Congressman Matheson (D Utah) response

Discussion in 'Gun-Control Issues' started by SpringerTGO, Feb 7, 2013.

  1. 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,
    Member of Congress

    P.S. Please sign up for my e-newsletter at


    Wanna kill these ads? We can help!
  2. Jerry

    Moderator Millennium Member

    :rofl: 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.

    Please show me where that is in the Constitution. Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Don't see any "expectation" of safety mentioned.

    #2 Jerry, Feb 7, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2013
  3. SPIN2010

    SPIN2010 Searching ...

    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
  4. Third paragraph down........ "I believe responsible individuals have a constitutional right to own firearms, and that this right should not be limited".

  5. Jerry

    Moderator Millennium Member

    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.

    The giveaway though is...

    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. :rofl:
    #5 Jerry, Feb 7, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2013
  6. 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.
  7. Jerry

    Moderator Millennium Member

    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.

    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. :rofl:
    #7 Jerry, Feb 7, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2013
  8. 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.
  9. 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.
  10. Jerry

    Moderator Millennium Member

    DemoRAT "elected" in a Conservative state. Pro gun DemoRAT. Sounds like a oxymoron to me.

    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. :rofl:
    #10 Jerry, Feb 8, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2013
  11. 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.
  12. 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.
  13. 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.
  14. 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.
  15. Jerry

    Moderator Millennium Member

    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!
    #15 Jerry, Feb 8, 2013
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2013
  16. So you don't like Democrats who are pro 2a?
  17. Jerry

    Moderator Millennium Member

    I don't like DemoRATS period. The ones that "profess" to suport the Second are liers.
  18. ^^^^^^

    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?
  19. UtahIrishman

    Silver Member

    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.
  20. 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?

Share This Page