CONGRESSWOMAN Carolyn McCarthy's
Request for Support

Check this out. Here's another letter that was sent to somebody that I know (to put it kindly) who does not agree with Carolyn McCarthy :

(my comments are centered in bold)

CONGRESSWOMAN
CAROLYN MCCARTHY

                                                                  Fall, 1999

Dear Friend,

Inside the headquarters of the NRA, the National Rifle Association, there is a list of people they'd like to remove from Congress. My name is at the top.

Funny, my name is listed at NRA headquarters, too. However,
I'm listed as a Guardian of Freedom. That's because I donate my
time, my efforts, and my money to fighting people like YOU.

The NRA wants me defeated because I am committed to breaking their grip on federal gun law. I am determined to push through meaningful and sensible laws to prevent gun violence -- including mandatory child safety locks. And I will do whatever it takes to get Congress to listen to the cries of the people, instead of the contributions doled out by the gun lobby.

Mrs. McCarthy, are you aware that "federal gun laws"
are blatantly Unconstitutional? That's right.
Neither the federal nor local governments can infringe
on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

"push through" ? Does that mean 'ramrod' or 'bulldoze'
laws, no matter what? I sounds to me like you intend to
shove these laws down our throats, whether we want more
gun laws or not. Is this what you mean?

"I will do whatever it takes" ? Well, Mrs. McCarthy, we will
"do whatever it takes", to defend American's rights, too. Within
the limits of the LAW, of course. You realize that the oath of office
that you took "to protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies,
both foreign and domestic" applies here, right? In fact, not only are you
FAILING to protect the Constitution, you have actually BECOME an ENEMY !!

"the cries of the people, instead of the contributions doled out
by the gun lobby" ? Mrs. McCarthy, this is pure emotionalism. Also - where
do you think 'the gun lobby' gets its money? From FREEDOM-LOVING Americans
like ME, that's where. Now, we know that you lost your husband and almost
lost your son to a criminal who used a firearm in the commission of a terrible
crime. Believe me, we all wish this had not happened. However, legislation that
you are supporting will only ADD MORE PEOPLE to the list of victims. Don't
you understand? Criminals prefer UNARMED victims. I don't want anybody else
added to that list because they did not have the means of self defense.

I am proud to stand tall against the NRA. But I cannot stand alone. In fact, without the support of caring, sensible people like you, I may not be in Congress at all after the next election.

Well, I believe that you really MEAN WELL. Thank you for
serving, and doing what you believe is right. However, you are
wrong. Disarming Americans while criminals run free will only
make the situation worse. We saw you crying after some more anti-
Second Amendment laws were defeated in Congress. You think with your
heart, rather than your head. I can understand this after knowing
what you've been through. However, you're still wrong. By the way,
what OTHER issues of importance have you addressed?

The NRA and its political allies came very close to defeating me last year. Their allies spent tens of thousands of dollars to attack my credibility and distort my record. As a result, my margin of victory was one of the narrowest in the entire country. That's the kind of power the NRA can weild.

I understand that Herr Klinton has targeted many in Congress
who voted to impeach him. Is that OK? By the way ... where did all
that "NRA" money come from? Right ... other Americans who also care.

But people like you and I have power, too. We proved it in 1996, when I entered politics for the very first time to oppose a weak-willed Congressman who traded the interests of his constituents for those of the NRA -- winning a district that hasn't elected a Democrat since the 1960s.

Yes, we have power, too. We proved it in 1994 when we replaced
a liberal Democratic Congress with a Republican Congress. The
Liberal Democrats, by the way, trade the interests of the taxpayers
for VOTES. They steal our money and redistribute the booty to
those on "government programs".

We can prove it again in 2000 -- if you'll join me right now. Your support will help me wage a campaign strong enough to return me to Congress, where I can continue to be a voice of passion and reason on gun violence, education, the high cost of health care, and other issues that matter to our families and communities.

See what I mean ... "voice of passion". I want somebody in
Congress who thinks with their head, not their heart. Oh,
and by the way, the federal government has no right, according
to its charter (that would be the Constitution) to infringe on
our right to self preservation, nor may it get involved in issues
(at least you brought a few up) such as health care (a la Hillary)
and education.

It isn't easy to be on the NRA's hit-list. But it's even more difficult to face the families of the 13 children a day whose lives are lost to guns.

