Chris Van Hollen Email response to Me.

[HRDWRK]

I emailed 3 times before and he has never responded, this time he did. Well, I will add him to the list of will vote against him.


Dear Mr. xxxxxx:

Thank you for contacting me to express your thoughts on the national debate we are having in the wake of the mass shootings that have recently occurred throughout the country, including the tragic shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. I appreciate hearing from you.

Let me make a few points very clear. I appreciate and respect the rights of responsible adults to own guns. I support the Second Amendment and oppose any effort to deny law-abiding individuals the ability to own firearms.

There is no set of laws we can pass that can end all gun violence. There are, however, practical, common sense measures we can take to reduce mass killings and lower the death toll. These measures should include improving our mental health system, strengthening security at schools and other sites, and some common sense gun safety measures.

With respect to gun safety laws, I support measures to ensure that guns do not fall into the hands of criminals and individuals that have been found to be mentally unstable. Therefore, I do support measures to ensure that we have universal background checks. We also need to strengthen measures to prevent illegal gun trafficking and straw purchases. We should not make it easy for criminals to evade the criminal background checks by getting others to buy guns for them.

I also believe we need to adopt other common sense measures like limiting the magazine capacity to 10 rounds. Law enforcement officials have identified this strategy as the most effective way to limit the carnage during these horrific mass shootings, and they have also made clear that this limitation would not affect Americans' abilities to defend their families and property. As you may know, during the massacre in 2011 in Tucson, Arizona that killed 6 people and wounded 13 others, Jared Lee Loughner was finally stopped after emptying his 33-round high-capacity magazine by nearby heroes who restrained him while he was attempting to reload another magazine. The perpetrators of the Aurora and Newtown massacres used similarly large (or larger) magazines as well. This measure can help reduce the carnage of these horrific massacres.

Universal background checks, laws to prevent illegal gun trafficking, and a limit on the size of magazines are among the common sense steps we can take to prevent guns from falling into dangerous hands and to reduce the death toll. These measures should be part of a comprehensive strategy that also strengthens the mental health system and increases security in our schools and other places.

Again, thank you for taking the time to share your views with me. Please do not hesitate to let me know whenever I may be of service.
Sincerely,
Chris Van Hollen
Member of Congress

 

[yellowsled]

post his email addy

 

[tapeman1]

Law enforcement officials have identified this strategy as the most effective way to limit the carnage during these horrific mass shootings, and they have also made clear that this limitation would not affect Americans' abilities to defend their families and property.

That's why they all carry 10 round magazines. Wait...

 

[HarCo2ANewb]

Thank you for contacting me to express your thoughts on the national debate we are having in the wake of the mass shootings

I stop reading when they start like this....

 

[shootin the breeze]

I got the same email. Told him in reply I was watching his voting record and if he voted for gun control I would be voting against him and campaigning for his opponents. Not that he cares.

 

[MH1]

I got the same email. Told him in reply I was watching his voting record and if he voted for gun control I would be voting against him and campaigning for his opponents. Not that he cares.

Did you tell him you were a newly minted DINO in his district?

 

[shootin the breeze]

You know, I can't remember if I did or not. I'll have to check my sent email and see. He does know I'm in his district. I may have to email him again. More is definitely better. Even if he just hits delete.

 

[rambling_one]

Did you tell him you were a newly minted DINO in his district?

It might be better to simply identify oneself as a Democrat rather than just becoming one.

 

[shootin the breeze]

True dat. I have been a marked as such for several years. I have emailed him before posing as a kool aid drinker. I had just moved here and wanted to see an inauguration even though I wish it had been someone else being inaugurated. He gave me tickets.

 

[shootin the breeze]

However, I wouldn't have gone to this one if I had been paid. No amount would've been enough. However, in 2008, I did enjoy the experience of being there. In and of itself it was fun, especially having just moved here.

 

[rmdashrf]

I got the same stupid email.

 

[HRDWRK]

Congressman Chris Van Hollen <imamd08@mail.house.gov>

 

[HRDWRK]

I told him in my email that, I am a registered voter and have been since 1974 and have voted in every election local,state and national.
That I would vote against all elected officials who did not believe in 2A.

From his email he doesn't care, So now I will have to show him.

 

[nedsurf]

Funny. There are a lot of responses that I am getting that read very similar. I got one today from E. Cummings that read very similar. I think they had a sit down to work out some boilerplate responses. I can share if anyone wants. I would write back to E. Cummings if I did not think he was a lost cause.

 

[jessebogan]

Look folks, the 8Th congressional district has NO representation in Con-Gress. Van Hollen works exclusively for the democrat party. I can't think of a thing he has ever done for the voters in MoCo at all. He is nothing more than a very reliable rubber stamp for any unicorn poop that comes from the White Hut, or the party in general. I am sure he thinks his seat is safe no matter what, so he does not give a damn what you or I think, only what his masters want. Has he ever held a town hall? I see his lying face on POX news often, just advancing gthe party line..... He really has got to go.

