Letter: Preserving the ‘Sportsmen’s Paradise’

In South Louisiana, we have the best quality of life in the country. With great food like gumbo and étouffee, zydeco music, festivals year round and beautiful weather, Louisiana is a wonderful place to live. I am proud to serve South Louisiana and represent our values on Capitol Hill.

One tradition Louisianans have participated in for generations is to embrace the “Sportsmen’s Paradise.” We hunt, fish and enjoy the outdoors — this is truly a way of life in South Louisiana. An important part of our heritage is that we own and use firearms. Law-abiding citizens, under the protection afforded them by the Second Amendment of the Constitution, use guns safely and responsibly every day here at home. We treasure this right as one passed down by the Founding Fathers and we exercise it for sport or, if necessary, for self-defense.

However, sometimes Washington can become far-removed from the people it represents. The nation’s heart broke when it witnessed the horrific tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn. We all agree something must be done to prevent this from happening in the future. But the recent proposals put forth by the president largely lack common sense. Why not instead propose increased screening and treatment for mentally ill individuals, and simply enforce the laws we already have on the books?

The actions of one mentally ill individual do not warrant an incursion upon the Constitutional rights of law-abiding American citizens. This is a right guaranteed by the Second Amendment, which specifically mandates that it “shall not be infringed.”

In addition, we know from experience that banning these weapons is simply bad policy. When a similar assault weapons ban was implemented in the 1990s, crime rates were not significantly affected — yet when it was allowed to expire in 2004, crime rates actually decreased. We should learn from history — and enact policies based on data and numbers, not on an ideological agenda or knee-jerk conclusions about firearms.

Thankfully, there is a broad coalition of conservative, common-sense people in Washington working with me to ensure that our law-abiding American citizens are protected under the Constitution. I am a proud and staunch supporter of the Second Amendment. I have been and always will be pro-gun. I will not support, and will actively campaign against, any infringement upon these rights.

For me, this is a fight about the way of life in Louisiana protected by the Second Amendment. No one will fight harder than I will to ensure these traditions are continued. You sent me to Washington to represent our Louisiana values, and I intend to use every avenue in my power to do just that.

Charles W. Boustany Jr. , R-La.,

congressman, 3rd District

Lafayette

Comments

1) Comment by Buck - 13/02/2013

Gee Doc, surely your lobbying friends for the gun industry appreciate the opportunity to use your good name to spout their interest. Can't wait for the next step to change the slogan of Sportsman Paradise to NRA Paradise. Surely in light of the recent tragedy in Lafayette you will encourage them to support the young shooter and his legal rights given to him by the NRA's sponsored Stand Your Ground law that they encouraged passage in the 2006 legislative session and signed by the then Governor from Lafayette, Blanco. Congratulation for being just another brought and paid for Louisiana legislator.

2) Comment by coachblades - 13/02/2013

Not meaning to attack you DMJ im just very passionate about this issue. As im sure you are too.

3) Comment by coachblades - 13/02/2013

So DMJ according to your explanation the only real solution is to invent a time machine go back and uninvent the gun. Guns are already on the black market even if we shut down every american gun factory guns are still made in Brazil, austria, germany, russia, israel, etc and the guns that are here are already here.... The black market of guns already exists. And to explain to you guys why we oppose any of this "sensible" gun control is because you guys cannot admit when something doesnt work. When the brady bill was signed, that was gonna decrease gun violence and it didnt did you give up on gun control ?? nope you simply said it wasnt strict enough so you pushed for more strict control....clinton assault weapons ban rolls around...didnt affect crime at all...did you guys admit gun bans dont work? nope the clinton ban wasnt strict enough so you are pushing for more strict bans....what happens if BHO gets everything he asks for and 5 or 10 years from now we look and see that it didnt work will you guys say "oh well" will you admit that it may be a problem with society/culture? nope you will say we need to ban more guns and more strict control and more and more and more until one day we are all standing around with single shot rifles. And to put just a little more blame on liberals here it is...The one thing we have to deter crime, to convince criminals not to rob, rape, kill, steal is prison. And you liberals have advocated so much for the "rights" of prisoners that they have cable tv, internet, a rec area with weights, pool tables, ping pong, cards heck not too long ago yall were on here whining about how angola inmates didnt have airconditioning. You guys have watered down prison and made it not that bad of a place to go. My own father has been in jails throughout louisiana and he will tell you its really not that bad that to quote him "you just kinda hang out and relax till you get out". Sherrif Joe in arizona makes prison miserable also has one of the lowest recidivism rates in the country and you guys hate him.

