[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Dear Senator Donnelly,[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I am writing to express my opposition to recent legislation concerning gun control and in particular Senator Feinstein reintroduction to the so called “Assault Weapons” ban. In the past gun bans simply haven't worked and placed an undue burden on the law abiding citizenry. After reading the synopses of Senator Feinstein bill and the sources of information she cited it became clear that she has “cherry picked” her sources without regard for the facts. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994 which she cites expressly states, “ Our best estimate of the impact of the ban on state level gun homicide rates is that it caused a reduction of 6.7% in gun murders in 1995 relative to a projection of recent trends. However, the evidence is not strong enough for us to conclude that there was any meaningful effect” and “The absence of stronger ban effects may be attributable to the relative rarity with which the banned weapons are used in violent crimes.”[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003 also cited by Senator Fienstein states, “ Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement. AWs were rarely used in gun crimes even before the ban. LCMs are involved in a more substantial share of gun crimes, but it is not clear how often the outcomes of gun attacks depend on the ability of offenders to fire more than ten shots (the current magazine capacity limit) without reloading. “[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Senator Feinstein cherry picked the data she wanted leaving out the conclusions that did not promote her agenda. What she also neglected to state is that the murder rate and violent crime rate according to the FBI crime statistics have been on the decline for the past two decades. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Senator Feinstein citing of the Washington Post Article the “The percentage of firearms seized by police in Virginia that had [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]high-capacity magazines dropped significantly during the ban[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]. That figure has [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]doubled[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] since the ban expired. “ It just takes just take a bit of common sense to understand. After the ban expired gun manufactures were able to sell their products with standard capacity, (or as she would say high capacity” magazines so of course that number would rise. The real question that has not been asked or answered is did the total number of gun seized increase or decrease since the AWB expired? If the FBI crime statistics are correct concerning lower rates of murder and violent crime then common sense would suggest that the total number of seized gun would be lower.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The citation by Senator Feinstiein of “When Maryland imposed a more stringent ban on assault pistols and high-capacity magazines in 1994, it led to a [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]55% drop in assault pistols recovered[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] by the Baltimore Police Department. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Source: Douglas S. Weil & Rebecca C. Knox, Letter to the Editor, The Maryland Ban on the Sale of Assault Pistols and High-Capacity Magazines: Estimating the Impact in Baltimore, 87 Am. J. of Public Health 2, Feb. 1997. “ Was published in February 1997 as a letter to the editor in the [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]American Journal of Public Health[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif], The study used predictive modeling for just a six month period in 1995 to achieve their results, not an exact science to say the least nor was it a long enough time frame studied to unequivocally state their findings. It it a poor reference for Senator Fienstein to use but it does show why it was nothing more than a letter to the editor and no follow up study was done.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The last citation “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]37% of police departments[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] reported seeing a [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]noticeable increase[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] in criminals’ use of assault weapons since the 1994 federal ban expired. Source: Police Executive Research Forum, Guns and Crime: Breaking New Ground by Focusing on the Local Impact (May 2010). This study was conducted by survey. 270 police agencies that served cities of [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]100,000 [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]or more were contacted but only 165 agencies responded. To put that statement in perspective, only 61 police departments reported an increase, but they didn't state what the increase was, one, two, twenty more “assault weapons”, the report doesn’t say. Without the actual number it's just a meaningless statement. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Most of the report is interviews with the various police chiefs relating their stories, not hardly a scientific study but the paper wasn't meant to be. The paper was meant to get police departments thinking of new ways to handle the violence in their cities. Senator Feinstein also neglected to point out that in the conclusion section the only paragraph in bold reads, “The preoccupation with gun legislation at the national level, while understandable, has the unintended effect of taking the focus off of local gun crime policies, which in many cases are just as significant or in some ways more significant in the day-to-day lives of the citizens of U.S. Cities.” It would imply that they feel gun control is more of a State and Local issue not a Federal Government issue.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Senator Feinstein's cited rational, much like her legislation is flawed. The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban had no overall effect on crime as stated by far more numerous studies than those she presented. Overall violent crime and murder has declined for the past two decades including the years since the exasperation of the ban. The vaulted countries of England and Australia in which private ownership of firearm has been restricted show a dramatic increase in violent crime since the banning of firearms. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Violent crime in this Country is a cultural and mental health issue and without first addressing those problems no amount of gun control will have the desired effect. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Senator Donnelly, I am a gun owner, I enjoy shooting various firearms including those that are on the proposed ban list. I use my firearms for recreational, sporting, protection and like the overwhelming majority of gun owners I am responsible, careful and safe when using them. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The Supreme Court has ruled that the police do not have a duty to protect me but the police see the need to have “assault weapons and high capacity magazine” to protect themselves from the criminal element. Do I not have the same right to the tools the police deem necessary for their protection to protect myself and my family? [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Senator, you were elected to represent Hoosiers and Hoosier values not California values nor the misguided agenda of a California Senator. I urge you to vote against any legislation that would restrict 2nd amendment rights of Hoosiers and in particular the proposed legislation of Senator Dianne Fienstien. