Posted on 01/12/2009 9:26:05 PM PST by correctthought
HR 45, gun licensing act, 1/6/09
To provide for the implementation of a system of licensing for purchasers of certain firearms and for a record of sale system for those firearms, and for other purposes. Sponsor: Rep Rush, Bobby L. [IL-1] (introduced 1/6/2009) Cosponsors (None)
Latest Major Action: 1/6/2009 Referred to House committee. Status: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009 - Amends the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to prohibit a person from possessing a firearm unless that person has been issued a firearm license under this Act or a state system certified under this Act and such license has not been invalidated or revoked. Prescribes license application, issuance, and renewal requirements.
Prohibits transferring or receiving a qualifying firearm unless the recipient presents a valid firearms license, the license is verified, and the dealer records a tracking authorization number. Prescribes firearms transfer reporting and record keeping requirements. Directs the Attorney General to establish and maintain a federal record of sale system.
Prohibits: (1) transferring a firearm to any person other than a licensee, unless the transfer is processed through a licensed dealer in accordance with national instant criminal background check system requirements, with exceptions; (2) a licensed manufacturer or dealer from failing to comply with reporting and record keeping requirements of this Act; (3) failing to report the loss or theft of the firearm to the Attorney General within 72 hours; (4) failing to report to the Attorney General an address change within 60 days; or (5) keeping a loaded firearm, or an unloaded firearm and ammunition for the firearm, knowingly or recklessly disregarding the risk that a child is capable of gaining access, if a child uses the firearm and causes death or serious bodily injury.
Prescribes criminal penalties for violations of firearms provisions covered by this Act.
Directs the Attorney General to: (1) establish and maintain a firearm injury information clearinghouse; (2) conduct continuing studies and investigations of firearm-related deaths and injuries; and (3) collect and maintain current production and sales figures of each licensed manufacturer.
Authorizes the Attorney General to certify state firearm licensing or record of sale systems.
Rep Rush seeks to prevent law abiding white people from owning guns...since it is this group, his designated target group, who are the people which will be mostly affected by his majesty’s unConstitutional law. Other groups, black and mexican gangs, street level drug dealers amongst others, could care less about being compliant with any law. Rep Rush knows this little fact.
The question white people should be asking Rep Rush is if he is a racist. If he is not a racist, then why does he as a black man seek to disarm law abiding white people inspite of our US Constitution which prohibits him from doing so?
Rep Rush
2416 Rayburn HOB
Washington, DC 20515
phone: 202-225-4372
fax: 202-226-0333
I think you are right on Sam, very easy to divide, isolate and demonize “the enemy”, very easy. Your photograph is very appropriate. Being in Central Texas and in LE at the time, I full well know the demonizing that took place. The resulting funeral pyre and deaths of the women and children were actually joked about.
For me, I could see the clumsy, heavy-handed treatment and destruction of evidence (including the crime scene) by government. I asked a friend involved in that travesty to show us some proof of “illegal machine guns” that was used as part of the justification for the warrants; something, anything tangible. A fire destroys much but not completely. I have yet to see anything. The “child abuse” lie was disproved by the Sheriff of McLennan County in earlier investigations. Well ultimately, child abuse it certainly was.
Your scenario on how a government might effect a 2nd Amendment “coup” is very plausible, very doable and very chilling to say the least.
The gun grabbers are even more orgasmatic than they were when they passed the AWB in 1994.
(tinfoil alert)
Could it be that the current gun confiscation is for the same reason (but in reverse) that southern democrats wanted gun control post Civil War? Back then it was to keep blacks from being able to defend themselves from white supremicists.
Actually, this might not be tinfoil at all:
“Never Forget, even for an instant, that the one and only reason anybody has for taking your gun away is to make you weaker than he is, so he can do something to you that you wouldn’t allow him to do if you were equipped to prevent it. This goes for burglars, muggers, and rapists, and even more so for policemen, bureaucrats, and politicians.”
I guess you’re seeing exactly what I thought of -
this is license for violent black on white crime. This is what the ‘Panthers dream of.
Ping
i’m emailing this to Rush right now...does anyone now if the NRA has gotten wind of it?? people need to know about this PRONTO...
