GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-07-2013, 16:55   #1
SpringerTGO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,405
Congressman Matheson (D Utah) response

Recently I contacted my representatives in Congress and the Senate about my concerns on gun control. To everyone who thinks every Democrat is evil, socialistic, and anti 2a, here is Congressman Matheson's reply:

Thank you for sharing your thoughts regarding firearms issues. I appreciate hearing about your interest in the issues facing our country and state, and I am glad for the opportunity to respond to your inquiry.

The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution establishes the right to bear arms, which more commonly means owning or possessing a firearm. Our Founding Fathers recognized this right when they included it as one of the original 10 Amendments, or Bill of Rights, to the Constitution. The ability to purchase and own firearms can be traced to the founding and defense of our nation, and I believe in the continued importance of the Second Amendment today. I feel strongly that the vast majority of gun owners in Utah and across the country understand the serious responsibilities associated with gun ownership, and they possess and use firearms legally.

Across our country, we have all been shocked and saddened by recent tragedies involving gun violence perpetrated by disturbed individuals. As a result there has been a great deal of discussion in the public policy world about possible steps to prevent tragic acts of violence. I believe responsible individuals have a constitutional right to own firearms, and that this right should not be limited. However, even the staunchest defenders of Second Amendment rights are deeply troubled by acts of senseless and brutal violence. It is here that we need to start, as a country, a broad discussion about how to reduce acts of violence in our society. Each of us should have the expectation of safety in our daily lives.

There are three general topics that should be considered in this discussion. First, we should examine our existing gun laws to determine their effectiveness as they are currently being enforced. Second, we should address the current mental health system in our country and evaluate options to make improvements. Third, we should examine the culture of violence in today’s society and seek out ideas to counteract that culture.

As we attempt to find common ground on efforts to reduce violence in our country, we should keep in mind the importance of seeking pragmatic, bipartisan solutions. Any meaningful proposals should be based on facts and with data demonstrating how they will reduce incidents of violence. For example, the so-called Assault Weapons Ban was in place for ten years before it expired in 2004, and the consensus of dozens of studies of that law demonstrate that the law had no real effect on reducing acts of gun violence in our country. The discussion should be deliberative and not reactionary, broad based and not simplistic, and formed through consensus of a wide range of interests and not from a small group of people.

Again, thank you for sharing your concerns with me. If you have any additional questions, please feel free to contact my office.

Best Wishes,
Gun-Control Issues
JIM MATHESON
Member of Congress

P.S. Please sign up for my e-newsletter at www.house.gov/matheson

JM/ss
SpringerTGO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 17:41   #2
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
I believe responsible individuals have a constitutional right to own firearms, and that this right should not be limited. However, even the staunchest defenders of Second Amendment rights are deeply troubled by acts of senseless and brutal violence. It is here that we need to start, as a country, a broad discussion about how to reduce acts of violence in our society. Each of us should have the expectation of safety in our daily lives.
Right! I see he's totally against any more gun control. Nice job of double speak there.

RVI strikes again. You hear (read) what you want to believe. If I'm wrong show me where he says he's against more gun control.

Quote:
Each of us should have the expectation of safety in our daily lives.
Please show me where that is in the Constitution. Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Don't see any "expectation" of safety mentioned.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 02-07-2013 at 17:52..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 17:55   #3
SPIN2010
Searching ...
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: On the move ... again!
Posts: 1,840
Yeah ... rainbows and puppies from the replys. They never lie. Unreal, that people still are falling for it.

Here is my slimey political rep return reply of the day:

February 7, 2013

Dear Mr. SPIN2010:

Thank you for contacting my office to voice your concerns regarding gun laws. I value your taking the time to actively advocate on behalf of an issue on which you feel so strongly.

Although the discussion on gun laws is happening at the federal level, you may be interested to know that the Ohio Senate is focused on conducting hearings on mental health issues and their relationship to school safety.

Given your passion for this current debate in the United States Congress, I recommend you also contact your federal senators to express your concerns. Senator Rob Portman can be reached by phone at (513) 684-3265 or by mail at 36 East 7th Street, Room 2615 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202. Senator Sherrod Brown can be reached by phone at (513) 684-1021 or by mail at 425 Walnut Street, Suite 2310 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202.

