17014 Broadway ave.
Snohomish, WA 98296
Sunday, January 27, 2013

Sen. Maria Cantwell
Sen. Patty Murray
Rep. Suzan DelBene
FAX: (425) 303-8351 (425) 259-7152 (425) 485-0083

Senator Cantwell, Senator Murray, Representative DelBene:

I am writing all of you this letter to demand that you uphold your oaths of office, namely that “I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same”; specifically I am writing to demand that you support, defend and bear true allegiance to the Second Amendment to the Constitution, by opposing any and all new “gun control” legislation in both the Senate and the House of Representatives, especially any and all of the following:

• oppose any and all bans of the importation, manufacture, sales or transfer (whether commercial or private), or possession of any semiautomatic rifle, regardless of design, caliber, features or magazine capacity, regardless of whether or not a “grandfather clause” is part of the ban;

• oppose any and all bans of the importation, manufacture, sales or transfer (whether commercial or private), or possession of any semiautomatic shotgun, regardless of design, gauge, features or magazine capacity, regardless of whether or not a “grandfather clause” is part of the ban;

• oppose any and all bans of the importation, manufacture, sales or transfer (whether commercial or private), or possession of any semiautomatic pistol, regardless of design, caliber, features or magazine capacity, regardless of whether or not a “grandfather clause” is part of the ban;

• oppose any and all bans of the importation, manufacture, sales or transfer (whether commercial or private), or possession of ammunition magazines of any caliber based on capacity, regardless of whether or not a “grandfather clause” is part of the ban;

• oppose any and all bans of ammunition based on caliber, penetration or “lethality”;

• oppose any and all federal registration of semiautomatic rifles, shotguns or pistols;

• oppose any punitive taxation of any firearms or ammunition;

• oppose the addition of any semiautomatic rifles, shotguns or pistols to the National Firearms Act list of firearms, which would result in their registration and punitive taxation as above.

Blaming inanimate objects for the evil acts of a handful of murderous madmen is irrational fetishism and cannot be the basis for rational, just laws.

Blaming millions of innocent, peaceable, responsible citizens who had no involvement in those evil acts, and seeking to punish them because of those evil acts, is medieval scapegoatism and also cannot be the basis for rational, just laws.

Broad-based bans of firearms or their components is Prior Restraint and a violation of the 2^nd Amendment; if the concept of Prior Restraint applies to the Rights protected by the 1^st Amendment, should it not apply equally to the Constitution as a whole?

Senator Cantwell, when I and others have written to you on this topic in the past you have responded with form letters containing statements like “While I support the assault weapons ban, I am also committed to protecting Second Amendment rights”. These two positions are irreconcilable. Military-pattern semiautomatic rifles such as those the so-called “assault weapons” bans seek to prohibit are precisely the sort of arms the 2^nd Amendment was intended to protect from government interference. U.S. v. Miller used the “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia” standard to judge whether a firearm was protected; these rifles are precisely the sort of rifles a modern Militia would be armed with. In both U.S. v. Miller and D.C. v. Heller the Court used the “in common use” standard to decide whether the 2^nd Amendment protects certain arms – there is no way you can assert that military-pattern semiautomatic rifles like the AR-15 are not in common use for lawful purposes today!

As for your claim to be “committed to protecting Second Amendment rights” – actions speak much louder than words. If you do act in support of any proposed legislation like the above, you are very clearly indicating to your constituents that you are not committed to protecting their 2^nd Amendment rights, but rather that you have contempt for the 2^nd Amendment, the philosophy behind it, the freedom it protects, and your oath to defend it.

Senator Murray, the most I have seen you say in support of the 2^nd Amendment is “I have concerns about legislation that would give the government information about law-abiding gun owners”. While I appreciate this position, this is tepid at best, and your more recent responses to others writing you on this topic suggest that now you are wearing your contempt for the 2^nd Amendment much more openly.

Representative DelBene, there is very little information available regarding your positions on gun control apart from that you “support restrictions on purchases”. While restrictions on firearm purchases by specific individuals for cause – a felony conviction or a judicial finding of mental incapacity – is completely acceptable, broad-based bans of firearms or their components are not. Please consider carefully how seriously you treat your oath to the Constitution.

Sincerely,

signature

John Hardin
<jhardin@impsec.org>