4) Comment by Whatnow - 13/02/2013

Bouncer, I'm not wallowing...

5) Comment by DMJ - 13/02/2013

Coachblades, there's a problem with your pot:guns analogy. It's simple. Weed is illegal and that illegality creates a black market. Guns are legal; in this case, the legality creates the black market. We're not importing guns from Mexico and Canada (in fact, it's the opposite). We're not making guns out in the woods. The vast majority of illegal guns in the U.S. started out as legal guns. What background checks and other gun control measures aim to do is figure out when a legal gun becomes an illegal one and thwart this transaction. Clearer now? How's that ulcer? And Whatchange, thanks again for being a voice of reason on the other side of this issue. Very rare these days, especially in Louisiana.

6) Comment by Whatchange - 13/02/2013

Sandy; I'm a gun owner, hunter, former military, and supporter of the 2nd Amendment. You are more than welcome to swamp hunt or dry land hunt with me for deer, hog, squirrel, rabbit, turkey, and coyote, I even gator hunt. I am sorry, but I completely disagree with your assumption that a military style weapon has the same functionality (semi-automatic) as your squirrel rifle and the shotgun you duck hunt with. Yes they are semi-automatic, but that is where it stops and we both know that. Background checks, yes they are performed at retail and sporting good stores, and believe it or not they are performed at gun shows if you buy from one of the booth sellers, if you buy from a private individual there is no background check, that needs to be closed, no private sales at gun shows. The proposed "assault weapons ban" DOES include confiscation, you are 100% wrong, you cannot sale your military style weapon after the ban to anyone other than a family member and they "WILL" pass on to your children or other family member (s) upon your passing. I believe in my 2nd Amendments rights, I also believe in common sense and responsibility, In no way shape or form do I believe the general public has any business owning military style weapons, high capacity magazines, or body armor, all of these are designed for one thing and one thing only, killing people, with exception to body armor and it keeps the killer safe. Military style weapons, high capacity magazines, and body armor belong in the hands of our military and law enforcement tactical teams, again with exception to body armor, all law enforcement should wear body armor while on duty. Please don't come at me with, I use my military style weapon to hog hunt, we both know for an animal with such short legs and fat can move very quick and will disappear with the first shot quicker than you can squeeze the trigger a second time, and I sure wouldn't want to be in the woods when you start randomly unloading that 50 round magazine, been there done that sure didn't like it. This whole "they coming for my guns" battle cry is bull and any rational thinking person knows this.

7) Comment by nimby? - 13/02/2013

MBW , I've been fingerprinted , documented , done everything legally and by the book . my weapons are secured in my home , what more would you want ? I assume nothing , your message is quite clear . instead of trying to make me a criminal wouldn't it be more logical to go after the bad guys already out there ? Tea is correct , only a minor legal procedure would be required . I did the same with an old lever action winchester to make sure it stays in the family . a lot of false information is being submitted by both sides on this issue , the truth lies somewhere in the middle . whatever action takes place will only affect those who respect , obey the law , period .

8) Comment by coachblades - 13/02/2013

Even the mayor of Newark admitted that of the 360ish gun crimes committed in his city last year only 1 was committed by a person that got their gun legally.

9) Comment by coachblades - 13/02/2013

Sandy there is no use in arguing with the gun control advocates. It will just give you an ulcer. These are the same people that argue the reason we should legalize pot is because people who smoke it will disregard the law anyway and buy their weed on the black market......Then when switched over to gun control suddenly criminals will obey laws.??? Do you really think the local thug bought his pistol from academy or from leroy down the street. These are the same guys that support president O's economic fix of forcing businesses to pay for Obamacare, Taxing them more and just last night asking them to raise the minimum wage. They buy into this line of thinking that in our super weak struggling economy the answer to help create more jobs is to hit businesses with 3 good blows that will cost them more money just to operate.

10) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 13/02/2013

Hroark: they won't find it because it doesn't exist. It all points back to an article on the NRA website concerning Sen Feinstein's bill. The actual bill, which can be found on the Senator's website, only states that any grandfathered assault weapon must be transferred THROUGH a licensed dealer. No where does it state that it must be turned over to the guvment...