(1) do you really "face" those families every day? While I'm sure
that you meet with some of them, let's not get so DRAMATIC.
(2) How large a percentage of our population are innocent victims
of firearm-related violence vs. those whose lives were PROTECTED
and PRESERVED with a firearm?
(3) How old are these "CHILDREN" that you cite? I've seen 24 year
old gang-bangers and drug dealers included in these lists.
(4) If you really want to "do it for the (4800 per year) children"
(like Hillary), then you should divert your attention to automobile
safety (45,000 deaths per year), falls (13000), poisonings (6500),
medical negligence (2500), and drownings (2700). Granted, not all
victims are "CHILDREN", but they are people, after all. Some are even
the parents of young children.

Each time there is a Columbine High ... a Northside Jewish Center ... a Wedgewood Baptist Church ... or another reckless, random incidence of gun violence and murder ... the victims and their families make their way to my door.

Did you realize that the cretin who shot people (thank
God nobody died there, although a postman was no so lucky)
at the Northside Jewish Center CHOOSE that location because
they were UNARMED? In fact he left at least 2 other potential
targets because they had the courage to protect themselves
with armed guards? Did you know that between 1 million and
2.5 million Americans defend thameselves EACH YEAR with a firearm?
Did you know that one reason why Colin Ferguson chose a NYC train
was because he KNEW that chances were that none of his victims
would be armed, since LAW-ABIDING people are not ALLOWED to
carry firearms for self defense in NYC? It is clear that the
benefits OUTWEIGH the costs.

In Congress, they know I am their most passionate ally in the quest for practical solutions to gun violence. They know that, because I've been there myself.

I don't agree that your solutions are practical. You
will just disarm the GOOD people. The criminals still
roam free. How is THAT practical? Also, being a victim does
NOT necessarily make you and 'expert' on solving the problem.
In fact, you are handicapped by your EMOTION on this issue.

During the infamous "Long Islad Railroad Massacre" in 1993, my husband Dennis was murdered by a crazed gunman wielding an assault weapon. Five others were killed that evening, and 19 more were injured, along with my son Kevin.

That 'assault weapon' was an autoloading pistol. An "assault
rifle" is defined by the military as a selective-fire semi-automatic
/ full automatic rifle. Of course, those people were still killed
or injured. However, would it make anyone feel better if he had used
a shotgun, revolver, axe, or can of GASOLINE to murder and injure?

You did not mention that nobody in that train car was armed. Nobody
had the ability to defend themselves and others. Why do you not bemoan
this fact? Perhaps if some people were armed, or Ferguson knew or
suspected that somebody might be armed, he would not have even
attempted to perpetrate this crime in the first place.

Kevin was paralyzed that night, and only recently recovered after a very long road. For weeks he couldn't even speak. When he finally could, the only word he could say for days was "why". "Why?" It was then that I made a promise to him and to my husband, to do everything I could to keep another family from experiencing such pain.

Why? Because some people are sick and twisted. Why? Because
he knew he would get away with it. Why? Because nobody COULD
fight back.

It is ironic that what you are doing will have the very OPPOSITE
affect that you seek. By denying others the means of self
preservation, MORE PEOPLE will become victims.

Turning grief into action, I lobbied Congress forcefully to do something about the scourge of assault weapons. When Congress finally passed a ban on these killing machines, I felt I'd done my part. But when my own Congressman voted to repeal the ban barely two months later, I knew my work was just beginning.

Just my point. You count emotion over logic and reason.
Automobiles are worse "killing machines", why not work
to BAN THEM, too? By the way, all bans on arms for the
people are Unconstitutional.

Since arriving in Congress three years ago, I have met with more victims of gun violence and their families than I care to remember. They come to my office, and the Congress of the United States, to ask that our government impose the national will.

Yes, they were grieving, and driven by emotion, just like you.
I'd rather not join them, so please leave my means of self defense
in tact. Also, we have a CONSTITUTION which protects us from the
whims of the times. If you want to change it, change the Constitution
to say that the federal government MAY IMPOSE restrictions on the
of the people to defend themselves.

What they quickly learn -- as I learned -- is that the national will means nothing to the profit-centered agenda of special interests like the NRA.

Mrs. McCarthy, do you have any idea which organization,
by far, does the most to train our law enforcement officers
and citizens alike ("children" included) in safe, responsible
firearms handling? Which organization trains women to "refuse
to be a victim"? Guess what? It's the 'evil' NRA, and members
like ME. Profit? WHAT PROFIT???

