Date: Tue, 13 May 2003 17:30:33 -0400 (EDT)
From: belmonte@MIT.EDU (Matthew Belmonte)
To: CapuanoHR8@aol.com
Subject: please reconsider your support for H.R. 2038, the Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2003

Dear Representative Capuano

I was disappointed to see that you're a co-sponsor of H.R. 2038, a bill that
would repeal the sunset clause of the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms
Use Protection Act.

Sunset clauses are emplaced in bills for a reason, and measures to eliminate
them should not be undertaken lightly.  For example, as you know, there are
many elements in the current government who bridle at the sunset provisions in
the USA Patriot Act and would like to see them removed, too.

The ban on assault weapons curtails the rights of recreational gun users, while
doing little to curtail gun crime.  In 1993, just before the current ban was
enacted, the the Bureau of Justice Statistics reported that military-type guns
were used in only about 1% of violent crimes in the United States.  Chicago's
crime statistics during this period revealed that crime victims were 67 times
more likely to be killed by stabbing or blunt trauma than to be shot with an
assault weapon.

Shooting is an important recreational activity for a significant segment of
society.  Not everyone likes it, but you don't have to like it in order to
respect other people's right to do it.  Hunting isn't the only recreational
use of guns; some of us simply enjoy shooting high-powered weapons.

Like all weapons, the guns that the Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use
Protection Act defines as `assault weapons' are can be used for harmful or
harmless ends.  Rather than targeting the guns themselves, legislative efforts
should target the misuse of guns.

Sincerely

Matthew Belmonte
[address]