Do you remember how brazen we all were right before the election?
"The polls are nonsense! Lies!" Well, no. They were unfortunately spot on, us Freepers just wouldn't admit it.
I remember a couple poor souls posting around on election night after Ohio like mad, "FOLKS! THIS ELECTION IS FAR FROM OVER!!" No. It was waaay over.
Now we're doing the same thing again. Telling ourselves it can't happen. That Obama isn't really as bad as we thought he was, and wouldn't dare try to go door to door taking our guns.
Until we at least realize what's about to happen, we have no chance of resistance...and talk like "p8riot" of "never giving up?" Well, we'll never know, because the "mediagov" will bury him if he does make a stand, and he will remain in the anonymous background if he doesn't make a stand. Like Gilbo says, "we will all hang separately."
We can't even coalesce around a single anti-Marxist GOP ticket in peaceful times with no risk to life and treasure. How do we possibly think on the eve of Obama-confiscation, if we are as rational as we should've been on November 3rd...that we are at all prepared to make the idiotic, brash, hollow threats of armed revolution as anonymous, isolated posters on a single website already targeted as a "hate site" by the side that's about to take complete control of the government?
Writing on the wall is as big as you please if your eyes are open.
We would have to fan out from the anonymous safety of freeperland and start giving out phone numbers and addresses and ham radio calls signs to each other, and coordinating ammo calibers and reloading centers. And we'd have to make the internal commitment to come to the aid on common principle of people we'd otherwise think of as crazy freaks....like Randy Weaver, or David Koresh, or the Eldorado FLDS people. We won't even vote together, does anyone really think we're anywhere prepared for "COME AND TAKE IT!" now? Does anyone recognize that trying to do that "post-confiscation" is going to be easier with 65 million Obama snitches out there?
They don't need a mass confiscation. Just do it one-by-one for 12 years.
Maybe he's trying to disarm the rest of us so his gang banger constituents will have an easier time of robbing us.
Too true.
New Orleans, 1973. A sniper (and by no small coincidence, a black militant who Bobby Rush probably mourns to this day) decides to make his stand atop a downtown hotel. NOPD officers are outgunned, having mostly revolvers and riot shotguns. Citizens carrying cased hunting rifles arrived at the police barricades, offering to either use their rifles for the police, or to allow the police to borrow the rifles.
The sniper is eventually killed by a police officer shooting a *privately owned* M16 from a helicopter.
Yeah, it was a different world then - but in general you still kill a sniper WITH a sniper.
It isn’t even the first thing they do in the new administration, it is BEFORE the first thing!
What does that say about what is coming down the road if (before) the first thing they do is license and disarm the public?
Last straw...
Yeah, many in our industry can’t see past the end of their own nose and look to the short term only. Yeah, we’d make a fast profit but what after that? I decided that supporting an entity that wants to destroy my way of life and my business gets nothing from me.
Mike
The thing you need to realize, not that I disagree, is that you’ll find someone out there who will take it upon themselves to fire the first shot. That will turn a Constitutional crisis into a bloodbath on both sides. Sadly, our Government seems adamant about having exactly that happen. I don’t think they have pondered the unintended consequenses of such an occurance and if they did, they’d stop the garbage about trying to ban guns at all. I for one do not want to see a war happen in our nation but it’s coming and all it’s going to take is one nut job on either side of the line to pull that trigger for the first shot.
Maybe we’ll get lucky and Yellowstone will pop full bore and we won’t have to deal with our Government any more.
Sigh.
Mike
We're at the end of a "long train of abuses".
Well, the most famous, in my opinion sniper vs. private gun owners was Charles Whitman, atop the UT tower in Austin.
Lots of locals showed up with deer rifles and scopes.
While this cover fire is credited with keeping his head down and limiting his free shots, only cops storming the observation deck finally took him out (though there was a private citizen who went up with the cops, he was not allowed in the final push on the deck.)
If that happened again, all of the citizens providing cover fire would've been arrested and their guns confiscated while the sniper kept killing, and the death toll would be used as evidence of the need for outlawing guns.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.