--not even to protect ourselves and our families. Do
you see the hypocrisy? Can you understand why tolerance pushed
beyond a limit of fairness leads to justifiable anger? Can you understand
why being told we cannot enjoy the same safety our leaders enjoy
invokes outrage? Is a politician's life more important than your life? If
so, why?

16) Mainstream media, which uses the publicly-owned electromagnetic
spectrum to broadcast, has clearly proven to be biased against guns; it
is not presenting both sides of the issue. (See
http://www.keepandbeararms.org/media_bias.htm) On the other hand,
http://www.citizensofamerica.org has a media program that presents the
pro-gun side of the story. If you believe in "equality" regarding public
property, should COA be given free media time to present their case?
And just why IS the media so biased in the first place? (And why might
the government be anti-gun?)

17) In many areas of the nation, a woman who is being stalked by her
ex-husband must wait 10 days to purchase a gun--even if her life has
been threatened. Why should law-abiding people in fear of their lives
wait 10 days to get a gun when criminals have no waiting periods?

18) Criminals often kill people who've already turned over their money
and put up no resistance. If a woman does not resist and the criminal
intends to rape her, she will be raped. Do you think the government has
a right to require women to submit to rape? If so, why?

19) Are we supposed to simply Submit when confronted with an armed
rapist or murderer and leave our ourselves at their mercy? If so, why?
Can you see how our society would revert to utter lawlessness if
everyone agreed to simply submit to armed criminals?

20) Many anti-gun people use child gun-related accidents and/or deaths
as a reason for banning guns. Seeing that more children drown every
year than are killed by guns, do you support banning swimming pools?

21) Current federal law now limits the capacity of a gun's magazine to
10 rounds. Police often empty their guns without ever stopping a
criminal. If you were out alone at a roadside rest area and were
approached by 3 hardened criminals with obvious intent to do you harm,
would you want to be limited to only 10 rounds?

22) Cars are commonly used to commit crimes. Far more people die in
cars every year than by guns--and no Constitutional Amendment
guarantees our rights to own cars. Because more people die every year
in cars than by guns, do you support a ban on cars? There are also an
alarming number of crimes committed under the influence of alcohol.
Would you support a ban on alcohol considering it didn't work the last
time they tried it?

23) Mayors of several cities in America are suing gun manufacturers
under the guise of recovering costs of gun-related injuries which took
place in their cities. Because more people are hurt or killed in cars than
by guns, do you support these mayors in suing car manufacturers?

24) Numerous cities in America criminalize carrying guns for
self-defense. These same cities make exceptions for people carrying
money and jewels. Do you agree that money and jewels are more
important to protect than people's lives?

25) The National Guard is paid by the Federal government, occupies
property leased to the Federal government, uses weapons owned by the
Federal government, and punishes trespassers under Federal law. Do you
truly believe the National Guard is a State agency?

26) The National Guard is also what is commonly called the modern-day
militia in anti-gun propaganda as a way of trying to deal with the Second
Amendment. If the Constitution was referring to the National Guard with
the term "militia," how can we account for the fact that the Second
Amendment was ratified in 1787--while the National Guard was created
by an act of Congress in 1903?

27) The FBI and ATF (agencies of the Federal government) gunned down
81 innocent women and children and burned most of the evidence down
to the ground in Waco and have withheld evidence which would (and still
may) convict them of wrongdoing. They murdered Randy Weaver's wife.
The police and other state agencies shot to death Donald Scott in a
bogus drug raid in California. Why would you trust these government
agencies with fully automatic weapons but not trust a law-abiding
individual with a simple self-defense handgun?

28) The law-abiding gun owners of today are presented as "gun nuts,
extremists, militia fanatics, and killers" in the communications media. Is
it possible they are depicted this way to sway public opinion toward
disliking guns? If so, why would the media and the anti-gun politicians
do that? How is this different from the way the news organs of Nazi
Germany, China, the Soviet Union, Cambodia, and Cuba propagandized
against the segments of their societies that opposed complete state
control?