 

[28Shooter]

"Common sense" four times in the same letter, bad form and the new anti-gun buzz words. Also, "...measures to prevent illegal gun trafficking and straw purchases" -so is he going to move forward with some sort of action against the Attorney General and the Administration for their role in Fast and Furious?

 

[Kimerazor]

Nothing irritates me more than the words "gun violence" & "common sense." If I needed someone to tell me what is and isn't CS, I'd be in 1st grade.

There is no such thing as "gun violence."

Think I'll write that P>€\€*>head telling him that it's common sense for him to propose term limits to give under-privileged children a chance to make laws.


NRA Life Member
SAF Life Member
GRRN Supporter

 

[gamer_jim]

"I support the second amendment but..."

nothing else matters after that statement. Either you recognize the right for citizens to revolt against their government or you don't. Either he's ignorant of what the 2nd is for or he knows but playing the liberal safe-card so that he can keep his job. Either way his opinion deserves to be made public to his constituents. I recommend an editorial to the local paper, or billboard or something to expose this guy to his constituents. Maybe a mass mailing of a copy of his letter to his district? I'll pay for the postage if you want to do this.

 

[Jim'sKid]

We were lucky enogh to get gerrymandered into Van Holland's district this time around. Very depressing to be completely disenfranchised. I got a similar response from Mikulski. Here is how I responded not that it will make any difference:

Senator Mikulski:



Thank you for your reply. While I agree that more must be done to address mental health issues and to provide real common sense solutions to protect our school children I respectfully disagree with your obsession with gun control, and in particular gun bans, as an effective or appropriate means of addressing gun violence in our society. The reality, as shown by the FBI's own statistics, show that these types of bans are at best ineffective and are actually more likely to increase the rate of violent crime. The focus of the ban on so-called "assault weapons," and especially certain rifles and shotguns, is not supported by the crime statistics which show that these types of firearms are rarely used to commit violent crimes. Moreover, many of these firearms and the features that have been called out are those that are commonly used for lawful purposes including hunting, competitive shooting and self-defense. The features are also important to enable those with physical disabilities to engage in these activities. Placing arbitrary limits on magazine capacity is another ill-conceived notion that more often will impair an individual's right to home and self-defense than deter or reduce violent crime. Putting aside the obvious Constitutional issues (which of course cannot ultimately be ignored) the truth is that these government efforts to disarm the citizenry fall on the law-abiding gun owner while those who would commit crimes are further emboldened and will not be denied access to those same firearms. Emphasis should really be placed on more vigorous enforcement of existing laws and mandatory minimum sentencing for violent offenders rather than on punishing those who are inclined to follow the laws. Finally, I find the use of the recent school tragedy to justify imposing these draconian and useless measures particularly disturbing. Greater police presence, providing teachers and/or administrators with the ability to defend themselves and the students as well as improvements to physical security measures will do more to protect our children than anything contained in the proposed legislation while at the same time not infringing upon the fundamental rights of law-abiding Americans. Taxpayer monies would be much better spent on these efforts. Thank you again for your attention.

 

[tapeman1]

We were lucky enogh to get gerrymandered into Van Holland's district this time around. Very depressing to be completely disenfranchised. I got a similar response from Mikulski. Here is how I responded not that it will make any difference:

Senator Mikulski:



Thank you for your reply. While I agree that more must be done to address mental health issues and to provide real common sense solutions to protect our school children I respectfully disagree with your obsession with gun control, and in particular gun bans, as an effective or appropriate means of addressing gun violence in our society. The reality, as shown by the FBI's own statistics, show that these types of bans are at best ineffective and are actually more likely to increase the rate of violent crime. The focus of the ban on so-called "assault weapons," and especially certain rifles and shotguns, is not supported by the crime statistics which show that these types of firearms are rarely used to commit violent crimes. Moreover, many of these firearms and the features that have been called out are those that are commonly used for lawful purposes including hunting, competitive shooting and self-defense. The features are also important to enable those with physical disabilities to engage in these activities. Placing arbitrary limits on magazine capacity is another ill-conceived notion that more often will impair an individual's right to home and self-defense than deter or reduce violent crime. Putting aside the obvious Constitutional issues (which of course cannot ultimately be ignored) the truth is that these government efforts to disarm the citizenry fall on the law-abiding gun owner while those who would commit crimes are further emboldened and will not be denied access to those same firearms. Emphasis should really be placed on more vigorous enforcement of existing laws and mandatory minimum sentencing for violent offenders rather than on punishing those who are inclined to follow the laws. Finally, I find the use of the recent school tragedy to justify imposing these draconian and useless measures particularly disturbing. Greater police presence, providing teachers and/or administrators with the ability to defend themselves and the students as well as improvements to physical security measures will do more to protect our children than anything contained in the proposed legislation while at the same time not infringing upon the fundamental rights of law-abiding Americans. Taxpayer monies would be much better spent on these efforts. Thank you again for your attention.

You response to the Senator was very similar to mine:

"Choke on a d**k, b***h!"