Dear Senator Dianne Feinstein,

I am writing you about the proposed Fire Legislation. While I think such legislation is well intended I do not believe that is will in fact make the people of the United States any safer in fact I believe it will have the opposite effect. The net effect is that firearms restrictions limit the liberties and defense of law abiding citizens while it has little or no effect on criminals or the insane.

I do not believe that greater restrictions on firearms will prevent events like the tragedy at Sandy Hook CT nor the other events that are similar in nature. I realize that it seems intuitive to try and pass laws to prevent such events from occurring but I do not see how restricting features on weapons, limiting magazine capacity or outlawing certain types of ammunition will prevent criminal or crazy people from hurting others. It will however have a negative effect on law abiding citizens, their safety, their liberties and their pocketbooks.

I think this reaction to the Sandy Hook Shooting was more emotional than logical. As you may know so called “assault rifles” are used in only a tiny fraction of murders in the United States of America. The term ‘Assault Rifle’ is really an amorphic label created by legislation and not a tangible item or group of items. I think as a common phrase it creates more fear and support for more legislation than is appropriate or meaningful. As it is I have not heard any new ideas about Assault Rifles or firearms restrictions that will cut down on crime or keep any of us safer.

Each state already has a background check system and these systems seem to fulfil their purpose. The people who obtain firearms who are not supposed to have them circumvent the law and I fail to see how new laws will prevent anyone from breaking laws.

I was in the South Land for the LA Riots, I saw shop owners and homeowners alike defending themselves with semiautomatic and none semiautomatic weapons alike. As you may already know citizens of the United States defend their own safety with a firearm in much greater numbers than they commit crimes with them. Further firearms restrictions will only further restrict their ability to do so. The people of California already pay higher prices for firearms because of California's unique restrictions, additional restrictions will come at additional costs both financially and in terms of safety.

Most citizens cannot afford private security like the Politicians, Celebrities and the wealthy, so further restrictions on firearms ownership puts the average citizen at more of disadvantage and makes them more of a target for criminals and the murderous maniacs.

In addition the Founding Fathers of our great country wrote at length about how private gun ownership was necessary for the prevention of tyranny. It is very important that the citizens of the United States of America be able to defend themselves against the their government should it turn Tyrannical. History has shown many examples of this happening.

So with that in mind I ask you to stop anymore support or proposal of firearms restrictions. In general I think our legal system, tax code and regulations are far too complicated and too expensive. I would like to see you lead a path back to a simpler form of Government. Government should be more local. I often ask people I meet if they feel they have any influence in Washington D.C., no one has answered ‘yes’ to my question yet. There seems to be a great disconnect between the citizens and the ever growing bureaucracy we have. I hope you could be apart of changing that.

Thank you for reading my letter.

AR-15 Strip and Clean

">

Who said learning can't be fun?
At least the boys will enjoy this 'Training Video' "How to field strip and clean a Glock" with Ashley :)
">