29) Many documented statements by anti-gun groups claim that the
Second Amendment refers to the power of the States to keep and bear
arms. In other sections of the Constitution, we find the following: "the
right of the PEOPLE to peaceably assemble," the "right of the PEOPLE to
be secure in their homes," "enumeration here of certain rights shall not
be construed to disparage others retained by the PEOPLE," and "the
powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and
to the PEOPLE." Do you honestly believe "the right of the PEOPLE to keep
and bear arms" refers to the States but excludes Individuals?

30) Handguns are the cheapest, lightest, most portable, easiest-to-use,
and most effective means of self-defense. This is why they are used by
police officers. Denying people the right to use this tool leaves them
defenseless against criminals on the street. Why do you advocate that
law-abiding people not be allowed to protect themselves with the best
means of self-defense available?

31) The Federal government and the United Nations (See
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/bluesky...ming_yo.shtml)
have been working in unison for years to systematically disarm American
citizens. Is it even remotely possible that the government has something
planned that so many Americans would be against that it is critical that
they disarm us? If so, do you see that supporting their disarmament
plans could be working against the American citizens committed to
preserving freedom?


I do appreciate your thoughts on these matters and look forward to your
reply. I am committed to answering every question you send me by
giving each one careful attention and a thorough, intelligent reply as
soon as possible. If you pose a question I cannot intelligently address, I
will seek out an answer until I can.

Respectfully,


--------------------------------------------
Angel Shamaya
http://www.keepandbeararms.org
webmaster@keepandbeararms.org


Supporting editors of and contributors to this document:
Inspired by original sentiments from Michael Z. Williamson,
daggers@indy.net
Brian Puckett, guns1776@earthlink.net
Jamie Jackson, jamie@spiritone.com
Angela Hunter Richardson, elan@fastlane.net
Gil Snodgrass, gilbert@peoplepc.com
Mike Ford, http://www.initiativefortexas.org

---------------------------------------------
REMEMBER TO VISIT
www.keepandbeararms.org/
AND SUBSCRIBE TO THEIR SECOND AMMENDMENT
ALERTS NEWS LETTER
ernest2

[JimR]

Marvelous list! Thanks for posting.

I wonder what the chances are of actually getting the typical over-emotional under-analytical soccer-mom gun-grabber type to actually read something longer than a headline and lead-in para.

[ernest2]

Dear Jim ,

I printed out the list above and actually read it out point for point to some non shooting friends of mine who came to visit over" coffee and".

They had no idea what so ever about
what was going on and had only their gut feelings to go on.

They did not even know the Network TV LIE Line of Socialist Brainwashing.

I honestly think that this was the first time in their lives that they had ever seriously considered the idea or were even aware of it for that matter.

Prehaps I made some converts to our side; I have a feeling that maybe I did, but
I am sure that they now have at least some thoughts on the matter , where before this they had none at all; and I think their new thoughts are with our point of view.

So, I think this letter has great promise for our side.

You need to invite people over to visit
and set out food & refreshments and then read
it to them point for point.

Do not just give it to them and expect them to actually go through all the trouble
of reading something.

After all, they are reduced brain function liberals who are, by
definition, not interested in reading or learning anything new.

They meerly sit in front of the tv set and soak up the socialist viewpoint ; not because they want to ; but only through over exposure time and time and yet time again.

This was truely the first time that they had been exposed to our pro gun concerns and our side of the story.

They were apauled at the anti gun changes happening and had no idea that our second ammendment rights were being lost and that the USa was becoming a police state that
makes Nazi Germany look like a comedy sideshow 8th rate fubar as far as being a serious Police State as compaired to the USA
under Bill Clinton and Janet "The Torch,Butcher of Waco" Reno.


[This message has been edited by ernest2 (edited April 27, 2000).]

[ernest2]

The above letter actually works.