Again, thank you for voicing your concern on this matter. If I can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact my office.

Warm personal regards,


Shannon Jones
State Senator
7th Ohio Senate District
SPIN2010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 18:03   #4
SpringerTGO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
Right! I see he's totally against any more gun control. Nice job of double speak there.

RVI strikes again. You hear (read) what you want to believe. If I'm wrong show me where he says he's against more gun control.
Third paragraph down........ "I believe responsible individuals have a constitutional right to own firearms, and that this right should not be limited".

SpringerTGO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 19:54   #5
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpringerTGO View Post
Third paragraph down........ "I believe responsible individuals have a constitutional right to own firearms, and that this right should not be limited".

I hope everyone takes note that in typical DemoRATic fashion you CHOPPED that EXACT SENTENCE... "I believe responsible individuals have a constitutional right to own firearms, and that this right should not be limited. However," out of my response when you quoted it. You also left out the "However."So there is one or two problems with you. Either, as a typical liberal you just ignore facts or your head is farther up your arss than even I imagined.

Now had I want to argue in defense of this DemoRAT. I would have use this statement.

Quote:
As we attempt to find common ground on efforts to reduce violence in our country, we should keep in mind the importance of seeking pragmatic, bipartisan solutions. Any meaningful proposals should be based on facts and with data demonstrating how they will reduce incidents of violence. For example, the so-called Assault Weapons Ban was in place for ten years before it expired in 2004, and the consensus of dozens of studies of that law demonstrate that the law had no real effect on reducing acts of gun violence in our country. The discussion should be deliberative and not reactionary, broad based and not simplistic, and formed through consensus of a wide range of interests and not from a small group of people.
The giveaway though is...

Quote:
not simplistic, and formed through consensus of a wide range of interests and not from a small group of people.
Translation = Assault weapons ban did nothing. We need much bigger and better gun control. Tricky little devils them DemoRATs. I trust a DemoRAT as far as I can throw one. I'm getting old and I can't throw them as far as I use to.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 02-07-2013 at 19:59..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 20:14   #6
SpringerTGO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
Tricky little devils them DemoRATs. I trust a DemoRAT as far as I can throw one. I'm getting old and I can't throw them as far as I use to.
Yeah, and I trust all Republicans. Did you get a chance to listen to Brenner being interviewed for his new job as head of the CIA?
It seems that Check intelligence sent a cable to the CIA saying there was no meeting between Iraq officials and the 911 bombers. Yet Cheney repeatedly said he had a cable from the Check intelligence saying the opposite. It seems the house wants that declassified, so they can produce it as proof that Cheney repeatedly lied as an excuse to lead us into war. And they are asking Brenner to get the Checks to allow us to declassify it.

But no way! A Republican lying about a war that has cost us 1000's of lives and trillions of $'s?????

I can't imagine Romney lying about leaving states to decide gun control issues. But even if he was telling the truth, where does that leave people in CA, NY, Chicago, and all over the U.S? Then again, maybe Romney would have used MA as an example of his true position on gun control.
SpringerTGO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 20:36   #7
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpringerTGO View Post
Yeah, and I trust all Republicans. Did you get a chance to listen to Brenner being interviewed for his new job as head of the CIA?
It seems that Check intelligence sent a cable to the CIA saying there was no meeting between Iraq officials and the 911 bombers. Yet Cheney repeatedly said he had a cable from the Check intelligence saying the opposite. It seems the house wants that declassified, so they can produce it as proof that Cheney repeatedly lied as an excuse to lead us into war. And they are asking Brenner to get the Checks to allow us to declassify it.

But no way! A Republican lying about a war that has cost us 1000's of lives and trillions of $'s?????
Did I say I trusted all RepubliCANTs? I just said I don't trust ANY DemoRATs. I may as well say this now. The old liberal trick of muddying the waters with unrelated BS doesn't work with me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpringerTGO View Post
I can't imagine Romney lying about leaving states to decide gun control issues. But even if he was telling the truth, where does that leave people in CA, NY, Chicago, and all over the U.S? Then again, maybe Romney would have used MA as an example of his true position on gun control.