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Sincerely,[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]I am writing to express my opposition to recent legislation concerning gun control and in particular Senator Feinstein reintroduction to the so called “Assault Weapons” ban. In the past gun bans simply haven't worked and placed an undue burden on the law abiding citizenry. After reading the synopses of Senator Feinstein bill and the sources of information she cited it became clear that she has “cherry picked” her sources without regard for the facts. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The Impact Evaluation of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act of 1994 which she cites expressly states, “ Our best estimate of the impact of the ban on state level gun homicide rates is that it caused a reduction of 6.7% in gun murders in 1995 relative to a projection of recent trends. However, the evidence is not strong enough for us to conclude that there was any meaningful effect” and “The absence of stronger ban effects may be attributable to the relative rarity with which the banned weapons are used in violent crimes.”[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]An Updated Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003 also cited by Senator Fienstein states, “ Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement. AWs were rarely used in gun crimes even before the ban. LCMs are involved in a more substantial share of gun crimes, but it is not clear how often the outcomes of gun attacks depend on the ability of offenders to fire more than ten shots (the current magazine capacity limit) without reloading. “[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Senator Feinstein cherry picked the data she wanted leaving out the conclusions that did not promote her agenda. What she also neglected to state is that the murder rate and violent crime rate according to the FBI crime statistics have been on the decline for the past two decades. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Senator Feinstein citing of the Washington Post Article the “The percentage of firearms seized by police in Virginia that had [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]high-capacity magazines dropped significantly during the ban[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]. That figure has [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]doubled[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] since the ban expired. “ It just takes just take a bit of common sense to understand. After the ban expired gun manufactures were able to sell their products with standard capacity, (or as she would say high capacity” magazines so of course that number would rise. The real question that has not been asked or answered is did the total number of gun seized increase or decrease since the AWB expired? If the FBI crime statistics are correct concerning lower rates of murder and violent crime then common sense would suggest that the total number of seized gun would be lower.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The citation by Senator Feinstiein of “When Maryland imposed a more stringent ban on assault pistols and high-capacity magazines in 1994, it led to a [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]55% drop in assault pistols recovered[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] by the Baltimore Police Department. [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Source: Douglas S. Weil & Rebecca C. Knox, Letter to the Editor, The Maryland Ban on the Sale of Assault Pistols and High-Capacity Magazines: Estimating the Impact in Baltimore, 87 Am. J. of Public Health 2, Feb. 1997. “ Was published in February 1997 as a letter to the editor in the [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]American Journal of Public Health[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif], The study used predictive modeling for just a six month period in 1995 to achieve their results, not an exact science to say the least nor was it a long enough time frame studied to unequivocally state their findings. It it a poor reference for Senator Fienstein to use but it does show why it was nothing more than a letter to the editor and no follow up study was done.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The last citation “[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]37% of police departments[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] reported seeing a [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]noticeable increase[/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif] in criminals’ use of assault weapons since the 1994 federal ban expired. Source: Police Executive Research Forum, Guns and Crime: Breaking New Ground by Focusing on the Local Impact (May 2010). This study was conducted by survey. 270 police agencies that served cities of [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]100,000 [/FONT][FONT=Times New Roman, serif]or more were contacted but only 165 agencies responded. To put that statement in perspective, only 61 police departments reported an increase, but they didn't state what the increase was, one, two, twenty more “assault weapons”, the report doesn’t say. Without the actual number it's just a meaningless statement. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Most of the report is interviews with the various police chiefs relating their stories, not hardly a scientific study but the paper wasn't meant to be. The paper was meant to get police departments thinking of new ways to handle the violence in their cities. Senator Feinstein also neglected to point out that in the conclusion section the only paragraph in bold reads, “The preoccupation with gun legislation at the national level, while understandable, has the unintended effect of taking the focus off of local gun crime policies, which in many cases are just as significant or in some ways more significant in the day-to-day lives of the citizens of U.S. Cities.” It would imply that they feel gun control is more of a State and Local issue not a Federal Government issue.[/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Senator Feinstein's cited rational, much like her legislation is flawed. The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban had no overall effect on crime as stated by far more numerous studies than those she presented. Overall violent crime and murder has declined for the past two decades including the years since the exasperation of the ban. The vaulted countries of England and Australia in which private ownership of firearm has been restricted show a dramatic increase in violent crime since the banning of firearms. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Violent crime in this Country is a cultural and mental health issue and without first addressing those problems no amount of gun control will have the desired effect. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Senator Donnelly, I am a gun owner, I enjoy shooting various firearms including those that are on the proposed ban list. I use my firearms for recreational, sporting, protection and like the overwhelming majority of gun owners I am responsible, careful and safe when using them. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]The Supreme Court has ruled that the police do not have a duty to protect me but the police see the need to have “assault weapons and high capacity magazine” to protect themselves from the criminal element. Do I not have the same right to the tools the police deem necessary for their protection to protect myself and my family? [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Senator, you were elected to represent Hoosiers and Hoosier values not California values nor the misguided agenda of a California Senator. I urge you to vote against any legislation that would restrict 2nd amendment rights of Hoosiers and in particular the proposed legislation of Senator Dianne Fienstien. [/FONT]
[FONT=Times New Roman, serif]Sincerely,[/FONT]
Last edited:
