PDA

View Full Version : Response Letter From Dianne Feinstein


mister0523
10-07-2011, 8:53 AM
A while ago I wrote to Dianne Feinstein about the national CCW reciprocity bill. I figured I'd never get an actual response back, but I did. Thought I'd share it with you all.

Dear mister0523:

I received your letter and want to thank you for contacting me regarding concealed weapons license reciprocity. I respect your opinion on this matter, and I welcome the opportunity to share my point of view.

On February 28, 2011, Representative Cliff Stearns (R-FL) introduced the "National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act of 2011" (H.R. 822), which would effectively allow the concealed carry gun laws of one state to nullify restrictions on concealed carry in other states. This bill would force California to recognize concealed carry permits issued in other states – including states with less restrictive gun control laws. To date, no companion legislation has been introduced in the United States Senate.

I do not support concealed weapons license reciprocity. It is my belief that concealed weapons laws that may work in rural areas may not be suitable in urban areas. What is good for Alaska or Wyoming may not be good for California or New York. The problem with a federal policy mandating concealed carry reciprocity is that it would usurp the right of states to grant concealed weapons licenses in the manner, and to those individuals, that they see fit.

Last Congress, Senator John Thune (R-SD) offered legislation similar to the "National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Act" as an amendment to the "National Defense Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 2010" (S. 1390). I opposed the measure, and the amendment failed by a vote of 58 to 39 because it did not receive the required 60 votes needed to pass.

Please know that while concealed weapons reciprocity may be an issue on which we disagree, I respect your opinion and I am sure that there will be other issues on which we will find common ground.

I hope you will continue to keep me informed on issues of importance to you. If you have any additional questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, D.C. office at (202) 224-3841.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator


:facepalm:

mag360
10-07-2011, 8:56 AM
I got the same form letter. She does not support correct original view of liberty or the constitution, unfortunately.

Suvorov
10-07-2011, 9:02 AM
Wow, Dianne Feinstein is suddenly a "States Rights" advocate :rolleyes:

OleCuss
10-07-2011, 9:04 AM
California's senators will never, ever support our full spectrum of civil rights. I don't even bother contacting them - I figure I have no Senator.

lawaia
10-07-2011, 9:04 AM
But she is Sincerely Yours!:rolleyes:

sfpcservice
10-07-2011, 9:07 AM
Wow, Dianne Feinstein is suddenly a "States Rights" advocate :rolleyes:

The economy is bad and as a result we're running through politicians like Russian Officers during the battle of Leningrad. They are communicating now because they have to in order to stay in office, hoping you will read that and say "huh, we disagree but she wrote me this nice letter as if she listened to my point of view!".

TimRB
10-07-2011, 9:11 AM
I've gotten similar letters from Feinstein. That's why I never bother writing to her any more regarding gun issues. She always tells me, in a polite sort of way, to go %^*& myself. In fact, because I live in Santa Cruz county, all my politicians at every level are the same. They know they will ALWAYS get reelected, no matter my opinion or vote.

Tim

fred40
10-07-2011, 9:14 AM
I guess she thinks Californians and New Yorkians are not important enough to defend themselves. (which the majority are and thats the category she falls in)

CycloSteve
10-07-2011, 9:16 AM
She is OK with her "right" having a LTC, but not the populous? So much for equal protection under the law. I am so tired of politicians like DiFi looking down their noses at the citizenry, and having special rights. Political arrogance IMHO.

As the CGF statement makes it clear:


Gun Rights

Civil Rights

Your Rights

mister0523
10-07-2011, 9:17 AM
I guess she thinks Californians and New Yorkians are not important enough to defend themselves. (which the majority are and thats the category she falls in)

I'll take it a step further and say she thinks the rest of America doesn't need to defend themselves when they come to California even though their home state, and in some cases other states, have said they do.

rero360
10-07-2011, 9:18 AM
I guess she thinks Californians and New Yorkians are not important enough to defend themselves. (which the majority are and thats the category she falls in)

That's New Yorkers :D

or New Yuoka if you're from down state.

infernl
10-07-2011, 9:19 AM
I pray for the day when Feinstein, as well as Boxer leave office permanently one way or another...

cmaynes
10-07-2011, 9:33 AM
I would be careful with language...

battleship
10-07-2011, 9:45 AM
Coming from the woman who carry's a 38 in a her handbag at all time.

vantec08
10-07-2011, 9:51 AM
Coming from the woman who carry's a 38 in a her handbag at all time.

. . . . . and surrounds herself with CAL/State police or FBI agents.

tackdriver
10-07-2011, 9:52 AM
Just a suggestion, when I write these types of political "people" I make sure to remind them of who it is, and whos' opinion it is, that they are there to represent. There own opinion/belief counts as only as one. Otherwise, we may as well say we're in a dictatorship.

21SF
10-07-2011, 9:55 AM
You guys are crazy, we all know she is a VIP and has more value on her life. Who would want to hurt us no-bodys :eek:

Quser.619
10-07-2011, 10:05 AM
At least she responds, which more than I have ever gotten from Boxer. I don't with Feinstein about much, but she does generally respond when you write

Iskra
10-07-2011, 10:10 AM
I kind of admire that she's unapologetic.

Most politicians would try to pretend that there's a middle ground where you & she could agree. At least its very clear where she stands. I think Boxer would completely waffle on the subject and end up saying a whole bunch of nothing at all.

DannyInSoCal
10-07-2011, 10:25 AM
She never read your letter. That's simply the form letter sent out by a $100k per year union coddled admin assistant...

loose_electron
10-07-2011, 10:30 AM
Coming from the woman who carry's a 38 in a her handbag at all time.

Interesting, you got a source on that?
I never really paid attention.

Thing is the NRA-ILA and their litigation process seems to be the most viable way to get the LTC issues resolved here.

cmaynes
10-07-2011, 10:40 AM
I think a letter writing campaign to your local papers is a good idea- why does Dianne need a CCW but thinks that you dont....

Ubermcoupe
10-07-2011, 10:58 AM
Did she sign it? or is just something an aide printed out and mailed to you?

I dislike that she refers to the California (as a whole) as an urban area. :(

battleship
10-07-2011, 10:58 AM
She has a ccw and from my understanding she thinks her life is way more important than any of ours, she is a cow no ifs buts, about it.

Just google it you will find many blogs on the subject, because she is such a hypocrite.

mag360
10-07-2011, 11:48 AM
Dear Dianne, it is not your duty as a US senator to take a utopian dream approach to decide which parts of the constitution you respect or deny. That's all. Arms include guns, bear means wear, and shall not be infringed is plain english.

Untamed1972
10-07-2011, 11:48 AM
The problem with a federal policy mandating concealed carry reciprocity is that it would usurp the right of states to grant concealed weapons licenses in the manner, and to those individuals, that they see fit.

Isn't she the one that proposed basically a mandatory federal "may issue" minimum follow the Giffords shooting in AZ?

So why it ok to usurp states rights when it comes to taking guns away.....but not ok when it means lessening burdensome restrictions?

Paul S
10-07-2011, 12:59 PM
She is OK with her "right" having a LTC, but not the populous? So much for equal protection under the law. I am so tired of politicians like DiFi looking down their noses at the citizenry, and having special rights. Political arrogance IMHO.

As the CGF statement makes it clear:


Gun Rights

Civil Rights

Your Rights


While the woman is a disgrace to the Senate of the U.S. and the people of California...she gave up her LTC after leaving San Francisco. But you are correct..at the time at least..she had special rights...while the remainder of San Francisco residents had squat.

nick
10-07-2011, 12:59 PM
She never read your letter. That's simply the form letter sent out by a $100k per year union coddled admin assistant...

Wrong, it's sent by about $100K (plus $17-20K/year maintenance agreement) CRM system :p

darthnugget
10-07-2011, 1:15 PM
She never read your letter. That's simply the form letter sent out by a $100k per year union coddled admin assistant...

You are 100% correct. I know of first hand this system that they use for the form letters for response, and yes the person performing the job function is way over paid for their George Jetson type job.

walkstep
10-07-2011, 1:23 PM
Thankfully Mrs. Feinstein and her colleagues are willing to represent the poor huddled masses who aren't responsible enough to protect themselves. Law enforcement resources in Democratic urban cities always protect their citizens from assault, robbery, murder and other violent crimes.

I've got to run now...time to go out and protest capitalism.

scarville
10-07-2011, 1:25 PM
But she is Sincerely Yours!:rolleyes:
Sin! That is an image I didn't need on a Friday afternoon :puke:

CAL.BAR
10-07-2011, 1:31 PM
I pray for the day when Feinstein, as well as Boxer leave office permanently one way or another...

Because THAT"S when suddenly a hard core right winger will be elected? PLEASE! CA is blue and getting blue-er by the day. That's like hoping that when Saddam is ousted that a sane, secular and peaceful government will suddenly appear.

CEDaytonaRydr
10-07-2011, 1:49 PM
"The problem with a federal policy mandating concealed carry reciprocity is that it would usurp the right of states to grant concealed weapons licenses in the manner, and to those individuals, that they see fit."

Interesting to see a Democrat asking for "state's rights"... :rolleyes:

What a hypocrite.

JSolie
10-07-2011, 1:51 PM
I got the same form letter. She does not support correct original view of liberty or the constitution, unfortunately.

Her staff sends the reply form letters. Occasionally one of the letters gets in front of her. I'd written a letter to her years ago (early 1990's) about an issue I feel strongly about. I wasn't expecting much, but I got a reply form letter back from her staff. A length of time passes, and I received another reply on the same issue, and this one has a real inked signature on it, not something that was done with a laser printer.

So, there is a chance (however small) that she'll actually get her eyes on your message. Don't be surprised if her response is different than what you want.

Wherryj
10-07-2011, 1:54 PM
I'll take it a step further and say she thinks the rest of America doesn't need to defend themselves when they come to California even though their home state, and in some cases other states, have said they do.

Well obviously it is because they are considered a valuable person in their home state, but when they arrive in the PRK they are just another of the unwashed rabble that has no right to defend themselves-unless they happen to be a politician from another state that is.

We all know that politicians are superior to the common peon. My Senator told me so.

Mute
10-07-2011, 2:04 PM
Let me decode that for you.

"I'm U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein. Bite me!"

hadjin
10-07-2011, 2:44 PM
Feinstein... "It is my belief that concealed weapons laws that may work in rural areas may not be suitable in urban areas."

Fine ... She can start by endorsing a new system allowing rural California counties to issue permits for their inhabitants valid only within that county.

We'll deal with metro areas after this rural County program proves it's success

Bruce
10-07-2011, 2:48 PM
You used :facepalm:

You should have used :puke:


By her logic, because California and New York have more stringent traffic laws than other states, driver's licenses from out of state should be invalid also.

Dreaded Claymore
10-07-2011, 3:29 PM
I kind of admire that she's unapologetic.

Most politicians would try to pretend that there's a middle ground where you & she could agree. At least its very clear where she stands. I think Boxer would completely waffle on the subject and end up saying a whole bunch of nothing at all.

I agree. It's much better than a politician claiming that there is a middle ground where everyone agrees, and it's MUCH better than claiming to have supported a bill when in fact they opposed it. I have seen letters from politicians making such a claim.

nicoroshi
10-07-2011, 3:31 PM
She never read your letter. That's simply the form letter sent out by a $100k per year union coddled admin assistant...
Agree^^^
I stopped writing her since it became apparent that she did not read my letters, and all I got was some 'form letter' in return.

Public servant my eye.

huntercf
10-07-2011, 3:39 PM
D.F. and her evil sisters forgot/ignored/dismissed the fact that they are servents to the people. Plus, she's an idiot, AK doesn't have LTC permits, if you are a resident and are allowed to own a gun you can carry a concealed weapon, no permit needed.

Wherryj
10-07-2011, 4:57 PM
You guys are crazy, we all know she is a VIP and has more value on her life. Who would want to hurt us no-bodys :eek:

Well, if you put it that way, I'll admit that if there was a 10 ton weight falling from the sky (ala Monty Python), I'd be more concerned if it were to hit you than I would be that it would hit her...

Wherryj
10-07-2011, 5:01 PM
Isn't she the one that proposed basically a mandatory federal "may issue" minimum follow the Giffords shooting in AZ?

So why it ok to usurp states rights when it comes to taking guns away.....but not ok when it means lessening burdensome restrictions?

Again, why is it ok for DiFi to have a CCW, but not for the "peasants"? Because she's a hypocrite.

Rusty Scabbard
10-07-2011, 9:11 PM
To her defense, at least she (or her staff) directly addressed the context of your letter and stated her position. That''s much more consideration than I've grown to expect from most politicians..... I wish she were on our side of these issues.

ccmc
10-08-2011, 5:12 AM
Isn't she the one that proposed basically a mandatory federal "may issue" minimum follow the Giffords shooting in AZ?

