Outbound-peer review

[jnevis]

So I put this together yesterday and I'll send it out by Fri.  I'll probably also modify it a little to send it to the rest of the local "leadership" both in Annapolis and DC.  Feel free to comment and use as necessary:

I ask that you NOT support Governor O’Malley’s attack on the Second Amendment, law abiding gun owners, and business in MD with his latest proposed gun-control measures.  The attack in Newtown is a tragedy but an “Assault Weapons Ban,” magazine capacity limits, or fingerprinting and training requirements as proposed by the Governor’s Office would NOT have had any effect on the outcome there.  The perpetrator of the tragedy there stole the weapons he used from his mother, who owned them legally.  Restricting magazine capacity did nothing to stop the shooter at Virginia Tech, as he simply carried more magazines and another pistol. 

It has been documented by the FBI that violent crime is down 15.5% overall since 2002.  A deeper look at the data shows that the overall violent crime rate is being committed in large cities over 250,000 people, including Baltimore:
•   The murder rate in the United States was 4.7 offenses per 100,000 inhabitants in 2011.
•   The murder rate in Metropolitan Statistical Areas was 4.9 per 100,000 inhabitants.
•   The murder rates in cities outside metropolitan areas and in nonmetropolitan counties were 4.4 per 100,000 inhabitants and 3.1 per 100,000 in population, respectively.
The Baltimore Metropolitan Statistical Area that Includes Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, Howard, and Queen Anne's Counties and Baltimore City has a violent crime rate per 100, 000 of 646.2 and a murder rate of 9.4 per 100,000, over DOUBLE the national rate.  Instead of political grandstanding, wouldn’t our time and money be better spent to getting the budget issues worked out and getting people back to work and better educated so the overall rates can be decreased, not  making a class of people who try and follow the law criminals. 

 Taking away a law abiding citizen’s ability to defend themselves against those odds are contrary to a Constitutional Oath.  The Supreme Court has ruled both in Heller and McDonald that a firearm, specifically a semi-automatic pistol and rifle, is protected under the Second Amendment and a “May Issue” Concealed carry permit requirement, the same as Maryland’s  is unconstitutional as it denies the individual the right to self-defense.  Additionally the 7th District Court determined that Illinois’ law banning the carry of a concealed weapon is unconstitutional.   

An “Assault Weapon” by Senator Feinstein’s definition would include virtually EVERY semi-automatic firearm in existence today.  The original AWB, and this one, are based on strictly cosmetic features, not reality or function.  Most of the weapons under that definition are simply sport versions that LOOK like a military arm, but are functionally not the same.  Additionally the argument that a civilian “doesn’t need a military looking firearm” is invalid, as nearly 100% of all firearms were at one point a military arm.  The current AR-15 rifle is used for hunting, marksmanship competition, and general plinking by hundreds of thousands of people in the US without incident every year.

Limiting the sale and manufacture of a certain class of firearm, or the over-burdening of the consumer, retailer, and manufacturer of firearms will have a negative effect on the economy of Maryland.  If the costs associated with shooting are taxed or regulated out of the average citizen’s ability to pay, there is a ripple effect that will close retailers, including many of the small one or two person shops and larger multi-state shops.  That will lower demand and cause manufacturers to have to lay-off employees, including Beretta in Accokeek.   There could be an impact to national security if firearms manufacturers are treated as criminals and have to shut down plants, and lay off employees.

New York is planning on implementing similar and in some cases worse “gun control” laws in the near future.  I predict that all of the laws enacted there will NOT lower the crime rate, it will INCREASE it.  Honest, law abiding citizens will be targeted by criminals, as they will no longer have any deterrent.   Criminals don’t care about gun laws, or any other law for that matter, so anything enacted now will only affect those that need firearms the most.

Please, again, I ask that you not support the Governor’s plan, and if at all possible inform those at the Federal level that taking firearms away is not the answer.  Proper treatment of the mentally unstable is part of the answer.  Mental health care has been taken away from the professionals and now people who require mental health care either receive none, or receive a cocktail of medications from a general practitioner, not a psychologist or psychiatrist.  Looking back to mass shootings from the early 90s on, a large percentage of the perpetrators were prescribed Prozac, Ritalin, Zoloft, and/or Paxil.  Those drugs already have suicidal, possible homicidal, side effects, but we’re prescribing these medications to our children like candy.

[jaybet]

Good stuff, but way too long. Their eyes will glaze over and they'll put it on the stack with all of the investment letters and "please your woman tonight" letters.

[jnevis]

Edit for length, as Jay suggested.  I also made it a little general so I could send it to State and Fed "representatives"

In today’s speech on upcoming gun control measures President Obama said, "While there is no law, or set of laws, that can prevent every senseless act of violence completely, no piece of legislation that will prevent every tragedy, every act of evil, if there’s even one thing we can do to reduce this violence, if there’s even one life that can be saved, then we’ve got an obligation to try,"  While I believe that to be a true statement, the proposed actions of the President and Congress are NOT what is required.  The President even hints that if his proposals were enacted they probably would not have made a difference.  Do not follow the emotional, misguided path and allow for the Constitution and our civil rights to be trampled on to “look good.”

An “Assault Weapon” by Senator Feinstein’s definition would include virtually EVERY semi-automatic firearm in existence today.  The original AWB, and this one, are based on strictly cosmetic features, not reality or function.  Most of the weapons under that definition are simply sport versions that LOOK like a military arm, but are functionally not the same.  Additionally the argument that a civilian “doesn’t need a military looking firearm” is invalid, as nearly 100% of all firearms were at one point a military arm.  The current AR-15 rifle is used for hunting, marksmanship competition, and general plinking by hundreds of thousands of people in the US without incident every year, and is the modern equivalent of our Founding Father’s musket.  Additionally, according to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, rifles as a whole are used in less than 4% of all violent crime, while so called “assault rifles” account for less than .03%.  So if they are the problem, why are they used so infrequently?

As for magazine capacity, a completely arbitrary number will not solve the problem either.  Restricting magazine capacity did nothing to stop the shooter at Virginia Tech, as he simply carried more magazines and another pistol.  A mother just a couple weeks ago had to shoot and armed intruder in her home with 5o f 6 shots and the attacker left the house.  If there had been more attackers or she had missed she and her child would have more than likely been killed with only 10 shots available.

Limiting the sale and manufacture of a certain class of firearm, or the over-burdening of the consumer, retailer, and manufacturer of firearms will have a negative effect on the economy of Maryland and the nation.  These proposals will lower demand and cause manufacturers to have to lay-off employees, including Beretta in Accokeek.   There could be an impact to national security if firearms manufacturers are treated as criminals and have to shut down plants, and lay off employees.

Please, again, I ask that you not support the President’s plan, taking firearms away is not the answer.  Proper treatment of the mentally unstable is part of the answer.  Mental health care has been taken away from the professionals and now people who require mental health care either receive none, or receive a cocktail of medications from a general practitioner, not a psychologist or psychiatrist.  Looking back to mass shootings from the early 90s on, a large percentage of the perpetrators were prescribed Prozac, Ritalin, Zoloft, and/or Paxil.  Those drugs already have suicidal, possible homicidal, side effects, but we’re prescribing these medications to our children like candy.  Spend the money earmarked for “gun control” to get better education and JOBS for lower income, inner cities were most of the violent crimes are committed, including Baltimore and DC which both have over double the national average of violent crime and murders.