11) Comment by HRoark - 13/02/2013

Sandy, or anyone else, could you please supply supporting documentation for this statement: "when you die they go to the government rather than your children"? I have seen this repeated numerous times and the NRA has this posted on their endless feedback loop of propaganda. Please support this assertion from a credible source.

12) Comment by Sandy - 13/02/2013

By the way, the proposed "assault weapons ban" or "scary gun ban" DOES include confiscation. You are allowed to own those gun while you live, but when you die they go to the government rather than your children. That is confiscation under any definition.

13) Comment by Sandy - 13/02/2013

Quit acting like background checks do not take place. If you go into a retail sporting goods or firearms store to buy a gun, you have to submit to a background check. Only sales between private individuals do not require a background check, and if they are across state lines, even those require a background check. And military weapons have been banned from private ownership since the National Firearms Act of 1934. The firearms that the left are trying to ban now have the same functionality (semi-automatic) as my squirrel rifle and the shotgun I duck hunt with. The just happen to look scary to those of you on the left. Hence the nickname "Scary Gun Ban".

14) Comment by MBW - 13/02/2013

@nimby? and Sandy--- Here we go again. You assume that because I want to regulate guns, that I also want to "take" your guns. Nonsense. If it makes you feel better to own one, fine....but anyone should have to pass a background check to get one...and tell your Representatives to stop blocking background checks. And you shouldn't be able to have military-style weapons. Beyond that, I say arm up if you want. But stop accusing everyone of wanting to "take your guns" or we can't have a rational conversation about guns.

15) Comment by Sandy - 13/02/2013

MBW - If you choose not to have firearms and exercise your 2nd Amendment rights, that is fine with me. I will not try to force you to do otherwise. So the question is, why are you trying to force me to adapt to your lifestyle? In regards to the NRA, I suspect that their 4.5 million and growing membership would keep their position the same. Find me an anti-gun group with anywhere near that level of membership. You can't, because it doesn't exist.

16) Comment by nimby? - 13/02/2013

MBW , there's been some wild dogs/coyotes in the area , trying to get in my chicken coop , would you come ask them to leave ? please tell me how I am dictating policy towards you ? the government knows who I am , where I live . they know what weapons I have , make , model and serial # . they know I am certified to carry and must maintain that certification . if'n you city folk are havin a problem with bad guys with guns , go get'em . Brave supposedly knows who they are , where they're at , but prefers dialogue .

17) Comment by HRoark - 13/02/2013

When I first started reading this letter I thought it was going to be about the tragedy of roadside litter and general untidiness of the natives....imagine my disappointment. Just another baseless diatribe against gun regulation wrapped in the vapid language of regional pride.

18) Comment by MBW - 13/02/2013

Let's put the shoe on the other foot. Those of us (myself included) who have spent most of our lives in or near major cities are tired of having gun policy dictated by rural people who neither understand nor care about our way of life.

19) Comment by nimby? - 13/02/2013

MBW , my weapons are registered and so am I . they are secured in my home , on my property . they affect no one , unless they decide to come onto my property , into my home . their decision , not mine ...

20) Comment by MBW - 13/02/2013

You know what? My "way of life" does NOT include the use of firearms. And my way of life is just as valid and worth preserving as yours.

21) Comment by MBW - 13/02/2013

He says we should have screening for mentally ill people.....but how do you do that if YOU and your party keep opposing background checks?? Stop talking out of both sides of your mouth.

22) Comment by MBW - 13/02/2013

I wonder what the NRA's position would be if you took away all of the money from gun manufacturers.

23) Comment by MBW - 13/02/2013

We regulate the 1st Amendment all the time: You can't yell "fire" in a crowded building, you can't say certain words on TV, you can't protest in certain areas. Heck, in Denham Springs, you had government trying to tell some lady what kind of Christmas light display she could have on her house. So WHY is it that conservatives get so selectively worked up about the 2nd Amendment but won't stand up for our 1st Amendment rights just as vigorously???

24) Comment by MBW - 13/02/2013

He says "Why not enforce the laws we have on the books?" Simple. The NRA and folks like YOU won't let the government enforce the existing laws. Why do you think the ATF has been without a head for years now because the NRA/Republicans keep blocking the appointment of one.