Even if he was telling the truth, where does that leave people in CA, NY, Chicago, and all over the U.S? It leaves The People as the Founders intended... with the chore of straightening out their own state or leaving. ****cago... law suit.... Supreme Cort ruled against ****gago. My state constitution says I have a Right to Keep and Bear Arms. My Governor and the "MAJORITY" of the state legislature support it. If yours doesn't change it or move to a state that supports your right. Oh wait! I forgot! You're a DemoRAT. Please move to NY City.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 02-07-2013 at 20:38..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 20:43   #8
Dawolf
Senior Member
 
Dawolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,145
Just look where the greatest amount of gun violence is. Cities/states with strict gun control. Based upon what has been happening in LaLa land, I rest my case.
Dawolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 22:56   #9
domin8ss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 413
Lol. All this hate for Matheson. He's an elected official in a state more Conservative Republican than Texas. Matheson knows a call for more gun control would kill him. Utah is so pro gun they hanger everything a gun owner would want. Cash and carry, open carry, most reciprocated cfw, civil immunity, only state to declare an official state gun, etc, etc. Matheson is harmless the first time around. It's the second or third time I'm more concerned about. Just look at his voting record in Obamacare. No the first time. Yes every time after that. The first time he knew his constituents were listening. After that he thought he could get away with being in the Good Ole Boys Club. Overall, I'm not worried about him.
domin8ss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2013, 23:23   #10
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by domin8ss View Post
Lol. All this hate for Matheson. He's an elected official in a state more Conservative Republican than Texas. Matheson knows a call for more gun control would kill him. Utah is so pro gun they hanger everything a gun owner would want. Cash and carry, open carry, most reciprocated cfw, civil immunity, only state to declare an official state gun, etc, etc. Matheson is harmless the first time around.
DemoRAT "elected" in a Conservative state. Pro gun DemoRAT. Sounds like a oxymoron to me.


Quote:
Originally Posted by domin8ss View Post
It's the second or third time I'm more concerned about. Just look at his voting record in Obamacare. No the first time. Yes every time after that. The first time he knew his constituents were listening. After that he thought he could get away with being in the Good Ole Boys Club. Overall, I'm not worried about him.
I thought you said he was harmless. "Matheson is harmless the first time around." The second part of you post doesn't sounds very harmless. Sounds like he jumped on the Obomawagon.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 02-07-2013 at 23:25..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 07:09   #11
domin8ss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 413
Like I said, he's harmless the first time around because he knows we are watching. It's after things calm down that people should really put pressure on him.
domin8ss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 10:13   #12
SpringerTGO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,405
Sorry guys, but this is not Congressman Matheson's first time around.
Funny though, I post an email supporting our 2a rights from Congressman Matheson, and you guys still find ways to insult him.
And the comments about his just doing what his constituants want are even more funny. I know, you prefer being ruled by politicians who only represent less than 1% of the population.

So we have a guy who is in total support of our 2A rights. Why not be pleased about it rather than beat on him? Even some Republicans are caving, so be grateful we have a Democrat who sees beyond party lines.
SpringerTGO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 10:49   #13
domin8ss
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 413
Just because I'm in Chicago doesn't mean Matheson doesn't represent me. I am a Utah resident. My permanent address is within Matheson's boundaries. I did vote for him recently, but only because I felt the Republican candidate Mia Love was weaker and didn't represent my values and ideologies. My comments about Matheson's history are based on my experience of dealing with him. Look at his voting record concerning Obamacare.
domin8ss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 11:27   #14
SpringerTGO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by domin8ss View Post
Just because I'm in Chicago doesn't mean Matheson doesn't represent me. I am a Utah resident. My permanent address is within Matheson's boundaries. I did vote for him recently, but only because I felt the Republican candidate Mia Love was weaker and didn't represent my values and ideologies. My comments about Matheson's history are based on my experience of dealing with him. Look at his voting record concerning Obamacare.
I voted for him because I didn't consider Mia Love a better candidate.
This is supposed to be a pro 2a forum. The NRA seems to back whoever is pro 2a regardless of where they stand on other issues. It appears that Glocktalk not only requires a congressman to be pro 2a, but to be a tea party conservative as well.
SpringerTGO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 13:33   #15
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpringerTGO View Post
Sorry guys, but this is not Congressman Matheson's first time around.
Funny though, I post an email supporting our 2a rights from Congressman Matheson, and you guys still find ways to insult him.
And the comments about his just doing what his constituants want are even more funny. I know, you prefer being ruled by politicians who only represent less than 1% of the population.

