To the Editor:
I have a question for Congressman Frelinghuysen: Can you please explain to the public why you favor allowing people who suffer from debilitating mental illness to legally purchase firearms with no questions asked?
And why you favor lifting current rules that support background checks in such cases?
That is the message you sent last Thursday (Feb. 2, 2017) when you voted “yes” on H.R. Resolution 40.
By voting “yes” on that resolution, you are telling your constituents that you disapprove of requiring the Social Security Administration (SSA) to follow current law and report to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) individuals who suffer from severe, long-term mental disorders.
Do you really believe the majority of your constituents support this position?
I get that “the devil’s in the details” when it comes to crafting regulations – especially on a topic like this.
So I did my homework, and here’s what I found: The SSA rule has been extremely well-vetted to ensure rigorous identification criteria AND rigorous protection of the legal rights of affected individuals – including their rights to equal protection, due process, confidentiality, privacy, and the right to bear arms.
Full details of the SSA rule and the vetting process used to develop it can be found here: https://www.federalregister.gov/d/2016-30407.
Additional information about the laws which give NICS its legal authority can be found here: https://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=49#q_and_a.
The notion that it’s OK to allow individuals with a significant history of debilitating mental illness to legally purchase firearms with no questions asked strikes me as an extreme view that’s heavily influenced by the NRA and the far right of your own party.
This is not the view of a once-moderate Republican who supports well-reasoned measures that protect public safety.
To my view, the most treacherous enemy here is the NRA – with its outrageous power to strong-arm elected officials into voting for measures that contradict common sense and undermine public safety.
I would like to remind you, Congressman Frelinghuysen, that it’s your job to represent the interests of your constituents in northern New Jersey – not the NRA, and not the Washington GOP.
You may believe your H.R. 40 vote will go unnoticed because it took place during the peak of last week’s national uproar over the travel ban.
While chaos may obscure certain issues (like this one) from getting the headlines they deserve, I assure you that ALL of your votes ARE getting noticed by your constituents – and many of your votes (like this one) ARE raising questions that require public answers from you.
Participating in Town Hall meetings would give you an opportunity to understand these concerns and answer them directly with the people you represent. I encourage you to add Town Hall meetings to your schedule – and your priority list.
Cathy Wilson
Morris Township
Cathy Wilson chairs the Morris Township Democratic committee, and started the Friends of Televised Access to provide video coverage of Township government meetings.
Good question. I had no idea. How cool if he answered right here, and directly. We’d all admire him for it.
I was at an event at HQ Plaza when an unstable young man, heavily armed was roaming the halls. We weree evacuated and thankfully the HQ security force managed to control the situation without any one including the potential shooter being wounded. But I’ll never forget the fear and terror the incident caused, all because of the fact that our legislators pay more attention to right of anyone to own weapons or profit from their sale, than the safety of our citizens.
A big thank you to Cathy Wilson for a well-researched and thoughtfully written letter. I’d like to ask Rep. Frelinghuysen why we must wait for an atrocious mass shooting by someone who should not have access to guns before paying attention to gun safety. Has our country not suffered enough from these terrifying incidents? What is the motivation for allowing weapons into the hands of those with severe mental illness?? Please consider the safety of your constituents. Help our children to grow up in a world a little bit safer, not more dangerous!
Rodney Frelinghuysen claimed that is our SAFETY he was concerned about, when he supported the inhumane travel ban on refugees and others, who have gone through one of the most rigorous vetting processes on the planet, from entering into the welcoming safety of our country. Our SAFETY. Yet in the same week, he voted to allow people who in some cases are seen by the law as unable to mange their own checkbooks, to own and carry guns. When you rubber-stamp the Trump agenda one day and the Tea-party madness the next, you ignore the SAFETY of the people you’very sworn to serve, Mr Frelinghuysen, and give up at long last, the SAFETY of your seat in congress.
Congressman Frelinghuysen needs to show up at Town Halls and hear his constituents concerns and explain why he is taking positions so far from the interests of those he represents. This resolution that Ms Wilson has so carefully researched is only one example of Congressman Frelinghuysen representing interests not consistent with Northern NJ values.