25) Comment by prbeav - 12/02/2013

Scrooge, yes. No matter what issue we face, to be the citizen the preamble calls for (and Benjamin Franklin hoped for when he said, "You have a republic if you can keep it"), we must weigh the issue in light of all seven stated goals.>>>>My latest words to represent the seven goals I am committed to (notwithstanding the ideas of 1787) are: integrity, justice, harmony, life, responsibiity, liberty, and continuity. I would gladly give up the 2nd Amendment, since the idea of a militia is outdated by nuclear arms and see no threat to my right to hunt or defend my home.>>>>Federalist 84 makes it clear that signers of the Constitution felt that a Bill of Rights would do more harm than good: by listing rights one diminishes the rights inherent in the preamble. The 2nd Amendment illustrates their point.>>>>The 2nd Amendment came not from the authors of the Constitution but from the First Congress. In other words, it came not from the nation's founders but from the first politicians.>>>>Please continue the dialogue.>>>>I like your phrase "when a politician blathers about "our way of life." If he is not representing the preamble to the US Constitution, he needs to be fired by We the People. Shame on us for not accepting our gift: the preamble.

26) Comment by Scrooge - 12/02/2013

Prbeav so when a politician blathers about "our way of life" in terms of the 2nd amendment he should be couching "way of life" in terms of the preamble? Ok I think I get it, the second amendment is subservient to the larger framework of the constitution as expressed in the preamble and when those conflict, the overriding framework must take precedence?

27) Comment by Whatchange - 12/02/2013

Tea_Slayer; point well taken and completely agree, heck I though of it myself but figured I rambled on enough. I just can't believe people don't want common sense laws. Being a hunter I love when people say they use military style weapons to hog hunt, for an animal with short legs and fat, they haul butt and will scatter with the first shot, with that said, I wouldn't want to be in the woods when they start unloading on a pack of hogs.

28) Comment by Bouncer - 12/02/2013

@Whatnow....I like eating. I like having a roof over my head. I like being able to pay my bills. I like having some disposable income. Where that comes from is of little consequence to me, as long as it is the fruit of honest labor. It just so happens that for the time being, my money is earned in this state. EARNED. Nobody gives me a red cent. What's your point, big mouth? Oh, I forgot. You never actually have one. You just like the taste of your own foot.

29) Comment by Whatnow - 12/02/2013

Bouncer, so you like our money... LOL! Laissez les bons temps rouler!!

30) Comment by prbeav - 12/02/2013

Scrooge, thank you for the dialogue. To answer your question: We the People govern the people, wherein We the People share the seven stated goals. Only people who are committed to the seven goals are of We the People.>>>>"We the People" appears only in the preamble with the seven stated goals and the phrase "establish and ordain" the laws and required system.>>>>In the articles and amendments that follow, "the people" occurs 6 times: voting, assembling, bearing arms, enjoying privacy, voting, and voting. Thus, just as the Articles and amendments specify the roles and methods of the administration, legislature, and judiciary, they specify for the people three voting roles and three rights.>>>>Patrick Henry proposed to revise the preamble to "We the States." Thankfully, he did not succeed, but what he failed TO DENY THE PEOPLE, governance within the seven goals by the governed, the people have never recognized by accepting the duties. The past is tragic in this regard (for example, the Civil War), but our generation has the opportunity to accept the gift and duty of the preamble and its seven secular goals.>>>>Please continue to question me about this: you've helped me understand it.

31) Comment by Bouncer - 12/02/2013

Not a chance, Mr. Attila. I've never been one to put all my eggs in one basket, and the same is true of my retirement. It's diversified and will not come from one source. As far as the magic number goes, I could retire tomorrow if necessary, but it makes no sense to me for a relatively young and able-bodied individual to stop working. In addition, enjoying one's work is a big plus, too.

32) Comment by Attila - 12/02/2013

Bouncer: Hope you are close to that magic number because if you hang around long enough Lil Booby will make sure that your retirement compensation will barely sustain the necessities of life.

33) Comment by Scrooge - 12/02/2013

prbeav (I better start addressing comments to whom they are intended) I am not quite understanding your larger point, here is my interpretation which does not make sense: the will of the people should prevail but their laws take precedent?

