Response from Inhofe

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

TCummings

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 11, 2011
Messages
1,611
Reaction score
0
Location
Enid
Dear Mr. Cummings:

Thank you for contacting me about the Second Amendment. As your voice in Washington, I appreciate knowing your views.

In 1994, the assault weapons ban established a comprehensive regulatory scheme of prohibiting the manufacture, transfer, or possession of assault weapons, as well as the possession or transfer of large capacity ammunition feeding devices that hold more than 10 rounds. These magazines are used by millions of Americans and are customary in handguns and other firearms. Nineteen specific weapons and their copycats were banned by the original legislation signed into law by President Clinton on September 13, 1994. The weapons ban was contained in a larger Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, and expired on September 13, 2004. As a member of the House of Representatives in 1994, I voted against the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 because of the undue restrictions on weapons, among other reasons.

Semi-automatic assault weapons function similarly to other semi-automatic firearms, as they fire one round per pull of the trigger. It is important to note that under the assault weapons ban, the defining features of a semi-automatic assault weapon are mostly cosmetic. For example, a handgun is classified as a semi-automatic assault weapon if its magazine is visible, despite the fact that it fires one bullet per pull of the trigger and the speed of fire remains the same. Therefore, the law banned certain guns that are functionally identical to other weapons that are still considered to be legal.

While supporters of the ban may point out that the violent crime rate dropped after the 1994 ban, they do not mention that violent crime was dropping before the ban was instituted in 1994 and that gun ownership, including ownership of newer designs of the banned weapons, rose during that same time period. It is also important to note that these weapons were rarely used in the commission of crimes before the 1994 ban.

Additionally, a provision of the 1994 law required a study of the effectiveness of the weapons ban. The Congressional study showed that, according to police reports and federal felon surveys, the type of weapons banned in 1994 were only used in one to two percent of violent crimes. Murders committed by knives, clubs, and bare hands outnumbered murders by weapons 20 to one. According to a recent study, existing data does not show whether the number of people shot and killed with semi-automatic assault weapons declined during the 10-year period (1994-2004).

Should any attempt be made to reinstate the semi-automatic assault weapons ban, I will strongly oppose it. Law-abiding gun owners should be free to use their firearms for hunting, marksmanship, and self-defense. The statistics demonstrate that a true ban on these weapons will not significantly decrease crime but will significantly decrease our rights guaranteed by the Constitution. When I was sworn in as a member of Congress, I took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. As your representative in the Senate, I will continue to staunchly oppose any attempt to tamper with our nation's Constitution or undermine our Second Amendment rights.



Sincerely,

James M. Inhofe
United States Senator


I made sure to bold the fact that he calls the Assault Weapons
 

TCummings

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 11, 2011
Messages
1,611
Reaction score
0
Location
Enid
I wrote a response to the "assault weapons" wording.


Senator Inhofe,

I appreciate the response very much, but I feel that there is something that I must point out. While the media, and the leftists are out there calling these semi automatic rifles, " Assault Rifles", nothing can be farther from the truth, the military classifies an assault rifle as a rifle that is capable of select fire (fully automatic or 3-round burst). The fact is that they have been labeled assault rifles to elicit a response from people's emotions is down right ridiculous. Recently I have even heard them called "Weapons of War" because of course war brings to mind terrible atrocities and fighting, again this is far from the truth, these are not used by any military so therefore they are not weapons of war.

I ask that you share this view with as many other Senators as you can, I feel that it is unfair that those of us who obey the law and even those of us who have served this country to protect our rights, are potentially going to be punished for the acts of very few. As you said these types of crimes do not happen often, yet the media acts as though they do and continually keep the news of such events in our faces all the time.

Again thank you for the response, and your continued support of the Second Amendment.

Travis Cummings
 

TCummings

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Sep 11, 2011
Messages
1,611
Reaction score
0
Location
Enid
I posted a link yesterday that was done by AmidsTheNoise which talks about the war of words we are in right now, until we can get the public and politicians to understand that nearly everything that has been presented to the by the leftist media is a lie we will continually be shut down in arguments against gun control, because of the emotions that are created by the wording used along with the tragedies that have happened.
 

LOKNLOD

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Messages
314
Reaction score
42
Location
Edmond
I think his reply to you was better than the one I got:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the tragedy that took place December 14, 2012 in Newtown, Connecticut. As your Senator in Washington, D.C., I appreciate hearing from you.

My thoughts and prayers are with everyone affected by the events that took place at Sandy Hook Elementary School. What occurred was absolutely senseless, and a tragedy devoid of explanation. We must work with experts in law enforcement and the mental health field to understand this heinous crime and examine ways to prevent future incidents.

Regarding the Second Amendment, the text of the Constitution clearly confers upon an individual the right to bear arms. I stand firm in my support of this right. Countless lives are saved each year as a result of citizens exercising the right of self defense.

Again, thank you for your comments. Please do not hesitate to contact me again.

For the record, I didn't write him about Sandy Hook, although I did mention something about the "recent tragedy" (I think that was my wording) in passing. Mine was all about preventing any encroachment on the 2nd Amendment and I specifically emphasize so-called assault weapons bans and magazine capacity bans. I thought his more generic reference to the 2nd amendment and self defense was a bit weak (lots of gun grabbers still talk 2nd amendment but mean only hunting guns). Glad to see him oppose it more directly in the reply to you.
 

mjasonc

Marksman
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 22, 2012
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Location
Tulsa
Appreciate the post, it's always nice to see a politician with his head screwed on straight...even if he did answer with five paragraphs when a sentence or two would probably have worked lol.

I don't mean to sound paranoid but while I think we might escape legislation because of people like Senator Inhofe, I'm more worried about some kind of executive order scenario.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom