Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
A letter from Inhofe
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JSPANIER" data-source="post: 2078055" data-attributes="member: 7055"><p>He may be many things but atleast he'll defend the Second Amendment.</p><p></p><p>Thank you for contacting me regarding the Second Amendment. As your voice in Washington, D.C., I appreciate hearing from you.</p><p> </p><p>The text of the Constitution clearly confers upon an individual the right to bear arms. Our Founders believed that the people's right to own firearms was an important check on the powers of the government and "necessary to the security of a free State." I couldn't agree more and I stand firm in my support of this right.</p><p> </p><p>The President's recent proposals on dealing with gun violence came in two very distinct parts: 1) executives actions that the President will be implementing unilaterally, and 2) making recommendations to Congress for laws that it should pass. Most of the planned executive orders are changes that are within the President's current powers to implement, namely: </p><p> </p><p>1) Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign. </p><p> </p><p>2) Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations. </p><p> </p><p>3) Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime. </p><p> </p><p>4) Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health. </p><p> </p><p>However, there is at least one order I cannot support. President Obama wants to clarify that Obamacare does not prohibit doctors from asking their patients about guns in their homes. Obamacare, however, states that no patient shall be required to disclose his or her own lawful storage or use of a firearm. This order could create confusion for a patient who believes he must answer his doctor's questions. I will adamantly oppose any executive order that I believe infringes upon duly enacted laws by the Congress or on our constitutional rights. </p><p> </p><p>I also disagree with the President is on his recommendations for laws Congress must pass. We know from experience that an assault weapons ban will have no meaningful effect on gun violence, as many of the changes that are implemented by such a ban are cosmetic in nature. Statistics demonstrate that a ban on particular weapons will not significantly decrease crime. Such a ban will, however, significantly decrease our rights guaranteed by the Constitution. </p><p> </p><p>Thank you again for your correspondence. Please feel free to contact me again in the future.</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>Sincerely,</p><p></p><p>James M. Inhofe</p><p>United States Senator</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JSPANIER, post: 2078055, member: 7055"] He may be many things but atleast he'll defend the Second Amendment. Thank you for contacting me regarding the Second Amendment. As your voice in Washington, D.C., I appreciate hearing from you. The text of the Constitution clearly confers upon an individual the right to bear arms. Our Founders believed that the people's right to own firearms was an important check on the powers of the government and "necessary to the security of a free State." I couldn't agree more and I stand firm in my support of this right. The President's recent proposals on dealing with gun violence came in two very distinct parts: 1) executives actions that the President will be implementing unilaterally, and 2) making recommendations to Congress for laws that it should pass. Most of the planned executive orders are changes that are within the President's current powers to implement, namely: 1) Launch a national safe and responsible gun ownership campaign. 2) Provide law enforcement, first responders, and school officials with proper training for active shooter situations. 3) Maximize enforcement efforts to prevent gun violence and prosecute gun crime. 4) Launch a national dialogue led by Secretaries Sebelius and Duncan on mental health. However, there is at least one order I cannot support. President Obama wants to clarify that Obamacare does not prohibit doctors from asking their patients about guns in their homes. Obamacare, however, states that no patient shall be required to disclose his or her own lawful storage or use of a firearm. This order could create confusion for a patient who believes he must answer his doctor's questions. I will adamantly oppose any executive order that I believe infringes upon duly enacted laws by the Congress or on our constitutional rights. I also disagree with the President is on his recommendations for laws Congress must pass. We know from experience that an assault weapons ban will have no meaningful effect on gun violence, as many of the changes that are implemented by such a ban are cosmetic in nature. Statistics demonstrate that a ban on particular weapons will not significantly decrease crime. Such a ban will, however, significantly decrease our rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Thank you again for your correspondence. Please feel free to contact me again in the future. Sincerely, James M. Inhofe United States Senator [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Range
Law & Order
A letter from Inhofe
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
