Dear State Assemblyman Carroll,
I am deeply concerned about attempts to pass new laws aimed at limiting
my Second Amendment rights. Focusing on 100 million law-abiding
citizens like me, who use firearms -- including modern sporting rifles
(MSRs) -- every day for hunting, recreational shooting and home defense,
is unproductive and unconstitutional. Lets prosecute those who abuse
our existing laws instead.
MSRs (so-called assault weapons) continue to be vilified in the
press. While they may look like military rifles, they function no
differently from any other civilian semi-automatic firearm.
Semi-automatic technology has been available for decades and is the
operating system for most of the firearms in existence today. They fire
only one round with each trigger pull. The design for MSRs, developed
in 1957, is the ArmaLite Rifle; the term A/R is its abbreviation it
does not stand for assault rifle.
A comprehensive 2003 study by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)
examined 51 gun-control studies, including the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban
(AWB). It was unable to show any crime reduction associated with gun
control. Another study, commissioned by Congress, found that bans were
not effective in reducing crime because "the banned weapons and
magazines were never used in more than a modest fraction of all gun
murders."
Since the AWB expired in 2004, the nations violent crime rate has
continued to drop by 17 percent and is now at its lowest levels since
the early 1970s, despite the rising of gun ownership, including MSR's,
to an all time high.
The vast majority of firearms used in crimes are obtained illegally, via
theft or illegal transfer. This is not surprising since criminals don't
follow the law, particularly when the laws are not enforced. As your
constituent I urge you to make me safer while protecting my
constitutional rights. Focus on real crime-control measures such as:
* Ensure that all states submit appropriate court data for individuals
adjudicated unfit to possess firearms into the National Instant Criminal
Background Check System (NICS) database. These are not private medical
records, but official court documents, therefore they do not infringe on
privacy rights, a common but incorrect argument.
* Enforce the existing laws already at our disposal, such as:
- Use the existing 10 year / $250,000 perjury penalty associated with
"Straw Purchasing." Even better, lets make straw purchasing its own
offense.
- Use existing federal laws to prosecute gun-related crimes, ensuring
that criminals don't plead down to lesser offenses. Armed robbery
should never become robbery because a busy court docket allowed a plea
deal. When Richmond, VA, did this under a program called Project
Exile, crime dropped 65 percent. Criminals respond to risk.
- Promote education to ensure firearms are safely stored away from
unauthorized users.
These are simple, noncontroversial, concrete steps we can take today
that will not infringe on anyones privacy or constitutional rights.
Lets focus on smart, data-driven solutions to get to the root of our
crime problems.
Here is the email response from Assemblyman Carroll I received today!
Let me take the opportunity to thank you for taking the time to call me on
the subject of Second Amendment rights.
Among the first bills I ever introduced was a proposal to bring NJ into
the modern era and permit concealed carry. Naturally, given the present,
anti-freedom majority, that bill continues to languish.
A noted political extremist once opined, "never let a good crisis go to
waste". Whenever some deeply disturbed individual goes on a rampage, the
cries go up to restrict the freedom of the 99.999999% of the people who
don't abuse their Constitutional rights. While the shootings at Sandy
Hook were a horror, not a single one of the new restrictions presently
proposed would have had the slightest impact. The massacre is being
cynically employed by the enemies of freedom as an excuse to advance
their ideological agenda,.
Simple logic demonstrates that freedom does not cause any shootings.
While it seems obvious that we need to pay greater attention to those
with serious mental instabilities, that can be accomplished without
imposing upon law abiding citizens.
Of course, the advocates of freedom face an administration in DC
actively hostile to freedom, a media which simply echoes their talking
points, and an often uneducated public. (One poll showed that a majority
favored a ban on semi-automatic weapons, although they have no clue what
that phrase actually means.) That means that freedom advocates need to
patiently explain to an often uneducated public why anti-freedom
proposals simply make no sense.
I've been doing my best. I appeared on NJTV on this subject; you can
find the interview here.
http://www.njtvonlin...ll-says-nothing
-could-have-prevented-sandy-hook-massacre/.
Again, I appreciate your note. Rest assured that I will continue to
fight for defend and expand freedom for as long as it is my privilege to
serve.
Michael Patrick Carroll