Many walk away in frustration. But I am committed. Hard as it's been, I've made a difference -- on gun violence, affordable health care, quality education for all, responsible environmental laws, and a decent living wage for our workers. And despite all the enemies I've made, I've made many more friends.

Yes, unfortunately, you HAVE made a difference - for the worse.
Again, the federal government has NO RIGHT to deny us the means
of self preservation, or to meddle with health care, education,
environmental laws, and wages. Did you ever read "Unintended
Consequences", or "Atlas Shrugged"?

But to continue to be a fighter in Congress, and prvail against the political forces lined up to defeat me in the 2000 election, I need more than friends ... more than the good wishes of people who know my story. I need the active, financial support of people who share my conviction.

So .. it figures ... you want me to send money ... and this
request is made after hearing the complaints about the NRA
spending "tens of thousands of dollars" to defeat you. It's NOT
OK when THEY spend MY contributions, but it IS OK for you, huh?

My presence in government -- my seat in Congress from a Long Island district just outside New York City -- is a threat to the power bases in Washington. The conservative leadership, led by Trent Lott and Tom DeLay, see me as a thorn in their side.

Wait a minute ... why do you think you must tell us where
you're from? You mean to tell me that you're not THAT famous ...
or are you sending this letter ALL OVER THE COUNTRY - to raise
funds for what SHOULD BE a LOCAL campaign? Is this what you're doing??

They don't like the national attention I receive, or the respect I command, on the issues they'd rather ignore. When Congressional Quarterly names me as one of the 50 most influential members of the House, they see that as a threat. And having even one colleague who can speak personally about gun violence is one too many for them.

These issues SHOULD NOT be addressed by our federal government.
The federal government has NO RIGHT to do so - so they are right
in leaving these issues to be dealt with on the LOCAL level.

Don't you agree that "having even one colleague who can speak
personally about gun violence" should be one too many for anyone?
We don't want this to happen to ANYONE. Unfortunately, if you
have your way, there will be more and more of us who can "speak
personally about gun violence". Don't you see?

And so they will spend heavily to defeat me. Already, the major conservative party organizations and their allied special interests, including the NRA, have raised record sums of cash to defeat me -- to silence the voices of dissent and reason, so they can continue to turn blind eyes, deaf ears, and hard hearts to tragedies like Columbine High.

So ... you will spend heavily to fight back, right? Gee ... how
do you suppose they are able to raise "raised record sums of cash"
to defeat you? Could it be that they HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE AMERICAN
PEOPLE?? Funny, there are 3 MILLION NRA members, and 10 thousand HCI
supporters. Who do you think is really "in touch" with us Americans?

The "voices of dissent and reason" are not reasonable at all. They
are purely emotional. Tragedies like Columbine High could all have
been avoided had the authorities paid attention to warning signs. Also,
most crimes of violence are perpetrated by REPEAT OFFENDERS who
are slapped on the wrist are released to prey on us all another day.

I have grown while I've been in Congress. I arrived as a widow ... a mother ... a nurse ... and a neighborhood activist who spoke out for women's choice, decent schools, and clean beaches.

OK ... here we go again. Your judgement really has been clouded
by your emotions. It's really no fault of yours, as this is normal.

I AM somewhat surprised that you "spoke out for women's choice".
Most of us understand that it is WRONG to kill another innocent
person. So ... why is it OK to kill an unborn CHILD? You're a hypocrite!

But after two terms, and daily exposure to the problems and possibilities of this institution, I know in my heart that I've made a difference. When I've fought to raise the minimum wage ... toughen enforcement of the Clean Water Act ... and improve access to better education and affordable health care, I knew I was making a difference for our country, for its future and, I believe, for you.

Do you know in your MIND? - or just your heart?

Again, these issues SHOULD NOT be addressed by our federal government.
The federal government has NO RIGHT to do so. Where in the Constitution
do we give permission to the federal government to meddle in these issues?

And when I introduced the Childrens Gun Violence Prevention Act of 1999 to make it harder for children to get and use guns, I knew I was making a difference for every family in America.

A difference? - yes. A positive one? - no. This just makes it
more difficult to teach "our children" safe, responsible firearms
ownership. It does nothing to reduce crime. Did you know that it is
illegal for children to purchase firearms? I hope you know that.

My bill would mandate the kind of common-sense remedies that families across the country are demanding:

Across the country? Probably ... but just HOW MANY? Not the majority.