34) Comment by Scrooge - 12/02/2013

I have such doubts as well, it is difficult to believe that this demonstration of uncritical consideration is intentional or maybe reconciling that doubt and belief is futile

35) Comment by prbeav - 12/02/2013

@Scrooge.It's complicated, but we cite the Declaration of Independence (which acknowledges God) to trump the preamble to the US Constitution (which does not acknowledge God) and need to recognize the error, apologize to ourselves, and reform.>>>>Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, Roger Sherman, Robert Livingston, and Benjamin Franklin were the committed patriots that wrote the Declaration for approval by a roomful of patriots with the awesome task of inspiring a motivated population in 13 States to declare war on the world's greatest empire of the time. The five authors were well studied in the art of politics to inspire warriors and subtly but plainly declared, in effect, "our god will defeat your god," an age old war cry: "Nature's God" would defeat King George III's God.>>>>Over a decade later, another set of authors had a new, unathorized task: having won independence, now write a document setting forth the laws to define a republic. The most precious author was Gouverneur Morris, who gifted posterity with the preamble. Federalist 84, published by signers of the Constitution, takes the preamble literally. Let me paraphrase the literal preamble: Citizens who share these seven goals govern the nation. The seven goals are secular: there is no god in them. The godless Constitution was written for a majority Protestant population.>>>>Unfortunately in 224 years the people have neither accepted the gift of the preamble nor committed to the seven duties. It is tragic. We must reform.>>>>Although it is his birthday, the person most responsible for the tradition of the Declaration trumping the preamble is unfortunate Abraham Lincoln whose political ambitions dissuaded him from spending outstanding political talents on peaceful negotiation of the 13th Amendment; 750,000 Americans died.>>>>We are our own victims, and our reform is in our hands.

36) Comment by Bouncer - 12/02/2013

Thanks to you, Scrooge, too. You know, in re-reading what Attila said to me, I'm wondering if he really, really gathered the implications behind his words. More importantly, I wonder if the word "irony" is in his dictionary.

37) Comment by Scrooge - 12/02/2013

As well as the intelligent discourse

38) Comment by Bouncer - 12/02/2013

Why, thank you, nimby. Hope you're having a wonderful Fat Tuesday. Being one of those lazy, overpaid state workers who get a holiday at the drop of a hat, I'm killing some time at home.

39) Comment by nimby? - 12/02/2013

Bouncer , appreciate your honesty .

40) Comment by Bouncer - 12/02/2013

@Attila.....work brought me here. I'm one of the people your kind truly despises....a....GASP!....state worker who makes quite a comfortable salary, I might add. Don't worry, though. As soon as I have enough in retirement, I will move on to more favorable environs. In the meantime, I get a tremendous amount of glee from poking the bars of your monkey cage....and that of your fellow Bubbas. Enjoy.

41) Comment by Scrooge - 12/02/2013

"common-sense people in Washington " isn't that an oxymoron? Ok that is facetious but "propose increased screening and treatment for mentally ill individuals, and simply enforce the laws we already have on the books?" Might that require funding a la taxes in contradiction to "shrinking government?", notwithstanding the contradictions pointed out by prbeav. However, in the context of originalism, the "rule of law" assertion works but didn't the voting population at that time consist of white, male property owners? Does that constitute a Republican hidden agenda? It is hard to believe that the group of men who wrote the framework for "a more effect Union" with an acknowledgement of God would believe that being men they could create an immutable, perfect framework, otherwise why make provision for amendments?

42) Comment by Attila - 12/02/2013

@Bouncer: Since you seem to hate all that the majority of Louisianans hold dear, just what is keeping you here? There must be SOMETHING you like about the area. I would tell you that if you are that dissatisfied with Louisiana that you are free to emigrate to a state that better suits your views, but I am not going to do that. It would only be an exercise in futility.