I'm pretty sure that was Boxer.

My biggest beef with Feinstein's position in the letter is she doesn't acknowledge that nonresidents have no way to legally carry in CA, and has never advocated that they have the ability to do so if undergoing the training/education required by the state. Same thing applies to NY.

Ford8N
10-08-2011, 5:39 AM
California's senators will never, ever support our full spectrum of civil rights. I don't even bother contacting them - I figure I have no Senator.

You are disinfranchised, like EVERY gun owner in this state.

She never read your letter. That's simply the form letter sent out by a $100k per year union coddled admin assistant...

Yup.

Isn't she the one that proposed basically a mandatory federal "may issue" minimum follow the Giffords shooting in AZ?

So why it ok to usurp states rights when it comes to taking guns away.....but not ok when it means lessening burdensome restrictions?

Like NFA. Federally you can own all kinds of cool stuff but California tells you no, States Rights.....in fact the Second Amendment should usurp States Rights! I keep saying it, California is NOT part of the United States.

Feinstein... "It is my belief that concealed weapons laws that may work in rural areas may not be suitable in urban areas."

That has racist undertones!!!!!!!!

Fine ... She can start by endorsing a new system allowing rural California counties to issue permits for their inhabitants valid only within that county.

We'll deal with metro areas after this rural County program proves it's success

I like that idea.

vantec08
10-08-2011, 9:10 AM
http://www.calccw.com/Forums/general-ccw-discussion/4149-dianne-feinstein-ccw.html

melted into a cross and presented to the Pope? First of all, I dont believe it. Second of all, so what

donw
10-08-2011, 10:01 AM
I pray for the day when Feinstein, as well as Boxer leave office permanently one way or another...

i have never understood why they keep getting RE-elected...neither is worth a hill of beans. :facepalm:

BTW: you can put Nancy Pelosi on the "Worthless" list too, as far as i'm concerned.

they're all three from the same political, socio-economic background of the SF "Elitists"

fpeel
10-09-2011, 10:04 AM
It is my belief that concealed weapons laws that may work in rural areas may not be suitable in urban areas. What is good for Alaska or Wyoming may not be good for California or New York.

Ms. Feinstein apparently subscribes to the notion that "some animals are more equal than others" a belief we are supposed to accept because Napoleon, er, Ms. Feinstein "is always right."

Welcome to The Farm.

ElToro
10-09-2011, 10:18 AM
write a letter to the paper ? LOL.. the comical, murky news et al surely you jest.

should try calling Pete Stark. at least he replies and if your lucky he will leave a profane voicemail on your answering machine.

The Wingnut
10-09-2011, 11:49 AM
Wow, Dianne Feinstein is suddenly a "States Rights" advocate :rolleyes:

...when convenient to her purposes, of course.

ojisan
10-09-2011, 12:06 PM
She has no objections to the Feds being involved in a state's business when it comes to public land closure issues.

Yes, I am another one who gave up writing to her years ago.

(So the pro-CCW bill almost passed, we missed it by two votes, she is proud she voted against it. Aaaaaargh!)

6172crew
10-09-2011, 1:49 PM
I'm wondering when she is going to realize that her opinion doesn't mean jack, she is supposed to represent the people of her district.

When she gets beat out of office I will pass out candy like them palestinians do.

loulouloulouloulou!

ccmc
10-09-2011, 1:53 PM
I'm wondering when she is going to realize that her opinion doesn't mean jack, she is supposed to represent the people of her district.

Isn't that what she's doing ie isn't that the reason the strategy in CA is through the courts rather than at the ballot box like IA or WI both of which went shall issue from may issue and no issue respectively through legislative action?

gunsandrockets
10-09-2011, 6:54 PM
Feinstein represents all of the worst aspects of the California/Democratic-Party political-establishment; from hostility to core civil rights such as free political speech and RKBA, to support of public-unions and big-business crony-capitalism.

I did pin-***** her one time though. It was a small and meaningless victory, but the memory of the time I punked her in public still makes me smile.

It was back in, I believe, January of 1994. The Federal AW ban was still struggling to pass in the U.S. Congress, though everyone feared the worst and the self-loading rifle buying panic was in full swing. Feinstein was making a public appearance at the San Diego Crime Commission in large part to promote passage of the Fed AW ban.

