HomeJoinMissionAbout UsLinksActivism

Another 'Thick-Headed' Senator

by Nicki Fellenzer

My friend Don lives in Washington State. Like many fellow patriots, he’s stuck in a beautiful area whose Senators wouldn’t know the Constitution from a roll of toilet paper. Maria Cantwell is one of those Senators. Recently Don took the time to write her a letter, urging Senator Cantwell to filibuster any attempt on the part of Dianne Feinstein to introduce the so-called “assault” weapons ban as an amendment to legislation. Don explained to Senator Cantwell that what she calls “assault weapons” “are not unlike any other semi-auto rifle where one pull of the trigger discharges one round.” Don went further to explain that “the Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting but with a guaranteed [and constitutionally protected] right of the People to keep and bear arms. Proposed laws, like the S.2498 by Sen. Feinstein, are contrary to the last sentence of the Second Amendment; ‘…shall not be infringed’ ”

Poor Don. He may as well have been talking to a brick wall. Senator Cantwell could no more have understood his letter than swallowed it, as you will see by the reply he received.

Apparently Senator Cantwell has about as much constitutional acumen and respect for her constituents as my Senator John Warner, who got a scathing letter from me a few weeks ago.

Well, as one of my readers so graciously pointed out, when a legislator participates in a passage of a law that affects all of us, we all become unwilling constituents, and we all have a right to tell that legislator our views.

So, I’ve asked Don’s permission to write Senator Cantwell and publicly tell her exactly why she does not deserve the title of “United States Senator.”

Dear Senator Cantwell,

A few weeks ago, one of your constituents wrote you a letter urging you not to support Senator Dianne Feinstein’s ill-conceived and unconstitutional legislation to ban what you erroneously refer to as “assault weapons.” Your reply (or rather the reply of the clueless flunky who was tasked with writing the reply letter) was indicative not only of your ignorance of constitutional issues, but your inability and unworthiness of being a United States Senator.

When he forwarded your reply to me, with a comment that he would rather be corresponding with a tree, I almost laughed. And then I realized just how little you respect your constituents, just how little you understand the Constitution you swore to uphold and just how downright ignorant you must be to actually claim to support the Second Amendment, while attempting to control how “We the People” exercise it at the same time.

Your letter states:

"On March 2, 2004, the United States Senate voted 52-47 on a bipartisan basis to reauthorize the assault weapons ban for an additional ten years. I was proud to support this extension, a policy for which both Attorney General Ashcroft and President Bush have also expressed support. The law bans certain models of semiautomatic assault weapons and ammunition magazines of high-capacity (that hold more than ten rounds). A recent study by the Department of Justice shows that the use of banned guns in crime has fallen by more than 60 percent between 1995 and 2002. I supported the original Assault Weapons Ban as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives and I believe the law has worked."

Did you happen to check, Mrs. Cantwell, how often these guns are used in crime? I bet you did not, because if you had taken the time to do your research, you would have noticed that these weapons are used in less than two percent of crimes committed with firearms. Would you care to guess how often these firearms were used in crimes PRIOR to the passage of the Clinton-Feinstein ban? Less than one percent. That’s right, Senator Cantwell, you are unequivocally stating your pride in having supported an ineffective piece of legislation that addressed a “problem” that did not exist in the first place.

And could you tell us, Mrs. Cantwell, which part of “…shall not be infringed” you do not understand?

"While I support extending the assault weapons ban, I am also committed to protecting Second Amendment rights, and I know that recreational use and collection of guns for hunting, sport, and other activities is extremely important to you and many other law-abiding Washingtonians. That is why I also cosponsored an amendment to expand the ability of law enforcement officers across the country to carry concealed weapons as they already have the right to do in our state."

Pardon me, Mrs. Cantwell, but this patently absurd statement certainly deserves the “Contradiction of the Year” award for unbridled stupidity and arrogance. You cannot claim to be committed to protecting Second Amendment rights, while attempting to limit people’s ability to exercise those rights. You cannot claim to respect and uphold the Constitution, while ignoring its clear and direct mandate in favor of what you THINK you know about what is important to Washingtonians (and Americans). The people of Washington elected you to represent their views on Capitol Hill, that’s true – but certainly not at the expense of destroying the one fundamental legal document on which this country is built – certainly not at the expense of decimating the Law of the Land!

Yes, you are supposed to represent the views of your constituents, but understand this: you swore to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic…”

You swore to “bear true faith and allegiance to the same…” - that’s the Constitution, Mrs. Cantwell – not the ignorant masses who may or may not understand, or even be aware of, this sacred document!

And understand this, Senator Cantwell, any constituent – any elected official, aide or supporter – who expects you to violate your oath of office to support and defend the Constitution in exchange for a vote does not merit, and should not receive your representation.

I would also urge you to remember this, Senator Cantwell: The founding fathers did not include the Second Amendment to the US Constitution in the Bill of Rights for “recreation,” “hunting” or “sport.” That little “sporting use” test comes directly out of the Nazi playbook of “How to Enslave and Murder an Entire Population.” Is that the kind of tyranny with which you want your name associated? Because that’s exactly the kind of tyranny that would forbid the people the use of certain types of arms. That’s exactly the kind of tyranny that would keep its slaves barely armed and powerless against the abuses of the state, while giving them the illusion of freedom.

The final insulting portion of your letter states:

“As your Senator, you can be assured that I will work to protect the legitimate rights of law-abiding American gun-owners, while continuing to support responsible legislation to reduce crime and make our communities safer. I believe both of these goals are important and can be simultaneously accomplished. I value the input of responsible gun buyers and sellers in forming common sense gun policy.”

Senator Cantwell, this may well be one of the most ridiculous, contradictory and insolent statements I have ever seen a legislator make to a constituent.

You cannot work to protect our rights, while at the same time working to control how we exercise those rights.

You cannot make our communities safer, while at the same time taking the most effective self defense tools out of our hands, leaving us at the mercy of criminals who will not abide by the laws you have passed.

You cannot debar the people the use of powerful firearms that could very well save their lives (think about the Korean shop owners who used these weapons in self defense against the hoards of violent vermin during the LA Riots of 1992) while at the same time claiming to support “responsible” legislation.

Disarming an entire population against armed thugs is not responsible.

Making us vulnerable to criminals is not responsible.

Claiming to protect our human rights – the right to life, and the right to defend that life with the most effective tools available – while at the same time prohibiting the use of said tools is not only contradictory, but inconsistent with any principle of logic.

Bottom line, Senator Cantwell: You took an oath by placing your hand on the Bible and swearing to support and defend the Law of the Land. Do not sacrifice that sacred oath or that sacred Law at the altar of incompetence, arrogance and political deal-making.

Nicki Fellenzer

Contact Senator Cantwell:

Web Site: cantwell.senate.gov
E-mail: Contact Via 'Web Form.'

Washington Office:
717 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-4705
Phone: (202) 224-3441
Fax: (202) 228-0514


NickiNicki is a US Army veteran, who spent nearly four years in Frankfurt, Germany on active duty at the American Forces Network. She is a former radio DJ and news anchor and a Featured Writer and Newslinks Director for Keepandbeararms.com. She is also a former contributing editor to the National Rifle Association's newest monthly magazine, Women's Outlook and she is currently the contributing editor to Concealed Carry Magazine and writes occasionally for the Libertarian Party. She resides in Virginia with her family. We are also proud to have Nicki as regular contributor to Armed Females of America.

Copyright © 2004 by Armed Females of America. All rights reserved. Permission to redistribute this article for noncommercial purposes is hereby granted, provided that it is reproduced unedited, in its entirety and appropriate credit given.