43) Comment by prbeav - 12/02/2013

It’s complicated, but Boustany cannot expect my vote.>>>>1) Obama has good proposals which should be discussed; 2) Boustany passes over frequent Baton Rouge home gun-accidental deaths for the sake of a hunter’s image; 3) Boustany glosses over the Constitutional issues and lastly 4) has no clue about the preamble to the US Constitution; also 5) I want to help bring We the People as defined in the preamble to the US Constitution into existence.>>>>1) Here’s a Jan 24 Obama report (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/01/majority-sees-obamas-gun-control-plan-favorably/ ) "Fifty-three percent in the latest ABC News/Washington Post poll view Obama’s gun control plan favorably, 41 percent unfavorably. Obama urged measures including background checks on all guns sales, reinstating the assault weapons ban, banning high-capacity ammunition magazines and armor-piercing bullets, new gun trafficking laws and increased access to mental health treatment.”>>>>2) see the Boustany letter.>>>>3)Here’s the verbatim 2nd Amendment, December 15, 1789: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Federalist 46, January 29, 1788, discusses a militia of the people that would protect a State from the Federal army. More critical, however, are two Supreme Court decisions, in 2008 that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home within many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession listed by the Court as being consistent with the Second Amendment and in 2010 that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the federal government.>>>>4)Here’s the preamble to the US Constitution: “We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.” Federalist 84 demonstrates that the preamble is to be taken literally; it would fulfill for the first time in history the Declaration of Independence’s claim that just governance comes from consent of the governed.>>>>5)However, in 224 years the people have neither accepted the gift of the preamble nor its duties, stated in the seven goals. The people need to govern according to the preamble instead of according to majority opinion; need to recognize that the preamble establishes a republic (the rule of law), not a democracy (rule of the majority).>>>>Each time the people discover a politician is not fulfilling the preamble to the US Constitution, they should remove that politician from office. Boustany will never receive my vote, unless he reforms and begins to respect and promote We the People of the United States as defined in the preamble and that's not "we, the people," quoting Obama in his 2nd Inaugural Address.

44) Comment by nimby? - 12/02/2013

I came to Louisiana in 1969 to attend LSU . still here . the food , the music , the people are part of why I stayed . for those who don't like it there's always the other L.A.

45) Comment by Tea_Slayer - 12/02/2013

excellent post, whatchange. The only point I would like to make is that many of our troops are coming home with PTSD and other mental health issues. That needs to be taken into consideration when issuing permits... not trying to sling mud, just a legitimate concern in light of the recent shooting deaths of Chris Kyle and Chad Littlefield

46) Comment by Whatchange - 12/02/2013

By the way, despite what SuzanneMS believes, Louisiana is the Sportsmen’s Paradise, why else would people come here from all over this country and other countries for hunting and fishing.

47) Comment by Whatchange - 12/02/2013

Every time The Advocate prints one of these letters I cringe. I am pro-gun (what ever that means), I believe in the 2nd Amendment, I believe our founding fathers meant for us to have the right to keep and bear arms, I also believe in common sense and responsible ownership, which my opinion means, the average citizen owning a military style weapon, high capacity magazine, and body armor is not common sense or responsible ownership. It is nothing more than saying I have the right, regardless if I have common sense or I'm a responsible gun owner, the proof in that is just by looking at how many are for private sale in any sporting magazine, which by the way makes no sense and in some cases is against the law. Look, I have the right to free speech, but I can't scream fire in a movie theater, I have aright to drive a vehicle, it doesn't mean I have a right to drive any vehicle on the road, I can't drive a Le mans race car down plank road, or a top fuel dragster either, I can't drive an 80,000 lb tractor trailer rig down the road without proper training and license, why, common sense and responsibility. Guns were designed for one thing and one thing only, killing. Yes in the beginning they were for self defense and food, I don't believe even your strongest anti-gun owner can argue this, the problem all started when our and other governments started mass producing for their armies and made the gun a weapon of mass destruction (I know, that's reaching, but think about it), then they allowed the gun manufacturers to start producing mock ups to these military style weapons for sale to the general public, pretty stupid move on the government's part don't you think. Now they are trying to close the barn door after all the animals have escaped. I am pro-gun, I don't believe President Obama, or the government is coming for my guns, I don't believe there is any conspiracy, but I do believe they are pushing for common sense and responsibility, I do believe they are pushing for less gun deaths and to keep guns out of the wrong hands, things have gotten out of hand, something has to be done. Do I believe this ban on military style weapons and high capacity magazines will help, no I don't, do I believe our government is the biggest reason that guns fall into the wrong hands, yes I do. I hunt, I hunt with hunting rifles, shot guns, black powder, bow and arrows, I hunt animals, I don't hunt people so I have no need for military style weapons or high capacity magazine, or body armor, I will leave that to our military and law enforcement tactical teams. I find it disheartening that our everyday road patrols has to resort to carrying AR16's just to compete with the criminals. I am a gun owner and supporter of the 2nd Amendment, you want to own military style weapons, high capacity magazines, and body armor, then you should have to get special training or serve/served (show DD214 for latter) in the military, register with local and state police/sheriff, obtain a license, pay a license fee with bi-yearly renewals, and wait 6 months to receive your weapon, you should have to lock up your weapons, or install gun locks. Wow, can you believe I'm a gun owner and believe in the 2nd Amendment. I know, I'm a little crazy about the mass destruction part, but hey. I do believe though, there are some out there who would love nothing more than a complete and out right ban on all types of guns for use by the general public and the proof of that has been all over the news.