So we have a guy who is in total support of our 2A rights. Why not be pleased about it rather than beat on him? Even some Republicans are caving, so be grateful we have a Democrat who sees beyond party lines.
He can't be a DemoRAT and support the Second Amendment. The two ideology's are polar opposites. Someone that considers themselves a DemoRAT that says they support the Second Amendment are one of three things, insane, stupid or a liar. Or a combination of all three. Insane because they support a party that has gone completely socialist... stupid because they believe in a party that has gone complete socialist, that the MAJORITY of it's members are on record as wanting MORE and MORE gun control and quite a few "party" members admitting they want a complete ban and confiscations... or a liar because they think the rest of us are stupid enough to believe it.

A RepubliCANT that supports gun control is referred to as a RINO. What would one call a DemoRAT that says he supports the Second Amendment? Oh, I know... a liar!
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.

Last edited by Jerry; 02-08-2013 at 15:34..
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 18:02   #16
SpringerTGO
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
He can't be a DemoRAT and support the Second Amendment. The two ideology's are polar opposites. Someone that considers themselves a DemoRAT that says they support the Second Amendment are one of three things, insane, stupid or a liar. Or a combination of all three. Insane because they support a party that has gone completely socialist... stupid because they believe in a party that has gone complete socialist, that the MAJORITY of it's members are on record as wanting MORE and MORE gun control and quite a few "party" members admitting they want a complete ban and confiscations... or a liar because they think the rest of us are stupid enough to believe it.

A RepubliCANT that supports gun control is referred to as a RINO. What would one call a DemoRAT that says he supports the Second Amendment? Oh, I know... a liar!
So you don't like Democrats who are pro 2a?
SpringerTGO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 18:17   #17
Jerry
Moderator
 
Jerry's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Louisiana
Posts: 8,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpringerTGO View Post
So you don't like Democrats who are pro 2a?
I don't like DemoRATS period. The ones that "profess" to suport the Second are liers.
__________________
Jerry
BIG DAWG #4

Liberal: Someone who is so open-minded their brains have fallen out.
Guns are not dangerous, people are.
Jerry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2013, 23:44   #18
Doc McGlock
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 273
Blog Entries: 1
^^^^^^

Dittos, the Rats don't have a clue as to reality or truth. "The ends justifies the means!". What ever gets them re-elected! Lying sacks of human fecal matter.

Folks, we're being or about to be coup'd here. I pray you all are up to the task of performing your duty?
Doc McGlock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 00:52   #19
UtahIrishman
BLR
 
UtahIrishman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Utah
Posts: 6,295


I received the same response from Matheson. He supports the 2nd Amendment. I don't how it could be any clearer.

For the record I voted for Matheson. I also voted for Orrin Hatch. To assume that being a Democrat makes a person evil and a liar is as odd as assuming that a Republican is always righteous and tells the truth.

I vote my conscience not a party ticket...

Independent rational thinking is what is needed to win. To paint someone that supports the 2nd Amendment as evil and a liar will not make friends or gather support. Democrats are part of the process whether you like it or not. They need to be convinced to support the 2nd Amendment as Matheson does.

Rather than lambasting a supporter it would be better to spend time persuading those who are sitting on the fence to support the 2nd Amendment. And those fence sitters include Democrats.

It may be odious to speak to a Democrat but if you don't we lose. Plain and simple.

I want to keep my guns...all of them.
__________________
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? - Juvenal

----
UtahIrishman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2013, 07:28   #20
norton
Senior Member
 
norton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Land of Lincoln, the growing years
Posts: 6,831
No reply from my 2 Senators

I sent e mail to Dan Coats and Joe Donnelly on the recent 2A debate. I received no reponse from either, except I now receive Dan Coats news letter.

Anyone else not received a response from elected officials?
__________________
Tinker to Evers to Chance.
norton is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:56.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 1,073
252 Members
821 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 16:42