I read of Feinstein's appearance ahead of time in the local paper. I'd never even heard of the San Diego Crime Commission before. Some quick research showed that any old clown off the street could sit with the audience, and that Feinstein would take questions from the audience! Aha! So off I went. I already had a zinger in mind to challenge her with on the AW ban.

When I got there though, I discovered that Feinstein was only taking written questions from the audience. For which 3x5 cards and pencils were provided at the tables of the audience. Crap! I knew the moment Feinstein read my hostile question she would just ditch it and not answer. What was I to do? Damn my mission was a failure.

Wait, what's this? Feinstein herself is reading out loud the questions off the cards before answering. The ushers hadn't reached my table yet to collect the cards. I hurriedly scribbled my question on to the card. Could I exploit Feinstein's hubris? I structured my question to appeal to her vanity, opening with "Dear Senator", and left the zinger towards the end. With any luck she woudn't notice until it's too late.

The usher came and collected my card. I was the only one at my table to write a question for the Senator. Would she read it? Would my gambit succeed? I waited with anticipation. The payoff was worth it.

Feintstein began to read, "Since more people are killed in the United States by lightning strikes than are murdered by assault weapons..." And there began a delightful and awkward pause! She continued to read in a more subdued voice, "... how can your assault weapon ban reduce violence in America?" Bingo! Yes! Yes! Yes!

:party:

Feinstein then spluttered something like, 'Well that's just now. The ban will prevent things from getting even worse.' I'm afraid that paraphrase is the best that I can remember, since at the time I couldn't believe I had succeeded at getting her goat. Happy happy joy joy.

To make things even better, the local paper seemed to pick up on the hostile question in the follow up story the next day. Of course the juicy details were left out, and it was buried inside the larger report of her appearance, but I was still shocked. The San Diego Union Tribune had been unremittingly hostile to so-called "assault-weapons" and gun rights since the 1989 shock of the Patrick Purdy massacre.

Of course my pin *****ing the mighty didn't make a damn bit of difference in the larger scheme of things. President Clinton muscled the AW ban through the House of Representatives later that year; with the promise of 'Brady Bill part 2' to follow with it's "arsenal licensing" provisions. Congressman Schumer celebrated passage of the AW ban and the promise of Brady II with the quote, "The AW ban is just the nose of the camel, Brady II is the rest of the camel."

Fortunately the Republican Revolution of the election of 1994 put an end to Brady II. Unfortunately the combination of the Waco disaster, passage of the Fed AW ban, and the promise of Brady II was enough to convince that idiot McVeigh to launch his undeclared war against the Federal Government and bomb Oklahoma in 1995.

One78Shovel
10-09-2011, 7:37 PM
I pray for the day when Feinstein, as well as Boxer leave office permanently one way or another...

I would be careful with language...

Never passes that someone does not state the obvious.

Gold star.

-178S

Arondos
10-09-2011, 10:56 PM
I love the line about what works in an urban area may not work in a rural area.

A rural or urban county issuing and then allowing you to carry anywhere in CA is somehow different?

TreeServ
10-10-2011, 9:58 AM
I love the line about what works in an urban area may not work in a rural area.

A rural or urban county issuing and then allowing you to carry anywhere in CA is somehow different?

Same line I would take issue with, California has more rural area than most states have area...

I truly am tiring of the marginalization of rural California, from SB198 redirecting DROS fees, the wildland protection fee (that my county fees already cover), and the passage of the AB459 that eliminates the rural protection by the electoral college...I am feeling oppressed.

infernl
10-10-2011, 10:07 AM
Never passes that someone does not state the obvious.

Gold star.

-178S

I'm pretty sure you misunderstood my intentions. These persons are getting on in years, and I'm sure won't be around as long as I will, at 42 years of age. I pray for their retirement or loss in an election - much sooner than later.

2Bear
10-10-2011, 10:41 AM
I'll add two words: TERM LIMITS

infernl
10-10-2011, 11:23 AM
I'll add two words: TERM LIMITS

Hear! HEAR!!

Deadbolt
10-10-2011, 11:25 AM
Wow, Dianne Feinstein is suddenly a "States Rights" advocate :rolleyes:

lets see if she backs the pot dispensaries whom's tax dollars have been polishing her teak desk and leather chair.