http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/text
It has started.
Congress is now starting on the firearms confiscation bill. If it passes, gun owners will become criminals if you don’t fully comply.
Important for you to be aware of a new bill HR 45 introduced into the House. This is the Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sale Act of 2009.
Even gun shop owners didn’t know about this because the government is trying to fly it under the radar.
To find out about this – go to any government website and type in HR 45 or Google HR 45 Blair Holt Firearm Licensing & Record of Sales Act of 2009. You will get all the information.
Basically this would make it illegal to own a firearm – any rifle with a clip or ANY pistol unless:
- It is registered
- You are fingerprinted
- You supply a current Driver’s License
- You supply your Social Security #
- You will submit to a physical & mental evaluation at any time of their choosing
- Each update, change of ownership through private or public sale must be reported and costs $25
- Failure to do so automatically causes you to lose the right to own firearms forever and would make you subject up to a year in jail.
- There is a child provision clause on page 16 section 305 stating a gun must be locked and inaccessible to any child under 18.
- They (the gov’t) would have the right to come and inspect that you are storing your gun safely away from children and it would be punishable for up to
5 yrs. in prison and a fine if you are found to be in violation.
If you think this is a joke – go to the website and take your pick of many options to read this. It is long and lengthy. But, more and more people are becoming aware of this. Pass the word along. Any hunters in your family pass this along.
This is just a “termite” approach to complete confiscation of guns and disarming of our society to the point we have no defense – chip away a little here and there until the goal is accomplished before anyone realizes it.
This is one to act on whether you own a gun or not.
If you take my gun, only the criminal will have one to use against me.. HR 45 only makes me/us less safe.
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h45/show
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-45
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-45
Please… copy and send this out to EVERYONE in the USA , whether you support the Right to Bear Arms or are for gun control. We all should have the right to choose.
I see registration. I see a fee. I don’t see any restrictions on gun ownership. Not one single person would be unable to own a gun based on this.
Where is the Constitutional violation?
http://thecentersquare.wordpress.com/
I see how this looks like an infringement on the second amendment, however, I see nothing restricting people from owning arms. I agree that we should be able to protect ourselves, but also that the government plays a role in that too. Although there are many responsible and well-intentioned gun-owners out therre, unfortunately, guns still fall into irresponsible and ill-intentioned hands. By requiring accountability, I believe that our government is protecting our second amendments rights and ourselves.
In response to the two comments before mine. Sure they’re not preventing someone from owning a firearm but they ARE restricting who can own a firearm by putting restrictions on the conditions for you to own that firearm. This is the end around run approach to implementing a ban on guns. If you make it ridiculously difficult to own a firearm you have, in essence, enacted a ban a firearms.
You have hit the nail on the head. I couldn’t have said it better myself!
Yeah, but then again, the Constitution doesn’t say it must be ridiculously easy to own a gun. Does it?
http://thecentersquare.wordpress.com/
Are you really going to use that as an argument to determine what type of restrictions your going to put on a constitutional right? Shall we apply the same logic to all the social programs that the federal government has choosen to make “ridulously easy” to gain access to? Not to mention the ones they are currently proposing. None of which are properly enumerated rights in the Constitution.
The “properly enumerated” argument is specious, in my opinion. If we were to uphold that standard, 80% of all federal activity would cease. While some radical right-wingers might find that appealing, it is utterly impractical. Held to such a literal standard, we also would have to concede vast portions of our territory to native claims, for that matter.
At any rate, the idea — that while this may be constitutional, it could lead to future actions that aren’t constitutional; therefore is must be deemed unconstitutional — doesn’t work for me.
It’s pretty simple. When a law is passed that bans gun ownership, then the line is crossed. Not here, at the point of reasonable registration requirements.
Note that no one has been able to address the fundamental, and deciding, question: How many Americans will be deprived of their Constitutional right to bear arms under this legislation. If the answer is zero, it cannot be unconstitutional, right?
P.S.: I continue to put forth: How many people will be prohibited from owning a gun by these regulations?
http://thecentersquare.wordpress.com/
All I am going to say is this…while these items seem like small things…inch by inch the Federal Government controls more and more things. With each thing is control for them and loss of freedom for the people. How much are you willing to give up and give them?