CmdrFenix.org

For some time, I have written my senators when I disagree, agree, or wish to maybe influence their decision on certain issues. Believe it or not, not all of those communications have revolved around firearms, but some have. I would like to share with you, my most recent letter to Senator Judd Gregg of NH. I wrote a letter to him in Feb in protest over then nominee Eric Holder for Attorney General. Now obviously, Mr Holder has taken office, and Senator Gregg voted for him, but Senator Gregg was also the ONLY senator to respond to my letters and while I disagree with his reasons, I applaud him for his response to me and his explanation why. Here is what I just sent him in response:

Dear Senator Gregg,

First, let me say I was very pleased by your decision to NOT accept the nomination as commerce secretary. I too feel your talents are better served focusing on NH, but I also feel that this is something our current Democratic governor would have used as one more means to better tip the scales of power in the Senate. Either way, I want to begin with a very loud thank you.

Now onto the main part of my message. I want to say thank you for your response on Mar 27th in regards to my message voicing objection to then nominee Eric Holder for Attorney General. You are actually the only person who DID respond to me and believe me when I say that it did make me feel like some part of our gov’t is listening to its citizens when I got the letter. I have to say though that I strongly … very strongly disagree though with his current position. I feel that he has completely miss represented issues, of which I will outline in a bit, but he has also used these issues as justification for legislation that’ll trample my rights and more specific harm me as a citizen, who in his 3 decades of life has never broken the law.

Eric Holder has recently announced his support for bringing back the “assault weapons ban”. I put that in quotes because I think it is the most ridiculous title I have ever seen. Automobiles can kill as many people in one sweep, but does that mean we need an “assault automobiles ban”? According to the FBI Uniform Crime Statistics in 1994, I was 11 times more likely to be beaten to death than killed by a so called “assault weapon”. I could give you many more pointers to evidence of this, but I think my point has been made. And what is his justification for this new and improved ban? It’s can’t be violent crime in this country because that has been dropping for some time according to the Department of Justice, which I confirmed on their website today. No, he instead uses the current crisis in Mexico as justification, when in fact the evidence he has brought forward has been horribly exaggerated. There are numerous articles that our media is currently pushing that explains how the Mexican military is out gunned by the cartels, since they are using military grade machine guns, RPGs, and claymores just to start. He has said that the “gun show loophole” (another ridiculous term) is to blame. I’m sorry, but I have been to many gun shows and I have NEVER seen these items available… probably because their illegal. Where is law enforcement pray tell? It has been show… but not readily put out by the media that a large portion of the arms being supplied to the cartels is actually coming from South America and also through corruption in the gov’t of Mexico and its military to which the US has give and sold arms. I will point you to the small arms survey at the below link:

http://www.smallarmssurvey.org/files/sas/publications/o_papers_pdf/2006-op19-US.pdf

… which shows that we have sold to almost ALL countries in South America including the ones that really hate everything about us some serious fire power. Are you really going to tell me the cartels are beating the Mexican military with Semi-Auto AR-15s? I ask this, why are we selling ANYTHING to Venezuela? A country that has called our current commander and chief an “ignoramus” (http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE52L19G20090322) . Now, while I do not support President Obama, I do afford him the respect of his office, and I find this detestable.

Instead of another failed assault weapons ban, I would suggest double… better yet triple funding to local and federal law enforcement. Why not cancel the war on drugs as being a complete failure, as much as prohibition was in the 1920s and early 1930s , and redirect all of that funding for other more productive forms of law enforcement. How many people are taking up valuable jail space for ridiculous crimes like low end drug crimes violations when violent repeat offenders are getting out and re-offending?You cannot ban something that the populace will simply take under ground and will be fed by a black market. Again, do not get me wrong, I have never, nor will ever do any kind of drugs. Personally I don’t believe in them unless it’s deemed medically necessary by someone who knows a lot more about it like my doctor. I think they should be treated like alcohol. If you do in your home… so be it. If you get behind the wheel… you are going to jail. Now I don’t know about you, but that seems reasonable to me.

I would ask you to consider what I’ve said here and really see if there is anything to prove that our nation’s “top cop” as you and others have called him, might have “colored the facts” so to speak and if there is enough to warrant his removal from office.

Best regards,

Update: 4/3/09 It’s too bad because I just found this link, which I think makes my point for me.

There’s just one problem with the 90 percent “statistic” and it’s a big one:

It’s just not true.

No kidding… Really? Tell me something I didn’t already know.