I sent the letter to all the US Senators and all the US Representatives and one actually read it and gave me an inteligent and thoughtfull reply and I was not even his constituient!

If we had 100 more of him, we might just be able to Save the USA from socialism.

Below is his well thought out and intelligent reply.

If he was in my state, I would make sure to vote for him.

---------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------


Senator Specter wrote:
>
> Thank you for contacting me with your concerns about gun control.
> I welcome the opportunity to hear the opinions of my constituents and
> to make my views known.
>
> I recognize the reality of gun problems in the United States.
> Because of this, I have taken significant measures to combat criminal
> violence and the unlawful use of firearms. I have supported increases
> in law enforcement efforts directed at prosecuting felons who carry
> guns or use them to commit crimes as well as state and local gun
> buy-back programs. I successfully urged my colleagues on the
> Appropriations Committee to provide funding for a program called
> Project Exile. This program is designed to provide additional federal
> prosecutors to prosecute persons who violate federal firearms laws.
> Project Exile also doubles the presence of agents with the U.S. Bureau
> of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms to help in apprehending violators of
> these laws.
>
> Where there were real issues of public safety, I supported the ban
> on assault weapons in voting for the 1994 Crime Bill. I have opposed
> many gun control measures which are essentially ineffective where a
> sizable constituency of about 2 million Pennsylvanians strongly favor
> Second Amendment rights.
>
> The real answer to the gun-crime problem involves:
>
> 1) long sentences for career criminals,
>
> 2) realistic rehabilitation (education; job training;
> counseling) for juveniles and non-career criminals and
>
> 3) long term action to change our culture of violence.
>
> I wrote the Armed Career Criminal Act which provides sentences of
> 15 years to life for habitual felons found in possession of a gun
> after three major convictions.
>
> I have also sponsored legislation to provide education and
> counseling for juveniles, and to provide job training and literacy
> education for offenders scheduled for release from prison. When a
> functional illiterate without a trade or skill leaves jail, that
> person returns to a life of crime. In my capacity as Chairman of the
> Appropriations Subcommittee on Health and Human Services, I am
> currently working with former Surgeon General Koop and Surgeon General
> Satcher to address the problem of youth violence. I opposed measures
> on the pending Senate juvenile crime bill because they were offered
> without hearings or without adequate opportunity for analysis and some
> involve complex Constitutional issues on freedom of speech.
>
> I recognize the importance of this issue and I appreciate hearing
> your concerns. I will keep your views in mind as I consider related
> issues in the Senate. Thank you again for contacting my office.
> Please do not hesitate to do so again with additional concerns.
>
> My best.
>
> Sincerely,
>
>
>
> Arlen Specter
> United States Senator

[animal]

No offense, ernest2, but I hope you realized that you recieved a form letter from a senator with a less than stellar record on 2nd Amend. issues. Even in the letter HIS OFFICE sent you, is a reference to the semi-auto ban. This particular senator needs to be defeated in a primary election by someone more friendly to the cause. He is a prime example of a Republican who is either a spineless compromiser or a man in direct opposition to gun rights (He has played both roles). People like him are one reason that we're fighting a losing battle in Congress.
At least Schumer and Kennedy are honest about what they're after where guns are concerned......

[Lucas]

ernest2:

Animal is correct--Specter is not a friend of the 2nd.

------------------
RKBA! NRA JPFO SAF

[The Silver Bullet 1719]

Well, it took 5 pages, and a whole bunch of ink, but its printed. I think I'll start giving to the antis on Tuesday.

------------------
Trespassers Will Be Shot
Survivors Will Be Shot Again

[Son Tao]

I have many friends who are too lazy to read page after page of papers on anything. So I added the questions to my page in the exact same layout and links to www.keepandbeararms.org/ . However, they'll sit and stare at webpages all day. If you have friends who are the same way, you can find these questions under Gun Contro ? on my website
1911 Addiction

[Jeff Thomas]

First, better check those links, friends. Number 3, for example, is a no go.

Regards from AZ