48) Comment by Bouncer - 12/02/2013

SuzanneMS....a very useful and revealing link. Thanks.

49) Comment by DMJ - 12/02/2013

First of all, new gun control legislation doesn't target hunting rifles and shotguns. Secondly, the 2nd Amendment doesn't mention hunting. Real genius you guys elected over there in Lafayette. "I have and always will be pro-gun." Yeah...'cause what could possibly go wrong? Dumb, dumb, dumb...

50) Comment by Stephen - 12/02/2013

Stupid letter. Full of logical fallacies. His use of crime rates and the ban on assault guns makes no sense. He is repeating an NRA press release which is repeated without any real thought. Let's get the risk of dangerous weapons and dangerous people getting together as low as possible without leaving those who want a weapon for self-defense or hunting out. We can strike this balance. And, we will.

51) Comment by bourbon-soda - 12/02/2013

Checked out the CNBC rankings; TX is #1 for business. Maybe no state income tax is a good idea.

52) Comment by SuzanneMS - 12/02/2013

You said it, Bouncer. CNBC ranked Louisiana as 50th in quality of life in its Top States for Business rankings back in July -- for the 5th year in a row. (http://www.cnbc.com/id/47818866/Hot_and_Cold_Rule_QualityofLife_Category_in_CNBC039s_Top_States_Study) Louisiana is tops in crime, obesity, diabetes, infant mortality, lack of health care, high school drop outs, emigration of educated citizens . . . no wonder Boustany has to fall back on the self-described "sportsmen's paradise" for talking points. And there are many states that would argue with him about that. The Rocky Mountain states have all that and skiing.

53) Comment by swinham - 12/02/2013

Congratulations, Dr. Boustany. Persons planning to run for office can keep your letter as a template for many speeches and brochures. They can also get the same free political advertisement you have. P. S. I'm sure your constituents appreciate your efforts to protect them from something that wasn't ever going to happen anyhow.

54) Comment by Bouncer - 12/02/2013

@bourbon-soda.....get a life. Better yet, check into a clinic and dry out.

55) Comment by bourbon-soda - 12/02/2013

@Bouncer - thanks for great demo of puritanical cultural bias and judgmentalism.

56) Comment by [e-mail] - 12/02/2013

I can't argue with common sense, but that's never stopped Democrats.

57) Comment by 8point6 - 12/02/2013

Thank you, Congressman Boustany. Great common sense letter!

58) Comment by gary - 12/02/2013

Ditto to Bouncer.

59) Comment by Bouncer - 12/02/2013

I think I'm going to throw up. It's a sad state of affairs when the "quality of life" of an area is measured in terms of its indigenous fat and cholesterol laden cuisine; grating, cacophonous squeezebox music; endless alcohol-soaked "festivals"; and weather that is often dicey, at best. And of course, the usual sock puppets come out in chorus with their usual knee-jerk responses, lapping it all up. When we have a first-class educational system, a strong infrastructure, an educated (and healthy) populace, and a governing body that serves everyone's interests, then we will have earned a few bragging rights. Being overweight, undereducated, near the top in all bad things, and near the bottom in all good things hardly paints a rosy picture. Denial and feel-good, rah-rah letters to the editor will not change reality.

60) Comment by slye753 - 12/02/2013

thanks Mr. Boustany. the majority of thinking people know that obama is on another one of his politicial kicks. let the wind change direction tomorrow and he will be on another kick.

61) Comment by Bighug - 12/02/2013

Ditto to Whatnow.

62) Comment by Whatnow - 11/02/2013

Thank you, Congressman Boustany.